Plenary

I thank the Member for that question. I am aware of her concerns with regard to reconfiguration in the area she represents, but it is up to local health boards, as they are responsible for service reconfiguration decisions and for engaging with communities and stakeholders, including Llais. Welsh Ministers are not the routine decision maker in such matters. Intervention generally would be considered only where there is evidence of significant concerns regarding decision-making processes, governance, statutory compliance or, crucially, patient safety.

Thank you for that response.

Sections 26 to 28 of the National Health Service (Wales) Act 2006 clearly give Welsh Ministers the power to intervene where a health board is failing to perform its functions adequately, and to remove board members, which we saw in the Senedd last term. Section 12 of the same Act allows Ministers to direct health boards on their functions more generally. While there appears to be some confusion over the 2006 Act, and the social care Bill in 2020, Vaughan Gething at the time was relatively clear that the Bill did not affect Ministers' powers under sections 26 to 28. That is a bit of a mouthful, I'm aware, of lots of sections. I ask for a clear answer, and I'm very happy to take a response in writing to this: is there anything in law that prevents Welsh Ministers from intervening under sections 26 to 28 where a board has lost public confidence in this way, or is the truth that Ministers could act and are choosing not to? Diolch yn fawr iawn.

I thank her for that further question, but the truth is that the Cabinet Minister for Health and Care has been very clear that any proposals for service change must be informed by evidence and with full regard to quality, safety and patient experience. In addition, it's expected that health boards engage with people openly and transparently about these service changes. As she probably knows, Llais also has a statutory role in representing the views and interests of people who use health services and may raise concerns regarding service change proposals. I do repeat that Ministers do retain statutory powers, to which she has referred, to direct local health boards and formally intervene where there's a failure in governance, performance and exercise of local functions by local health boards.

Those powers, clearly, are to safeguard patients and are intended to address significant patient safety concerns, failures in consultation or decision making, breaches of statutory duties or wider governance concerns. Therefore, with respect, political opposition, public concern or the controversial nature of a proposal would not, of itself, ordinarily justify intervention. These powers are safeguards for addressing failures by local health boards in discharge of functions and they are not a mechanism for reconsidering the merits or demerits of any clinical service decision. That is clearly the position as far as the law is concerned. But I would add that during a consultation, surely it's better to wait for the conclusion of the consultation before coming to any thoughts about any possible legal avenue.

I'd like to thank Jane Dodds for bringing this matter up. Powys is a large and sparsely populated rural county, where removing in-patient provision from community hospitals can mean substantially longer journeys for patients and their families. When a health board considers a major service reconfiguration, what legal duties must it take into account regarding rurality, equality and access to services? And what remedies are available if those duties have not been properly discharged?

I can only repeat what I've just said, and no doubt the Member has heard what I've said. That's clearly what the law says. I would, again, suggest to him that it might be better to wait for the outcome of the consultation and then to decide was it a fair consultation, was it a consultation that people would expect at law, and, whatever the conclusions are, are the conclusions safe as far as patients are concerned and other considerations. But I think it's rather early now to say, 'Let's look for a challenge', until the consultation has been completed and conclusions have been reached.

Youth justice should be devolved to Wales. That's the plain truth. It should be an important early step towards the devolution of justice in full. As a starting point, the UK Government’s proposed reforms offer the Welsh Government an opportunity to have greater influence over, and responsibility for, overseeing and funding youth justice services here in Wales.

Diolch, Gwnsler Cyffredinol. Many have called for youth justice to be devolved to Wales, including the Brown commission, and I'm glad that this Plaid Cymru Government also wants to see that happen. Currently, a child in the justice system in Wales has one foot in each world. Their school, healthcare and social workers are devolved, yet their court and their custody are not. That jagged edge means different systems, different governments, and it's the child who tends to slip through the gaps. The UK Government is proposing, like you mentioned, reforms to the youth justice system. From April 2027, Wales is due to take on some funding for remand and early intervention. That's a start. It's funding, but it's not powers. Decisions on how the system works will still be made in Westminster, even though Wales delivers the majority of it. Does the Counsel General agree that the UK Government has a duty to work with Wales, not around it, on reforms to a system that Wales largely delivers? Diolch.

I thank the Member for this important question. The case for devolving justice and policing to Wales is open and shut, in my view. She referred to the various commissions. They've all said the same thing. They were arm's-length commissions, they decided what is best for Wales, how we could deliver better for Wales, and that is their conclusion. The commission found that devolving justice would enable more responsive, joined-up and effective services, as the Member alluded to, better aligned to the needs of people and communities in Wales and more closely integrated with devolved responsibilities such as health, social care, education and housing. In particular, the most recent commission found that youth justice should be among the starting points for fuller devolution. This Government's priorities are clear: where there are opportunities to improve the delivery of those priorities by securing further powers, then we will take them, to ensure the right foundations are laid for a system that is joined up—which the Member refers to—preventative, and fit for Wales.

I will conclude by saying that I agree entirely with her question. The Welsh Government position has been communicated to the Minister for youth justice, Jake Richards. The reforms being progressed by the UK Government potentially offer the opportunity to provide greater Welsh Government responsibility and influence in relation the strategic oversight and funding of local youth justice services. But it is important that the result is that Wales has sufficient powers and responsibilities to simplify and create strategy, governance and oversight arrangements. Our priorities are clear: where there are opportunities to enable more responsive, joined-up and effective services to be aligned, then of course we will go for them. I thank her for the question; it is an important one. There is a lot of ongoing work.

Counsel General, there is a fundamental difference between improving youth justice and simply devolving it. Wales already has strong pre-court diversion and comparatively low levels of youth custody. Yet the Government's own advisory work identifies inconsistent police management, staffing pressures, funding uncertainty and rising school exclusions. Indeed, its own youth justice advisory panel asked the questions Ministers must answer: how will devolution improve outcomes for children rather than simply change who is responsible? Because transferring responsibility across the border does not solve a problem. Changing the nameplate on the door is not reform. Counsel General, what objective test has the Government been advised must be met before further youth justice powers are devolved? If Ministers cannot demonstrate better outcomes for children, victims and the public, what is the legal or constitutional justification for transferring those powers at all?

The Member asks about legal tests. I would surmise that those legal tests were uppermost in the minds of all three commissions when they decided wholeheartedly to suggest that there should be devolution of justice. One of the problems that we have, which was alluded to in my answer to the previous question, is that we need joined-up responsibility in the whole area. It's not simply one function. It's not one service. It's an amalgam of the services. By having piecemeal devolution in these areas, it does nothing for the services and, arguably, we are letting our young people and families down. It's not a constitutional nicety. That is why we want to prioritise moving forward on this. And that is why, presumably, all three commissions, together, decided in that way as well.

Here we are again, Counsel General. You and I have to walk a narrow line in our exchanges. We're here in our legal capacity in this instance in an immensely political Chamber. So, no trick questions.

Constitutional change can have long-term consequences, of course. When the Government considers seeking additional powers for Wales, what tests do you believe should be applied before a proposal is taken forward? Should those tests include a clearly identifiable difficulty, evidence that transferring powers is the best way to address it, a workable delivery plan and sustainable funding, and clear accountability? Where services operate across the England and Wales border, should the effect on those cross-border links also be addressed and made clear before any changes take place?

I think the overall priority of this Government is to improve the lot of the people of Wales. If that means prioritising further devolution in some areas, so be it. It's not devolution for devolution's sake. That would be unfortunate, and probably prone to several problems.

There is, for example, an argument, occasionally, for cross-border understandings. These are exceptions to which we refer in our approach to UK legislation. That's only sensible, because we are looking at services for people on both sides of the border, actually, but our priority is people here in Wales.

If the test we apply shows that we can improve services for the people of Wales by going for further devolution, then that is the driving force, that is the reason why we are doing it. There's no other reason, because, as I said earlier on, change for change's sake—and the Member said this, and he's right—change for the sake of change takes you nowhere. Change for the sake of improving services does.

Thank you. I want to move to the tribunal system. I know it's high in your priorities, Counsel General. So, the proposed new Welsh tribunal structure is intended not only to bring existing devolved tribunals into a more coherent system, but also be capable of taking on additional jurisdictions in the future. Before any additional jurisdiction is transferred into the Welsh tribunal system, what safeguards do you believe should be in place? In particular, how would we protect judicial independence, access to specialist expertise, consistent rights of appeal, and the handling of cases across the England-Wales border? And would you expect the costs and practical impact of each proposed transfer to be fully assessed before it takes place?

Well, there are some figures being looked at at the moment, but, clearly, as with any new major change, it cannot be known fully at the very beginning. But as regards cross-border function, I don't see that that is an issue in this case. It was, because I know of several cases where people in the tribunal system wished to appeal, and they happened to have their cases dealt with in Welsh, and they had to go over the border and could not obtain Welsh translation facilities, so they had to speak in their second language very often. So, that was one thing that needs putting right, and it will be put right in this case. All these tribunals, bar one or two, are existing. They are currently being run as best we can ensure that they are, but it will be far better to have the six of them designated properly, with a fully professional clerical service and administration, and then topped by a limited-form court of appeal within Wales for tribunal appeals. It's a logical step forward. The senior judiciary—not known for radical constitutional change—are all in favour of it, and we do have their full support in going forward, which makes me think it's the right thing to do.

Let's move now to the rail network—another one that is coming down the line, excuse the pun. Counsel General, the Government has set out a pathway towards full devolution of rail services and infrastructure, while also accepting that the Welsh network must remain integrated within the wider United Kingdom, of course. From a legal and constitutional point of view, what would need to be settled before such a transfer could take place? In particular, how would responsibility for long-term infrastructure liabilities, cross-border routes, for example, funding and dispute resolution be divided between Welsh Ministers, the Welsh Government and Great British Railways? And should funding and liability be settled as an integral part of any transfer rather than being left to subsequent negotiations?

Well, the transfer to which the Member refers does not apply to the tribunals Bill scenario. That's the first thing to say. As for further devolution, that clearly is a political matter. I am not part of the political machine as such. I am engaged by the Welsh Government on legal matters. If and when we come to a position where I'm asked my advice about the points that he very properly raises, then I will give my clear advice at that stage. At this moment in time, I can't assist any further.

Diolch. What discussion has the Counsel General had with the Law Society regarding securing fully funded level 7 solicitor apprenticeships in Wales? Level 7 solicitor apprenticeships are a well-established route to qualifications in England, allowing aspiring solicitors to earn while they learn and avoid taking on significant tuition debt. In Wales, however, aspiring solicitors still cannot access an equivalent funded route. The uptake of level 7 solicitor apprenticeships in England has grown, with more than 5,000 people starting an apprenticeship between 2018 and 2025. We cannot allow Wales to be left behind, can we?

That is a very good question, and I fully agree with the Member on what he says. What I can tell him, which may cheer him up slightly, is that level 7 apprenticeships at the bar and also solicitors are uppermost in this Government's mind. We are pushing forward on them and, indeed, I shall be making a speech on them in about a fortnight's time, during the Legal Wales conference. So, as he is interested, I'll send him a copy of the speech, and he can see that we are doing what we can.

Thank you very much for that answer. Let's see if I can keep being on a roll. Access to justice is a core component of the rule of law and yet many areas of Wales are facing a growing crisis in access to legal services. Described as legal deserts, these are areas where the presence of solicitors is so limited that people cannot easily obtain legal advice or representation when they need it. The Law Society has produced a report that draws on the latest data available, including solicitor distribution, demographic trends and the impact of legal aid funding pressures. The findings include severe geographic inequality in solicitor density, rising solicitor retirements without adequate replacements, the attrition of legal aid providers, and increasing numbers of unrepresented litigants in civil, criminal and welfare cases. What are the Counsel General's views on this report?

I've read the report, obviously. It's an important report, and it's been a fairly long-standing problem in many areas in Wales. In fact, it's been described, in terms of north and mid Wales, as an advice desert, and I do know of pockets of deserts, if you like, within urban areas as well. It's partly because solicitors have left the legal aid work, it's partly because there are fewer of them, it's partly because they are drifting away to larger firms who are privately funded. That is the picture. It is something that is creating a huge amount of difficulty for people who wish to access legal advice who are unable to obtain legal aid and who, therefore—and by the way, the qualification for legal aid has been cut back drastically as well in many areas—are left with private funding that they cannot afford. So, it is a big issue. What I can say is that I have no doubt that, during the forthcoming conference to which I referred, it will be a live issue and there will be further discussions. Something needs to be done, I fully accept that. It's been going on for far too long and it's reaching a situation now where it's becoming critical.

Diolch, Lywydd. Counsel General, I want to return to the issue raised by the Member for Brycheiniog Tawe Nedd and ask some further questions around what the Welsh Government can do to intervene and stop service reconfiguration decisions taken by local health boards. I listened very carefully to your earlier answers. Now, I'm sure you'll agree that health board service reconfiguration is a contentious issue in most parts of Wales, including, of course, in west Wales, which has a long history of service reductions, relocations and reconfigurations that have led many residents to feel that healthcare provision is increasingly being moved further away from their communities. In my view, when there is such strong public opposition to the health board's decisions, the Welsh Government has a moral responsibility to get involved and put a hold on controversial plans that do not carry the will of the people. So, Counsel General, you've confirmed here today that Ministers can intervene under the National Health Service (Wales) Act 2006, but can you tell us what role you have as the Welsh Government's legal adviser in any process that would involve intervention? And can you confirm that a Government can legally intervene on any health board decision under this Act?

Well, the first thing to say—. The Member referred to a moral case. I'm not an arbiter of morality. My job is law—simply law—and the legislation is quite clear. I know that it will disappoint the Member. I fully appreciate that this is a very emotional subject. I fully appreciate that; I don't live in a bubble—I understand. Nevertheless, the law is clear and it relates to failure of governance, failure of performance and the exercise of functions by local health boards. If one or other of those are engaged, then there would be a case for intervention by Welsh Ministers. Currently, I do not see it. It has not been reported that there is any problem in any of those three cases. But I would suggest to him, as well, that he should allow the consultation to take its course, and then a step back can be taken to consider what kind of consultation it was, what the conclusions are, and whether the conclusions deliver a service fit for his constituents. That's the acid test. And then, if there's a problem with that, clearly something could be done. But up until at that point, there is nothing that Welsh Ministers can do under any legislation that I have seen, and I say that with respect, not to be pejorative.

You see, many people across Wales will find it difficult to understand why Ministers appear powerless to act when there is overwhelming public concern about major service changes that could significantly affect access to healthcare. Therefore, Counsel General, can you outline the legal thresholds, then, you believe must be met before the Welsh Government will intervene in a service reconfiguration decision taken by a health board? Furthermore, do you believe the current legal set-up provides the Welsh Government with sufficient powers to protect communities from reconfiguration decisions that lack public confidence?

Again, I'm not trying to be unhelpful, but I'm not going to speculate about thresholds, and I cannot, because I do not have the information in front of me. And I'm not going to speculate about the law, either. But what I will say to the gentleman is this: if he feels the law needs amending, strengthening or whatever, why doesn't he prepare a Bill and then present it to the Senedd and see how far it goes?

I'm asking your opinion.

Well, I cannot give you my opinion on anything other than the law. The law is plain, and I told you and I've explained where Ministers would be engaged, and currently they're not. But it is a prerequisite for that consultation to take its course, in my view, and then people may look again objectively at what the findings are.

Well, of course, the role of Welsh Government is to defend the devolution settlement, but also to ensure that things such as the Sewel convention are observed, and to defend and extend the relationship, one hopes. In July of this year, I published the Welsh Government's principles on UK legislation in devolved areas, and this includes a commitment that the UK legislation in devolved areas will only be used where the legislation protects or strengthens the devolution settlement and does not introduce new constraints on devolved competence. I am very clear, as is this Government, that we are focused on enhancing the devolution settlement and, with that, the Senedd’s legislative competence, rather than simply maintaining it. However, where there are attempts to limit or constrain the Senedd’s legislative competence, these will be firmly resisted, and this includes opposing the imposition of any further reservations or restrictions in the Government of Wales Act 2006, as well as securing relevant consents and carve-outs to ensure that devolved provisions conferred by UK parliamentary Acts can be removed by the Senedd at a later date. And I think key to all of this is the principle of legislative consent as set out clearly in the Sewel convention. This is essential to our devolution settlement and safeguards the Senedd’s role as the Welsh national legislature. As Counsel General, I am clear that the Sewel convention must be respected, particularly where there are any attempts to reduce or restrict the Senedd’s legislative competence via UK legislation.

Now, the Government's view is we would like it to have statutory underpinning. That is not forthcoming at the moment. There are discussions going on. Meantime, what is currently happening is there's a detailed discussion about a firm, proper solid memorandum of understanding on Sewel. It's probably second-best to having it on a statutory footing, but it is being undertaken and discussed as we speak now. So, something is happening. I fully appreciate the force of the question. It is vital that we ensure that Sewel is respected, as it has been disrespected so often of late.

I'm sure that, as a former Member of Parliament, the Counsel General is well acquainted with the concept of parliamentary sovereignty. Will the Counsel General acknowledge that the Senedd's legislative competence is defined by the Parliament of the United Kingdom and that the Senedd lacks the legal capacity to legislate on matters explicitly reserved to Westminster? Schedule 7A reserves the union. Does the Welsh Government accept that a Senedd Bill for independence or for an independence referendum would be outside the competency of the Senedd?

I've already said that I'm not a political animal, quite different from some of my colleagues. It's not a question I can answer, with respect.

I thank the Member for this question, which is a current hot potato, if I could describe it that way. Ofcom regulates certain online services under the UK Government’s Online Safety Act 2023, including standards to minimise disinformation. The Welsh Government will continue to work closely with partners to protect the integrity of devolved elections and the safety of candidates, and support access to reliable information, through vote.wales. We are very much alert to the threats to democracy from online disinformation and malinformation.

Seven years ago, the BBC's The Capture imagined footage of a public figure fabricated convincingly enough to destroy them. It was dystopian and it was fiction then, but today all it takes is a free app and 90 seconds. A councillor in Kent told LBC this week she is thinking of quitting politics altogether due to sexualised images of her being flyposted all around lamp posts around her home and the council building she works in. It makes her feel watched, she said, and unsafe in the town she represents. Other women have said they are now considering whether they should stand at all. This is a real cost, not for one councillor, but for every single woman who decides the abuse is not worth it. Wales goes to the polls in May 2027, and I know the Government really does take this seriously. So, does the Counsel General consider that the existing Welsh electoral law reaches artificially generated material of this kind, and what steps is the Government considering before those elections?

Well, again, I thank the Member for this important question. I do know, actually, that women and people from ethnic minority backgrounds are unfortunately particularly targeted by harassment and abuse. This misogyny is appalling and should be condemned by all decent campaigners. I know that the police welcome reports of any potentially unlawful material or behaviour in political campaigns. Whilst this does not take away the very real problem of abuse, anyone considering standing for election should know there is support out there. Now, that's the crucial point, I think. Ahead of next year's local elections, we are funding Elect Her to support female candidates in Wales. The programme includes a digital self-defence and self-care toolkit, including resources to support candidates to create their own digital self-care plan and strategies for dealing with online abuse. The Deputy First Minister is considering how the Welsh Government's diversity and inclusion guidance for political parties can be strengthened. So, it is an issue very much on the table at the moment. I would say that politicians and candidates should always report any harmful online material to Ofcom and also the police as appropriate. All digital campaign material must clearly show who it is being promoted by. These digital imprints ensure that there is accountability for all official campaign material. Thank you.

Counsel General, under Wales's electoral law voting system, voters get one vote for a political party and its list of candidates, so there's a very clear statement of accountability. What happens when a candidate asks voters to back one party, gets elected on that party's manifesto and then walks away from those commitments? The voter doesn't have to change their vote—[Interruption.]

They can't choose another candidate—[Interruption.]

Diolch, Lywydd. Yet, the Member keeps their seat, alongside their very generous salary. Now, some learned legal minds, such as yourself, could consider that to be fraud by misrepresentation. So, Counsel General, does Welsh electoral law provide any legal protection for voters where a candidate's conduct after election departs from the political representation they were elected under? Does Plaid Cymru still consider that politicians who mislead constituents should be criminalised? And have you considered that, in order to protect Welsh democracy, the Member should do the right thing and resign? Diolch.

I regret, Llywydd, that I haven't got my wellingtons with me. [Laughter.] I've never heard such a load of muck in a long time. And I'm not getting involved in the politics of it, but is the Member seriously saying that nobody within Reform has ever switched sides during the currency of an election?

We've all been elected.

No, I'm not—. I'm the legal officer. I thank him for that question, but it's not for me. Thank you very much.

Forgive me, Mair, I couldn't find you for just a moment there.

The ability to access legal services and justice through the medium of Welsh is an important part of access to justice in Wales. As I engage with the legal profession and also the wider justice sector, I will continue to explore how we can improve access to justice for communities across Wales, including Welsh speakers.

Thank you, Counsel General. In February, the Law Society reported on the legal deserts in Wales, outlining how access to legal services declines outside the M4 corridor. While Cardiff has 12.3 solicitors for every 1,000 residents, in north Wales, the figure is closer to 2.3 per 1,000. This geographical inequality has a fundamental impact on Welsh-speaking communities in Bangor Conwy Môn and across north Wales in terms of access to legal services and justice through the medium of Welsh. Will the Counsel General outline the Government's plans to address this inequality?

Of course, access to justice means more than just access to the courts. People must understand their rights, get reliable advice at the right time and participate effectively in legal processes that have an impact upon them. The ability to use the Welsh language in legal cases is an important principle within the justice system in Wales. Arrangements are in place to support Welsh-medium cases, including translation, interpretation and bilingual documentation as necessary.

Wales, of course, is a bilingual nation, but in asking what specifically can be done, this is now a very live issue. It is an issue that will be raised in various conferences over this winter. The deficiencies in the provision of providing advice through the medium of Welsh has been too apparent to all, but also, by the way, through the medium of English in many areas too. But it is particularly bad in the case of the Welsh language, because, more often than not, we are talking about rural areas, and rural areas have been described as 'legal deserts'.

So, there is a great job of work to be done, and it is part of my job description to ensure that access to the law is possible through the medium of both languages. It's something that's at the forefront of my mind, and something that I will be working on in the coming months.

My question has some crossover with the question that Mike Hedges asked earlier.

Pressures on legal aid provision in Wales are a very serious concern. Reduced provision means many communities cannot access the legal help they need. Although legal aid is reserved to the UK Government, we will always look for opportunities to bring these problems to the attention of the Ministry of Justice.

Diolch yn fawr iawn. We know how vital legal aid is to helping those in need and ensuring that everybody has the right to adequate legal representation. A report by the House of Lords select committee last year concluded that there are people who are both unable to access legal aid and unable to afford to pay for legal services privately. As the Law Society have noted, proposals put forward by the UK Government have not addressed the distinct issues facing the legal sector in Wales and that the part or full devolution of justice, if implemented and funded appropriately, offers significant potential opportunities to the people of Wales. What advice has the Counsel General given the Welsh Government on the adequacy of legal aid in Wales?

Well, it is a matter that the Welsh Government are acutely aware of, and it's partly because of the narrowing of the scope of legal aid alongside tighter eligibility criteria. That's had a very significant impact over many years on the justice system across England and Wales. I'm particularly concerned that people in many parts of Wales are unable to access local legal advice because legal aid fees are no longer sufficient to support sustainable provision. In Wales, reduced provision has contributed to legal advice deserts, leaving some communities without local access to specialist legal help. For example, the Law Society's heat maps show that 82 per cent of the people of Wales have no access to a legal aid-funded local welfare provider, and no less than 88 per cent have no education law provider.

These pressures are acute everywhere, but particularly so in rural, post-industrial and lower income communities, similar to the area that the Member represents. Where alternative sources of advice may be very limited, and without early legal advice, problems can escalate, increasing pressures on devolved services including health, housing and social care. Through the regional advice networks, we are supporting closer collaboration between private law firms and not-for-profit advice providers so that people across Wales can access the advice they need. Although, as I've said before, legal aid is reserved, we will work closely with the Ministry of Justice, the UK Government and legal professions in Wales to ensure Wales's needs are clearly understood and are reflected in the response to these pressures.

This feel slightly strange, asking a question to the person next to me. [Laughter.]

I'm pleased you're not fighting with the man next to you. [Laughter.] The devolution of powers over policing and justice has been recommended in a series of independent commissions, dating back to the Silk commission in 2014. Those commissions, all three of them, considered the legal implications, among others, in arriving at their clear conclusions. I will be working closely with colleagues as we continue to work towards this objective.

Thank you, Counsel General. The need to devolve justice has been outlined several times in this Chamber by the Independent Commission on the Constitutional Future of Wales and by the Law Society. We know that the current system deteriorates outcomes for people in Wales. And I've been frightened, truth be told, that 40 per cent of the funding comes from the Welsh Government, although justice has not been devolved. That isn't sustainable. So, does the Counsel General agree that devolution of justice is vital to improve outcomes for those who go through the system?

I have no doubt when I agree with the Member on that point, and the devolution of powers over policing and justice is a priority of this Government. The case for the devolution of justice and policing to Wales, as is the case in Scotland and the north of Ireland, is clear. That's a clear conclusion, as the Member said, of the Silk commission, the Thomas commission, and, more recently, the Independent Commission on the Constitutional Future of Wales. Those commissions did find that the devolution of justice would allow for more accountable, co-ordinated and effective services that align better with the needs of the people and communities of Wales and that are integrated more closely with devolved responsibilities, such as health, social care, education and housing. The First Minister has informed the UK Prime Minister that this is a main priority of the Welsh Government, and Ministers will try and secure progress on this, including through the police reform Bill, which is in the pipeline. I would have thought that that is an excellent opportunity to start the process of the devolution of policing, and it is an opportunity that we as a Government will grasp with both hands. Diolch.

While criminal justice, as the Member knows, is largely reserved, the Welsh Government works with policing, the Crown Prosecution Service, courts and specialist services to improve access to justice for rape survivors. Through the violence against women, domestic abuse and sexual violence agenda, we fund advocacy, counselling and support services, including independent sexual violence advisers, helping survivors access information, support and justice.

I would further say that the Government has invested in specialist support services throughout the piece. More needs to be done, I hasten to add, and we recognise that access to justice is about more than court outcomes. Survivors must be able to access timely support, information and advocacy so they can make informed decisions and recover from the impact of abuse.

And with regard to the university sector, all learners, including university students, should be able to study in safe environments free from violence, abuse, harassment and intimidation. Whilst universities in Wales are autonomous, we expect them to take robust action to ensure safe and supportive teaching environments. Medr's new staff and learner welfare condition has introduced clearer expectations on well-being, safety and protection from harassment and misconduct, including sexual violence. Officials are working closely with Medr and universities and sector partners to strengthen prevention, reporting and support, improve consistency and transparency and support providers to create safe cultures where concerns are taken seriously. I would suggest to the Member that she writes to my colleague the Deputy First Minister on this matter, and I am sure that she will get a full and substantive response on the current steps being taken.

Thank you for that. I was pleased to see the UK Government announcement that specialist courts to deal with rape and sexual offences are to be introduced across England and Wales, and, hopefully, this begins to tackle the shamefully low prosecution rates of rape in the UK, which has, effectively, been decriminalised.

However, we also must look at prevention, not just justice. I met with a group of young women at Cardiff University, so I was glad to hear you talk about the university sector. They're called Time to Act, and they've been campaigning to eliminate sexual assault and sexual harassment from campuses, alongside supporting survivors. In England, as you'll know, there are currently regulatory consequences for institutions that fail to prevent and to tackle harassment and sexual misconduct. Students in Wales don't have this equivalent protection, so I was wondering if you would, potentially, look at what avenues are available for the Welsh Government to legislate and prevent sexual harassment and violence on university campus.

Well, I hear what the Member says, and I appreciate the work that she's doing in the area. It's certainly very important, and I can speak from my own personal knowledge of work I do at the university in Aberystwyth. It's high on the agenda at that university and, I have no doubt, in every university in Wales, and so it should be. So, things are moving, albeit slower than all of us would want, but they are moving in the right direction. And our job, it seems to me, is to pressurise and ensure that the continued improvement in this area is to be seen by all.

If I add one final thing, on the issue of rape generally—horrific as it is—there has been an announcement that there will be, from 1 October, designated courts dealing with rape. That will lessen the backlog, and that will include specialists available to help and back up individuals but also things like separate entrances and waiting rooms, basic protections of that kind. This is something, I believe, to be welcomed. I would also say, on a more positive note, that the backlogs in Wales are considerably better than they are elsewhere in the UK, and we need to maintain that, but this, again, will assist, I believe.

I thank the Member for raising that matter. Fortunately, the Deputy Minister for Transport is here, and he'll be writing to you. I would encourage you also to share any information that you have, and encourage any Member here to always share information where services need further attention from us as a Government.

Last week, I was glad to be joined by my Welsh Labour colleague Ken Skates at Llanwern steelworks in my constituency. Llanwern is strategically important to Wales and the whole of the UK, and it must not be lost in the wider debate on the steel industry. Steel making is in Newport's DNA, and it should have a proud future, but the workers that I spoke to last week were concerned about that future and that it's under threat from cheap galvanised steel imports. The Welsh Government must work with the UK Government to protect steel jobs in Wales and engage with the unions to support the workforce. So, Trefnydd, can we have a statement from the Welsh Government confirming that you will do everything in your power to ensure a sustainable future for the steel industry in Wales?

Well, I thank the Member for raising an issue that is, of course, hugely important. You will be highly aware, I'm sure, that the Deputy First Minister, when she met with the new UK Prime Minister, Andy Burnham, over the summer, expressed this new Government's concerns about the lack of action taken by the Labour Government in not securing a future for steel in Wales and ignoring the steel industry here. Certainly, the Cabinet Minister for Enterprise, Connectivity and Energy is in the Chamber and has heard what you had to say, and, as always, we are more than willing to have discussions with local Members where necessary. But, unambiguously, I can say that we do see a future for the steel industry, and we do want to work with those who are concerned about this issue, and, of course, are constantly making the case at a UK level for the UK Government to give sufficient attention to the steel industry here in Wales.

Trefnydd, continuing on the theme of trains, I'd like to request a statement from the Deputy Minister for Transport on the delivery of rail services in west Wales. I'm regularly contacted by constituents from across Ceredigion Penfro who express concerns about the frequency, reliability and overall availability of rail services in the region. They want to see more regular and dependable train services operating across all rail lines in west Wales throughout the week, because for too long west Wales has not received the level of attention it deserves when it comes to rail connectivity and service delivery, and I believe there should be a review of rail provision in the region to assess whether current services are meeting the needs of local communities, and indeed to identify where improvements are required. Therefore, I'd be grateful if the Welsh Government could provide a statement outlining what steps it intends to take to improve the delivery, frequency and reliability of rail services in west Wales so that we can understand how it plans to address the long-standing concerns of passengers in Ceredigion Penfro.

I thank the Member for raising those issues. Dirprwy Lywydd, of course, every Member will have heard previous statements, including statements on priorities, including those from the Deputy Minister for Transport. We too share that vision in terms of ensuring that public transport is available in every part of Wales, and that vision includes the work in train to look at that provision. As that work continues, the Deputy Minister will be providing updates to the Senedd and will, of course, be very willing to engage with Members, who will want to make the case for their constituencies.

Trefnydd, we just heard questions to the Counsel General about the legal position surrounding health service reconfiguration. Last week, Powys Teaching Health Board decided to press ahead with consultation on proposals that could remove in-patient beds from a number of our community hospitals. There is considerable concern across Powys and many of us are far from convinced that the voices of local people or their elected representatives are being heard. Will you therefore arrange for an urgent statement from the Cabinet Minister for Health and Care setting out the Government's position, what discussions he has had with the health board, and, crucially, whether he is prepared to intervene?

I thank the Member for raising this issue. Clearly, it's an issue that was raised last week as well, and, as I outlined at that time, dealing with that initial engagement, that's what the health board is doing. No decisions have been made. And what I would ask every Member who has constituents who have been affected by the possibilities raised in this consultation to do is to become involved in the consultation, and to encourage others to engage, and to be clear that the health board has yet to make any decision on its clinical services plan.

Trefnydd, we know that many people were preparing for surgery when they heard, by word of mouth or by social media, that their surgeries under the Welsh Gender Service had been paused during the Senedd's summer recess. One of my constituents was actually in hospital for surgery when they were told that their operation was cancelled, with no further support provided since then. You'll know that I've written, with other Members, to the NHS Wales Joint Commissioning Committee, who were responsible for this decision, asking about the evidence that informed this decision, the lack of communication with patients, and how patients' voices were not heard.

I know that this decision was made by a medical body, rather than a political one, but I'd like to request a statement outlining how the Government will ensure that this community will be listened to, how their concerns will be central to any further decisions made about trans healthcare, and how they will be supported. Diolch.

I thank the Member for raising such an important matter. I'm sure that many of us will have heard from friends, from constituents, who've been impacted, and have heard about the very powerful impact that this has had.

Please be assured that this Government stands with the trans community and will continue to protect and promote trans rights in line with our commitment to a welcoming and inclusive Wales. Members will be aware that a debate is tabled tomorrow by Anthony Slaughter. There will be an opportunity then to ask questions of the Cabinet Minister for health, and he will also be responding in full then.

To be fair, you, like me, Trefnydd, have been an advocate for ensuring children and young people get to school safely and happy, and I'm sure that you'll agree with me that the first priority of governments at every level should be to protect children's and young people's well-being and not leave them anxious and worried. This policy of getting as many pupils as possible onto public buses rather than school buses is majorly flawed. It may work in urban areas, but it certainly doesn't work in rural areas, where routes like the Usk to Monmouth are long and winding, with national speed limit roads. Children packed in like sardines, standing for 40 minutes, is just not acceptable, and I'm sure you'll agree with that. But, sadly, this was the case in Monmouthshire on the first day of term, with multiple parents and pupils contacting me, with issues—similar issues, actually—flagged all over Monmouthshire and Torfaen. How can we possibly be in a situation where children have to have their own seat and even wear a seat belt for school trips, but this is acceptable?

Cost-cutting exercises by councils—and we all know they're strapped for cash—should never come at the expense of children's safety and well-being. Trefnydd, on that note, I would like to request an urgent statement from the Cabinet Minister responsible as to when this policy will be reviewed to ensure all children and young people get to school safely, on time and ready to learn. Diolch.

I thank the Member for raising this issue. It is a very live issue as part of our discussions as a Government. It's a cross-portfolio issue. I'm pleased that the Deputy Minister for Transport is here. We have had discussions even this week, as Ministers, looking at the impacts in terms of barriers to people's access to education, and that does affect how much money families have too. This is a very live issue. The work is ongoing. As there are updates, the Deputy Minister will, of course, engage with Members of the Senedd who are concerned about this issue.

Trefnydd, can I call for a statement from the Cabinet Minister for Enterprise, Connectivity and Energy on access to banking services in Wales? I appreciate that banking is not a devolved matter, but banking services really do matter to people across the country, particularly in communities that don't have access to a bank. I've been blessed in my own constituency to have two banking hubs, which are serving the communities of Abergele and Prestatyn, but there are other communities, places like Llangollen that lost its last bank a couple of years ago, that don't have a bank present. At the moment, the FCA, the Financial Conduct Authority, simply do assessments of access to cash, rather than access to banking services.

Shortly after the election, the UK Government did announce a review of access to banking services. That consultation finished over the summer. I wonder whether the Welsh Government has made a submission to that about the particular circumstances in Wales, particularly given our rurality, to make sure that people have access to these vital services. If it hasn't, is there any way we can work together to make sure that we make a call and a demand for legislation in this area, to ensure that banking services are available?

Thank you. I'm sure that you're not the only one and I know that we've been part of campaigns in the past when banks have been at risk, and have seen the impact when they have gone from those places, and what impact that has then had on some of the most vulnerable residents or the oldest people in that society. This is also an issue that the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Minister for Social Justice and Equality has been raising, because this is a social justice issue: ensuring those services. I am very pleased that the Cabinet Minister for Enterprise, Connectivity and Energy heard what you said just then. We will consider that, and I'm sure that the Minister will engage with you.

Given the significant impact of storm Bert in November 2024, when the community centre in Aberfan and the leisure centre in Merthyr Tydfil opened their doors to support residents who had had to evacuate because of the destructive floods, many constituents across Pontypridd Cynon Merthyr are very concerned about the increasing risk of flooding over the coming winter. The Taff and Cynon rivers pose a serious threat to homes, businesses and community infrastructure. Given these concerns, I would like to ask for a statement from the Cabinet Minister for Rural Resilience and Sustainability outlining how the Welsh Government is strengthening Wales's preparedness for floods over the winter months. This should include details about current resilience planning, support at a community level, the readiness of infrastructure, and any additional measures being taken in order to safeguard areas that are at risk in our region. Given the scale of recent events, clarity and assurance for residents is crucial.

I thank the Member for raising that issue, and it was spoken about earlier today in First Minister's questions. I should declare that I share a constituency with you and I have been a strong advocate of taking action in terms of supporting communities who face this continuing risk. I've seen the impact that this has, not just when the floods happen, but any time it rains heavily, and that continuing fear that people have that they are going to suffer further flooding and the impact that that will have on their day-to-day lives.

The Cabinet Minister for Rural Resilience and Sustainability will be making a statement in these next weeks about preparing for the winter. And certainly, what we have seen now, with this extreme weather, is that we have to do this work throughout the year, because one of the challenges that we have seen is that some of the storms happen earlier or later in the year, and that then that preparedness is needed. Certainly, that statement will be coming in the next few weeks. And I think, from what the First Minister said earlier today, that the work that we can do as each Member of the Senedd, in terms of supporting communities with that resilience and advocating for them, is incredibly important.

I'm raising this as an MS for Carmarthenshire, but I need to declare that I am also the Chair of the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee. Trefnydd, can I ask for a statement from the Welsh Government on nutrient neutrality and its impact on housing delivery in west Wales?

Following Natural Resources Wales's marine assessment and subsequent planning advice to councils last year, social and affordable housing schemes across Carmarthenshire and Pembrokeshire face significant delays. I have been contacted by one contractor who builds almost exclusively for affordable social housing, and he has an order book of £30 million-worth of secured work that has now stalled. Its turnover has halved, it supports approximately 80 staff and 320 subcontractors, from groundworkers and bricklayers through to merchants, plant hire firms and delivery drivers. Everyone accepts in this Chamber the need to protect our rivers and estuaries, but nutrient pollution comes from a wide range of sources across whole catchment areas. These delays are affecting both families waiting for homes and the firms ready to build them.

So, can we have a statement on what has replaced the marine nitrates development taskforce, what further mitigation measures are being considered, and when these housing schemes can realistically move forward? Thank you.

I thank the Member for raising that issue. The Cabinet Minister for Local Government, Housing and Planning will have heard your calls and the issues that you've raised. And I will discuss with her the most appropriate way of responding to those, be that a statement or by correspondence.

I'd like to request two statements, one from the Cabinet Minister for Social Justice and Equality on how they are working with councils and the UK Government to prevent rogue builders and their ability to phoenix, which is starting up again after you've left people with incomplete builds and in lots of debt, and also on identity fraud, quishing and other scams that are taking place in north Wales, where it has emerged that there is a higher degree of scams now affecting our older constituents. I'm working with trading standards and the BBC, as north Wales does seem to be this key place where it's happening. The Federation of Master Builders Cymru have called on the Welsh Government to work alongside the UK Government to produce a mandatory licensing scheme for building companies. Will your Government support that?

And a second one from the Cabinet Minister for Health and Care on the parking provision at Ysbyty Gwynedd—and Ysbyty Glan Clwyd is just as bad. Patients and visitors are continuously struggling to find appropriate parking, despite driving around continuously for almost an hour sometimes, and sometimes they will actually accept that they're going to get a fine because otherwise they would miss that appointment. This has been going on for too long now, so we need something from the health Minister to say that he's accepting that this isn't adequate. Please help.

Thank you. The points made by the Member are on the record. I'm not sure if there was a request for a statement on the second point that she raised, but certainly I will make the Cabinet Minister aware of the issue that you have raised. As always, if there are any specific examples that you want to raise, I would encourage you as a Member to raise those issues. I certainly know that Members representing other health boards have been raising concerns around parking in hospitals. So, it would be good to know about any problems so that we too can have those conversations with the health boards.

I want to continue on transport, if that's okay.

I want to ask about speed limit guidance, and it's great to have the Deputy Minister here. I've raised this repeatedly in the Senedd, because communities across Brycheiniog Tawe Nedd— Rhayader, Llanspyddid, Libanus, Cwmdu and others—have been waiting for many months and years for revised guidance on the speed limits. And we've had correspondence, and I understand it will be some time in 2027. But I just wonder if we could just be clearer and more specific, given that we represent communities—and it's not just me—who really need this speed guidance in order to ensure they're safe. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

I thank the Member for raising that point. The Deputy Minister has heard what you've had to say. In terms of a more specific timetable, I don't have that information beyond what's already been shared with you, that is, that we do anticipate that the new guidance will be published in 2027. Officials are working with local government officers to update the guidance, and their feedback on the latest draft is being considered at the moment. So, that work is ongoing, and I thank you for raising the issue.

Trefnydd, I would like to call for a Welsh Government statement from the Minister for Finance regarding the Welsh rates of income tax during the Senedd term, in particular whether she has made any request to any civil servant on assessing the impact of an increase in taxes and what impact that would have on her finances.

I thank the Member for the question. I would suggest that that type of question—. I didn't hear anything about a specific statement there. It was more of a scrutiny question, or a question for you to put to the Minister when you have that opportunity. But, certainly, the Cabinet Minister for Finance is present and she has heard what you've raised, and I'm sure you'll have an opportunity to discuss this further.

Trefnydd, as vice-chair of the executive committee for the Urdd Eisteddfod in Bro'r Wenynen, I'm pleased to say that holding the Urdd Eisteddfod in Newport next year will be an important and historic moment for our area. It's an opportunity not only to welcome thousands of visitors, but also to introduce more families, young people and children to the Welsh language and our national culture.

On Saturday, the welcome festival will take place in the centre of Newport, and everyone is welcome to join us at the celebration. For me, the important thing will be the legacy left by the Eisteddfod. Can I therefore ask for a statement describing how the Government will work with the Urdd, local authorities, schools and community groups to ensure that the Eisteddfod has a permanent impact on the use of the Welsh language, and on confidence in terms of community use across Casnewydd Islwyn, and Bro'r Wenynen in its entirety?

I thank the Member, and good luck to everyone who is involved in that welcome festival. And I look forward to attending Eisteddfod Bro'r Wenynen next year. As the Member has said, it will be an excellent opportunity for the area. And we know of the boost that comes to an area and its Welshness when Eisteddfod yr Urdd goes to that area.

Certainly, one of the things that I felt very frustrated about as an opposition spokesperson was that there was not enough planning being done in terms of legacy. And the assurance I'd like to give the Member, and every other Member, is that I and the Cabinet Minister for Education and the Welsh Language are having discussions at the moment about how to put that legacy framework in place in terms of the Urdd Eisteddfod and the National Eisteddfod, and you will have heard me speaking about other events across Wales.

There is investment, of course, from this Government going into that, and ensuring that that legacy work does not just fall on the very busy people who are currently fundraising for these eisteddfods, but that we can work with people such as the mentrau iaith on the ground to ensure that legacy, is very important. So, as that work continues, I will be very ready to share that with Members, and to take your ideas and input on board as well. Because these are important events. They do leave a legacy. But if we can have more of a legacy by planning more strategically, then that's where I and the Cabinet Minister for Welsh education want to reach.

Trefnydd, can I request a statement from the Cabinet Minister for Local Government, Housing and Planning on the extent of houses in multiple occupancy in Bangor Aberconwy Môn being used by Government-contracted organisations to house people via Home Office schemes? And what assessment has been made of the effect on local housing costs and supply for constituents on waiting lists, some of whom have been waiting for over a year?

I thank the Member for raising this issue. Clearly, you are discussing an issue that is not devolved to this Senedd. If the Member wants contact details in order to raise any questions that he has in the most appropriate way, of course I would be happy to facilitate that. But, in terms of what is within the control of the Cabinet Minister, you are talking about an issue that is not devolved.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I'd like to call for a statement from the Cabinet Minister for Health and Care on the increasing prevalence of antisemitism in the healthcare sector. The Campaign Against Antisemitism is today publishing a groundbreaking documentary featuring patients and practitioners describing experiences, including Nazi salutes, antisemitic death threats and patients refusing treatment from Jewish doctors. There has been a meteoric increase in antisemitism over the last three years, and British Jews have been taking steps to conceal their Jewish identity. Whilst most evidence focuses on England, I'd be surprised if Wales were immune from this problem. So, can we have a statement outlining how the Welsh Government is monitoring antisemitism in our healthcare services, and what action is being taken to root it out?

Thank you. Can I be very clear that antisemitism is something that we should all condemn? We should all work proactively to ensure that no-one is targeted in such a way and feels unsafe. The growth of antisemitism and hatred is something that should unite all of us in condemning and working hard within our communities to ensure that there is community cohesion and that nobody is targeted in such a way. The Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Minister for Social Justice and Equality leads on this work on behalf of the Welsh Government, though it's of course owned collectively by each of us, and the 'Anti-racist Wales Action Plan' is being reviewed to ensure that it's fit for purpose in light of the rise that we're seeing in antisemitism and hate crimes. Therefore, any Member here who is concerned about such issues, please engage with this work, because it's crucial that we work together.

Trefnydd, I would like a statement from the relevant Minister on the criteria used in allocating additional funding to support people living in poverty. A press release last week on emergency food and poverty support noted that funding would not be allocated on the basis of the number of people living in poverty, but, rather, that an additional percentage of the funding will be distributed according to how rural a community is.

There's a long-established formula for the distribution of such funding, and well-established processes for making changes to this formula. Your Government has torn that up via a press release, and I'm told councils are still waiting for details nearly a week after the announcement was made. I find it deeply concerning, without debate or scrutiny, that the Plaid Government would divert potential funding away from communities such as Ely, Caerau, south Riverside, Pentrebane, Grangetown, Butetown and Splott, despite the significant challenges of poverty faced by residents there. Surely there's consensus across this Chamber that the most effective way to target funding intended to alleviate poverty is to allocate it according to the levels of poverty and need. The Minister needs to urgently explain why she believes differently. Diolch yn fawr.

Thank you. So the Member will be aware, the Cabinet Minister for Social Justice and Equality is the relevant Member; you asked at the start of your question who the relevant Minister was, so just to give you that assurance.

Could I make it clear? It has been unequivocal in terms of this Government that tackling poverty in all parts of Wales is a priority for us. Or entire programme for government, if you look at it, that cross-Government focus, in every portfolio, is entirely clear that tackling poverty is incredibly important and is something that we prioritise. The Member will also be aware, I'm sure, that there are problems in terms of rural poverty in particular that need to be tackled. Often, that has been something that has been hidden, and it's very important that the support that we provide in order to ensure that everyone, in all corners of Wales—. We know that, in every constituency, there are people living in poverty who should not be living in poverty, and that the last Labour Government's record was to increase the number of children living in poverty. That is why it is a priority for this Government to work across Ministers to get to the heart of the problem.

For too long, the Welsh Government has been measured on the number of actions it takes and not the outcomes it delivers. That changes now. From now on, every action will have a clear purpose, namely to improve people’s lives. Prioritisation will be central to our approach. Effective government means focusing our efforts and resources on the areas where they can have the greatest impact, being clear about the outcomes that we want to achieve and being accountable for delivering them. That must always be the case, but it’s especially true at a time like this when resource is limited.

Dirprwy Lywydd, for too long, silo working has stood in the way of progress. This new Government will work across traditional boundaries to address the greatest challenges facing our society. That is why prevention, productivity, the climate and nature emergency and the Welsh Language—Cymraeg—are embedded throughout every aspect of our programme. They are not separate priorities, they underpin every aspect of how we will deliver change and improve outcomes across Wales. They will shape the work of every Minister and every part of Government.

At its heart, the aim of this programme is building a better future for Wales. Guided by the principles of the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015, we have brought together our well-being objectives and our programme for government into one single framework—a framework that sets out the future that we want to build and the actions that we will take to deliver it.

So, what does this mean in practice? It means prioritising the areas where we can have the greatest impact. A health and care service that is fit for the future is something that every Welsh citizen needs and deserves. This not only means taking immediate action to bring down waiting lists, which remain unacceptably high, but also ensuring that our most precious public service is sustainable and resilient for the future.

We'll rebalance resources towards the prevention of ill health, better access to services and improved social care. We want a future where preventing ill health is given the same priority as treating illness, where services are designed around people and communities, and where every part of Government works together to improve health and well-being. And as the cost-of-living crisis continues to bite and global headwinds threaten further volatility in coming months, my Government will help households make ends meet.

At a time when many families are facing significant financial pressures, we will take action to make everyday life more affordable. Central to that effort is our transformative new childcare offer, which will help families with the cost of living, support parents into work and training and make a significant contribution to tackling child poverty. We will also tackle one of the biggest pressures on household budgets by improving access to affordable and secure housing, including through our commitment to deliver at least 20,000 additional social homes by 2030.

Last week, my colleague the Cabinet Minister for Finance announced a 30 per cent cut to business rates for the leisure and hospitality sectors. This decision was widely welcomed by the industry, and it reflects this Government's determination to give people practical support in challenging times. This, of course, is inherently linked to our aim to unleash the potential of Wales's economy and to create high-skilled jobs that pay well.

Our ambition for Wales rests on a flourishing economy that fuels our public services, creates fulfilling and rewarding jobs, and provides the foundation for a stronger future. Through our productivity mission, we'll work to halve the productivity gap with the rest of the UK within 10 years. We'll also establish a new national development agency to help Welsh businesses to grow, innovate and create good jobs. Every part of the Government has a role to play in growing the Welsh economy.

Dirprwy Lywydd, every child and young person deserves the opportunity to fulfil their potential and succeed in the future. But they've been failed by previous administrations whose lack of ambition has left Wales languishing at the bottom of league tables.

That is why the Cabinet Minister for Education and the Welsh Language has already published a new literacy and numeracy plan and has set clear national expectations to raise standards and help every learner to succeed.

We cannot and will not accept that this is as good as it gets for our education system. We owe it to the next generation to match their hopes and aspirations for the future with a new level of ambition never before determined by any Welsh Government. That commitment to improving the lives of our young people is just as relevant to their formative years. Years of flawed strategies and unfocused spending by previous administrations, compounded by destructive austerity policies pursued by Westminster, have left child poverty levels stubbornly high. Getting to grips with this is both a moral imperative and a defining mission of this Government.

Neither family income nor the circumstances of a child's birth should ever determine their future. A Wales where every child can thrive is a Wales where opportunities are available for all, and where every community is stronger. That's why, through this programme, we will act across Government to break the cycle of poverty and create opportunities for every child in Wales.

Finally, my Government will be unwavering and unapologetic in standing up for Wales and demanding fairness from Westminster at every turn.

We believe in our nation, and we will take every step possible to unlock its potential and build a stronger, fairer and more resilient Wales. We will continue to make the case to the UK Government for the funding, the investment and the powers that Wales needs to thrive. As such, I look forward to meeting with the Prime Minister at the National Economic Council next month.

Underpinning all of this is our determination to deliver through better Government. Better Government means focusing on what matters most, working across traditional boundaries and ensuring that our efforts make a real difference. We're also committed to being open and transparent about our progress. We will strengthen our use of evidence and data, learning always from what works. Dirprwy Lywydd, after years of missed opportunities and stagnation, we are getting Wales moving.

By focusing on what matters most to the people of Wales, working together and taking a long-term approach, we can build a more confident nation that is ready to fulfil its wealth of untapped potential and give people hope for the future.

Prif Weinidog, can I begin by thanking you for delivering your programme for government today? There's plenty in this programme that Reform can agree with. We want waiting lists down, we want standards in our schools to improve, we want better paid jobs, stronger businesses, and a health service that people can access when they need it. Where there is common ground, I will say so.

Reform went into the election supporting greater surgical and diagnostic capacity, stronger literacy and numeracy in schools, reform of the additional learning needs system, more vocational opportunities for young people and a stronger future for family farms up and down the country. But the real test of this programme is not how many promises are made today, it's whether we can come back to this Chamber in a year, two years and four years from now and measure whether anything has actually improved.

Holding you to account is our responsibility as an effective opposition. Take the NHS. You're promising up to 10 surgical hubs, more diagnostic capacity, stronger clinical pathways and up to 100 more general practitioners. Those are ambitious commitments and people will expect this Government to deliver them. So, my first question is this: by the end of this Senedd term, how much lower should the overall waiting lists be, when will those surgical hubs be operating at full capacity and how many additional patients will they treat? Give us the baseline. Give us the target. Give us the date. Then, this Senedd can hold you to it.

The same applies to education. Your programme says that raising literacy and numeracy is one of the most urgent challenges facing our schools. I would agree. It also accepts the problems around persistent absence, behaviour and the pressure on the additional learning needs system. I welcome the fact that the Government recognises those problems, but recognition is the easy part. Schools cannot employ additional support with warm words, and local authorities cannot satisfy the growing demand for support with another review.

So, my second question is this: what improvement in attendance, literacy and numeracy should we expect to see by 2030, and what additional resource will actually reach the schools and councils to make the ALN system sustainable? Again, put the numbers against it. Parents and teachers need to know what success looks like. We on these opposition benches need to know what your idea of success looks like.

There is a much clearer political difference between us on the economy. This Government wants new agencies, commissions and programmes. Reform went into the election offering a different approach. We want lower taxes, better roads, stronger infrastructure and a Government that makes it easier for businesses to invest and grow here in Cymru. Your programme talks about productivity and good jobs. Fine. Productivity can be measured. Pay can be measured. Economic inactivity can be measured. Business creation can be measured. So, my third question is this: which economic measure does the First Minister want us to judge him by in 2030, and what target is he setting himself? Because if the answer is that Wales will be more prosperous, that is not enough. We need to know what progress looks like in hard figures.

I will now move on to the areas on which Reform fundamentally disagrees. First Minister, your Government remains committed to a pathway to net zero by 2040. Reform does not support that devolved target. We put greater weight on affordability, energy security and nuclear power, including the economic opportunity through small modular reactors at Wylfa in north Wales, which did not feature at all in Plaid Cymru's election manifesto. In fact, there's not much talk of north Wales at all in your programme for government, which is extremely disappointing.

On farming, you intend to continue and refine the sustainable farming scheme. We campaigned for much more substantial reform, with food production taking precedence and bureaucracy taking a back seat, rather than form filling and farming by calendar, which risks driving livestock numbers down in Wales. Those are fair and genuine differences, and people can judge the outcomes for themselves.

I also want to address the constitutional section of this programme, because it goes well beyond asking Westminster for a fair funding settlement. You are establishing a new national commission for Wales. You want justice and policing devolved, welfare devolved, further powers over energy, broadcasting, water and the Crown Estate. And Government is formally asking for the power to determine the timing, question and process of an independence referendum. Plaid Cymru is entitled to argue for those things. Reform is equally entitled to oppose them. I will never accept the notion that you have to support independence and constitutional chaos to prove you believe in Wales.

First Minister, I'm interested in what works, not what fits an ideology. Being Welsh does not require supporting independence, and standing up for Wales does not require wanting to leave the United Kingdom. So, my fourth question is this: how much public money and civil service resource will be committed to this constitutional programme during this Senedd term, and what practical outcome will you use to show that the expenditure has improved people's day-to-day lives?

Your own well-being statement says that the programme for government will be reviewed every year, and that progress will be reported annually. Good. And those reports must contain enough hard information for this Senedd and the public to judge whether you are delivering. By 2030, will people be waiting less time for treatment? Will children be attending school more regularly and achieving better results? Will wages and productivity be higher? Will businesses have confidence and invest in Wales? Will Welsh farmers be unshackled from burdensome red tape and incentivised to increase food production? I'm asking you to tell us what success looks like in numbers and time frames. Set the measures now, publish them every year, and then we will see whether this Government delivers what it has promised. Diolch yn fawr.

Thank you for those comments.

I'm grateful to the leader of Reform for agreeing that we are getting our priorities right in this programme for government and pledging to work in a co-operative way to help us deliver. That's exactly how I think we should operate here.

The Member is quite right that we need a Government that is willing and wants to be held to account. Scrutiny is important. That is why we have already published the first iteration of our digital dashboard. It will develop, it will grow, enabling you, and the Welsh public, to see how we are performing against a range of targets. Yes, and of course we have elements of targets throughout our programme for government.

There are some things that we have done already. We don't need a target to say that we will deliver that £1 billion that shows Welsh agriculture that this is a Government that believes in them and wants to support them. These are actions already taken. We don't need to set a target for how much funding we think needs to go into the health service. We've already taken those actions.

But the Member is quite right, so let's have a look at a number of the really key targets. We couldn't be clearer about what the childcare offer means. We have already been able to get to a point where the outcome at the end of this financial year is the roll-out of 12.5 hours of funded childcare for every two-year-old in every part of Wales. That's something the previous administration singularly failed to do. They got up to three. We're getting up to 22.

On education, interestingly, the work that we need to do—you have a background in education—is find a baseline from which we then are able to build. There will be targets around elements such as the Programme for International Student Assessment, which is only one measure, but we absolutely are putting those baselines in place so that we can build exactly that framework around which schools and parents and pupils know what they're aiming for.

There's a question about productivity. What are our targets on productivity? The Cabinet Minister for enterprise has literally published the first proper target for economic growth in Wales for a quarter of a century. It’s pretty ambitious, but I know that we have got the means to get there. It is, as it happens, not within the life of this Senedd, because we have to think long term about the economy. This is halving the productivity gap with the rest of the UK within 10 years. Now, that is a significant target, and throughout the term of this Senedd and beyond, as a nation, we need to be working towards those kinds of ambitious targets.

So, the targets are there. The differences that the Member emphasised are ones that are clear for everybody to see: that Reform do not believe in Wales as a nation, that we are a nation that builds our own future. That is my belief. I believed in devolution in 1997, when we had the chance to vote. I believed in strengthening it when we had the referendum in 2011. I believe we need to strengthen it further. What we have from the leader of Reform is a blanket ‘no’: ‘We do not want Wales to have the tools. We do not want Wales to be able to succeed by having the powers or the finances in order to build a better future for Wales.’ That is fine, that is a fundamental difference between us. I'll be the one here standing up for Wales. She can do as she pleases.

First Minister, can I also thank you for your statement today and congratulate you on publishing your programme for government? This, of course, is the first non-Welsh Labour-led programme for government this Senedd has seen, and we aim to respond to it in a dignified manner, putting the people that we serve and represent first, and of course working in common cause where and when we can. I look forward to working constructively on legislation in particular.

Now, governing, as I believe you recognise, is hard, and we do not intend to make your task unnecessarily harder, but we do represent in our party a great Welsh tradition with deep bonds of solidarity across Britain on the basis that we achieve more together than we can achieve alone. And our role in this Chamber is to stand up for the most vulnerable and to be a voice for those who don't have inherited wealth and privilege, but who graft and work for a better tomorrow. We were therefore disappointed that one of the first things this Plaid Cymru Government did was to water down its offer on free school meals. Plaid Cymru promised in its first 100 days document to commit to expanding free school meals to all secondary school pupils in households claiming universal benefit from September of this year. But by June, of course, just weeks after the election, you stated that this year it would only be available to parents of children in years 7 and 8. No date, indeed, has been given for extending this to years 9, 10 and 11.

Now, Bevan said that socialism is the language of priorities, and one of your first decisions was that you decided that keeping an election promise to some of our poorest children was not a priority. When over £300 million of ALN consequentials came to Wales, again you decided that the most vulnerable children were not a priority and not a penny was allocated to them. Welsh Labour had published plans in Government and in our manifesto for a negotiating body for school support staff, and despite the Senedd voting in favour of it, your Government has refused to commit to supporting school support staff on this.

Now, First Minister, you told traditional Labour voters in your election campaign that you were a safe pair of hands for progressive voters, and yet your group is now welcoming right-wing Reformers. And in your first decisions on education and opportunity for everyone, you've prioritised expanding Welsh Labour's childcare offer to millionaires. First Minister, can I ask you today to commit that your policies in this programme for government will not result in the removal or reduction in support aimed at working class or vulnerable children, such as Flying Start?

Turning to healthcare, under this Plaid Cymru Government, both overall waiting lists and two-year waiting lists are rising again, having fallen for 10 months in a row under Welsh Labour. Before the election, you promised that, within months, the number of people waiting for more than two years would be zero. Can you confirm that the priorities that you set out in this programme for government will not see you renege on another promise—a promise, not just an ambition, that we will see two-year waits reduced to zero within months? And can you confirm how many months that will be?

Weeks before the election—in an attempt, obviously, to get Wales's trade union movement on side—you also wrote to Cwm Taf health visitors supporting their call to upgrade all band 6 health visitors to band 7. Ministers, again, have reneged on this promise, and health visitors rightly feel betrayed. So, can I ask you, First Minister, will you now make good on your promise to these workers and to Unite the Union?

Others who will feel ignored and betrayed by this programme for government are the people of north Wales, as Helen Jenner has already identified, specifically those in Flintshire and Wrexham, because as Wrexham.com have observed, for north-east Wales, a notable feature is absence. It's as though parts of Wales are already being left behind. Standing up for Wales means uniting the people of Wales, not seeking a course of action that will divide Wales, divide the nation, divide our families and divide our communities, as Brexit did. Standing up for Wales means taking action to improve Wales, not producing a plethora of plans.

It's not too late, though. It's not too late. I ask you, finally, First Minister, to work with us in the spirit that you campaigned, in the spirit not only of constructive politics, but also progressive politics, because when the people of Wales are prioritised, I can assure you that you will find in us a willing and constructive partner.

I thank the Labour leader for beginning his contribution in a positive way. Governing is hard, as he knows. There has never been a majority in the history of devolution, and we recognise that we need to work across this Chamber in many ways, including through the development of legislation, which he suggested he wants to work with us on.

Unpicking a bit more some of the points that were raised there—on the NHS, it was and is priority No. 1. This is a Government that has already made choices, including on a budget deal with the last Labour Government, to ensure that we have the resources to make sure that we build a more sustainable future for the NHS. We begin now from the point of the legacy that we inherited from the last Labour Government. Data is just coming through now from the time of the election and the weeks following that, and, yes, it confirms how dire the situation is that we are trying to resolve. But through the measures outlined in this programme for government, building towards the introduction of up to 10 hubs, a change in emphasis in terms of the work patterns of doctors—this is clinically led, remember, to free up time, to get more people through the system—the injection of £150 million, some of it clinical, some of it on the actual buildings themselves, which will be the home of a sustainable NHS for the future, we stand firm by the pledges that we have made and in making this a priority.

On this element of somehow north Wales not being mentioned in this programme for government, I come from even further north than he does, and this is a Government—and I have made it clear—that isn't about the tokenism of having a north Wales Minister; every single Minister in this Government is a north Wales Minister and a south Wales Minister and a west Wales Minister, because we believe in bringing Wales together and building a brighter future for people, wherever they are. And to attack the first north Wales First Minister for somehow not caring about the north isn't something that people are going to even believe makes sense, frankly.

I come back to additional learning needs and remind the Member again that he had £9 million that Labour were going to put into something that we consider to be very important; we're glad that he does too. We had £100 million on the table; we have £40 million that we can spend this year. That is what this party put on the table, seriously, in a way that isn't just money but is money that can be spent—money that can be spent to make a real difference to councils, to schools, to parents, to children. The offer is still very much available. This has to be about more than politics.

And I will end, if I may, on this attack, which I've heard mentioned and read about it in the paper—and I was thinking, 'Surely, he's not going to make this accusation here in the Senedd Chamber'—that the childcare offer is something that he objects to in its universality. So, suddenly, the Labour Party objects to the universality that provides bus passes for pensioners, so we can assume that Labour wants to take away bus passes for pensioners, we can assume that they're against the universality of free prescriptions. Can we start thinking that also they want the universality of the NHS, even, to be taken away from people? Is he happy to create a two-tier system where rich people are to be supported to go off into private healthcare, or does he, like me, believe that the more we can build together—yes, including that principle of universality—binds us together as a nation and gives us solutions for the long term that address the needs of people in all parts of Wales from all backgrounds?

We have here a programme for government that is about transforming Wales, and I guess the point to make on governing being difficult is that government is difficult, especially when you inherit a broad range of issues that don't put us off, that don't make us diminish our ambitions, but make us work harder to deliver them for the people of Wales.

It's always interesting watching a messy divorce—[Laughter.]—and, my goodness, has it been an untidy one.

Can I thank you, First Minister, for advance notice of your statement, although not quite as in advance as the Western Mail's notice of your statement today, which seemed to have more detail than any Member of this Senedd prior to the release of it at 9.34 a.m. this morning? I'm afraid to say, again, a bit of a sense of déjà vu, a lot of recutting and rehashing of your manifesto, recutting and rehashing of your 100-day plan, and there's only so much rehashing that you can do with the same sorry document so many times to try and polish what many people would describe as something that I won't refer to. Because that, I'm afraid, is what many people will see it as.

I have to say that I was listening carefully to the radio this morning, as you found out in First Minister's questions today, and Laura McAllister referred to your 100-day plan as a 'gimmick'—I agree with her, and it's not always that I agree with Laura McAllister, but I agree with her on that. And now, of course, the rubber needs to hit the road in terms of getting some delivery for the people of Wales. And it's not going very well so far, is it? Waiting times up, PISA scores down, your grandstanding on independence really not making much of a difference, no matter how loud you scream. Now, I will say that, look, there is a lot of ambition in this document that we on the Conservative benches share—we want to see a more prosperous Wales, we want to see a better educated Wales, we want to see a healthier Wales; we want to see all of those things—but I'm afraid that it's lighter on detail than I would like in terms of the availability to deliver on those things.

Let me just turn to the NHS for a second, because I'm very concerned about the NHS, as are you, and I know that it's something that is close to your heart. You referenced the climate emergency and the nature emergency; you didn't seem to reference a crisis in the NHS, which I'm afraid it is, and many people perceive it as such. One thing that we do know is that that crisis is largely caused, according to the clinicians themselves, and according to the royal colleges, including the Royal College of Nursing, which was here last week in the Senedd, as a result of the beds situation in our NHS. There simply aren't enough beds. The Labour Party was disastrous in terms of its management of the NHS; I agree with you on that. They cut the number of beds too far, too fast, and people now are paying the consequences.

Just over the last three years, I am told by the Royal College of Nursing, 21 per cent of acute surgical beds have gone in the Welsh NHS, a fifth of our capacity. Thirteen per cent of acute medical beds have gone. It's no wonder that our emergency departments can't find the beds in those hospitals when patients need them. You didn't reference that situation. I want to know what are you going to do to surge those beds in the short term to fix that issue. Because let me tell you: you create surgical hubs, you need beds for people to go into after they're recovering from surgery, particularly if something goes wrong. So, I want to know what are you doing on that front.

You also suggested that there's going to be a switch in the way that the NHS is funded, with more going to primary care. Now, I want more money to go into our primary care services, but I don't want it to be to the detriment of hospital care. What assurances can you give me today, First Minister, and the people of Wales, that you won't be cutting funding to our hospitals in Wales in order to compensate for that extra investment in primary care? Because we need to know.

You referenced the cost of living. I agree with you that we need action on that. That's why I raised the need to do something on council tax today in First Minister's questions. We need action to extend free childcare. We had a free childcare plan as well, and we'll support you to be able to try to deliver some more free childcare. Ours was slightly different; we wanted more parental choice so that grandparents could look after their children too, and that was better for the taxpayer in terms of cost. But I want to know what you're doing to cut taxes. Can you cut some taxes for us? A penny off income tax. Is it not possible to shave some money off the budget where we've got waste, where we've got largesse, so that we can put money back into people's pockets so that they can decide how to spend it in the economy themselves?

You referenced in your document—. By the way, when the statement came through, I clicked on the well-being link. It didn't work. I hope that's not an omen for the future in terms of whether you'll be able to deliver things. I eventually got around to finding the right link. You talked in there about the desire to allow people to buy their own community assets. I support that; we'll support you with that. I want people to be able to buy their own home. I want stamp duty gone. I want the right to buy back. I want to bring empty homes back into use. There's insufficient detail on those things in your plan.

I've got all sorts of other things that I'd like to discuss, but the clock's against me. Let me say this: if you're able to deliver on your ambitions, many of them which we support, we will try to work collaboratively with you. It might be difficult. There may be some stumbles along the way, but we're prepared to reach out on a cross-party basis, and it was good to hear the same message coming from Reform as well, to try to make Wales a better place. But be under no illusions: we want to see a Wales where there are lower taxes, where there's an end to wasteful spending, where there's less emphasis on the grandstanding and more emphasis on the day-to-day jobs and using those powers and resources that you already have in your armoury to deliver a better future for our country.

Diolch yn fawr iawn. Again, the common ground that we have, and I also take a real positive from the fact that we have three party leaders now who say that they want to work positively and constructively. It won't be on everything—there are differences between us, we know that—but there's that positive sense here that there are elements of the work that we do in this place, from legislation to budgets and all sorts of other things, where we need to work together.

I must say that the accusation that somehow this is a rehash of our manifesto, that you have a manifesto, you stand in an election, you get elected, you have a mandate, and somehow then you tear up the manifesto and start again—. That's not how it works. That's not how it works. If this feels like our manifesto, as in if this feels like that it reflects what we promised the people of Wales that we would do, with the priorities on health and education and job creation and childcare and child poverty and standing up for Wales, it's doing its job, so thank you very much for confirming that, Darren.

You also criticise—. I get it; scrutiny includes criticism. I honestly say, on health, we face an uphill struggle because we inherit some serious issues, not all of which are the fault of the last Government, but that is what we inherited.

On PISA, don't criticise us on PISA scores. Those PISA tests were taken in 2025, before we came into power. But it does, of course, reflect again the scale of the challenge that we face.

The Member focuses, in particular, on health, and, yes, it is something that is important to me, but it's important to all of us here, I think, getting the NHS right. The Member's party has often made the case that we should declare a crisis. I do certainly believe that there's a crisis in many parts of the NHS. I'm not convinced that a declaration of crisis in that kind of way is particularly useful. There are suggestions there that we should have more about beds here. I have made the case for making sure that we maximise the capacity of our health system in the past, but it's not quite that simple either. Our surgical hubs—most of the people that will go through surgical hubs will be going home the same day. Also, in my local district general hospital, it's not a lack of beds; it's the lack of throughput and the number of people. It's the same wherever we are. The numbers of people who are medically fit for discharge and who are still in our hospitals, those are the issues. Should we have an ambition to absolutely grow where we can, including bed capacity, with the staff to go with them? Yes, absolutely. But we're also working within constraints. Remember that the plans that we have put in place and that are reflected in this document are clinically led, and they're not telling us what we need is more beds—they're saying we need a number of steps to be taken. But I'm not dismissing the point that the Member is making.

On the shift of resource towards primary—and I include preventative, I guess, in that, though preventative is a little bit different too—the Member's right that you have to be careful. We're not suggesting going in one leap. We're talking about 0.5 percentage point per year of an increase. But it happens in a slow and sustainable way because you don't want a detrimental impact on secondary care, which, in many ways, is the expensive end of the health service. And getting those waiting lists down, the higher waiting times in particular, takes then the pressure, hopefully, off secondary care, which helps then that transition to primary care.

The leader of the Conservative group says that there's a lot of ambition in this document that we share. That's good. So, let's work on those areas. The same invitation goes to Members in other parties. This is about ambition, as it says, but, at the end of the day, we're going to be measured on whether we are able to realise, if not 100 per cent, the thrust of what we say we're going to try to achieve on behalf of the people of Wales here.

Thank you for your statement, First Minister. It's great to see that raising standards in our schools continues to be one of this Government's key aspirations. And I believe that this was also clear from the statement made by the Cabinet Minister for Education and the Welsh Language last week. The foundational literacy and numeracy plan offers a golden opportunity to get the infrastructure right. There's little doubt that the process of implementation and of delivering better results will be a major challenge. But, as the Cabinet Minister said last week, we must not apologise for setting our standards and our expectations high. There is a clear timetable for completing this task and it is an ambitious programme.

It comes at a time when schools are already dealing with increasingly complex pupil needs, concerns regarding student behaviour, teachers' workload, and challenges in recruiting and retaining staff. Bearing in mind the plan's importance and our aspirations for education, what further support will the Welsh Government be providing to teachers and to staff more broadly during this Senedd term in order to ensure that they receive the appropriate support to deliver this plan?

Thank you very much for those comments and for that question. Yes, this is one of our key priorities. Standards in our schools aren't where, I think, all of us in this place can agree that they should be. The new literacy and numeracy framework, I think, will turn out to be something very valuable in taking a new view as to how we strengthen those fundamental skills. But the Member, Dirprwy Lywydd, refers to more than just what is taught in the classroom; it is about the support provided to staff too. We know that issues such as school attendance percentages and behaviour in schools are all part of the factors that create pressures on teaching staff. Those issues are very interconnected, and are often tied in to poverty and disadvantaged backgrounds and so on. But what we intend to do is to bring different agencies together—the schools, health and care services, youth services and so on—in a framework that's properly integrated in order to tackle these problems in a holistic manner, which is something that has, perhaps, been missing in the past.

During the election campaign, the First Minister said that the election was not about independence and that it would not be a priority during this Senedd term. Then, last week, he signed a joint statement with Sinn Féin and the SNP saying that Westminster's time was at an end. And now, today, in the programme for government that was published, it lists in the section of devolved powers the desire to pursue the devolved power to hold an independence referendum in Wales. Given the First Minister's comments during the election and then his comments today about his determination for an honest politics, I'd like to ask: what's changed between now and then?

Well, nothing's changed. I believe in Wales being able to pursue its future as a normal country. I believe in independence for Wales. I think everybody knows that. Our manifesto stated clearly that we believe that the shape of our constitutional future should be in the hands of the people of Wales. I mean, I think that's a fundamental right, and that is precisely what we're saying, in that we should be the ones, as a Senedd, calling it, as the people of Wales, asking for it, who are able to set the timetable for this. Yes, I did say that the last election wasn't about independence, and I think I have had lots of opportunities to explain what I meant by that.

There's no referendum being pushed for by this Government now, but we absolutely believe that the people of Wales should be allowed to decide. I will use the influence that I have, hopefully, as Wales's leader, to try to persuade people to think about the challenges, the opportunities and what we might be able to do in future that we aren't able to do now. These paths are challenging and full of opportunity at the same time. The Commission on the Constitutional Future of Wales isn't an independence commission. It is about, 'How do we arm ourselves to make us, as a nation, fit for the future?'

Now, Reform, we know—we've heard it again today from your leader, and again, you're being honest about this—don't believe in giving us any more powers. You think we should settle as we are. You think that we should, at best, put what we have in aspic and just hope that somehow, through our actions as Governments, that we can make things better. I just don't see it in that way. I think, where there are things that all the evidence points to it making sense for us to have control over—policing, where we pay for most of it directly in Wales now, but have no accountability for it; justice, so that we can serve people better in constituencies all across Wales; so that we can make decisions about our natural resources—I just think that's common sense.

What the commission does is provide us a platform through which you can say you don't want it to happen, and I can say, and others, 'Do you know what? We should look at this and see how we can deliver this.'

First Minister, it's encouraging to see the first visible signs that this Government has a programme at last. Many who read the statement by the First Minister will have smiled to see the claim that the Government made a good start during its first 100 days. For many across Wales, however, a series of reviews and a series of postponed decisions felt like anything but progress.

More concerning, however, is the continued failure to prioritise funding to areas of genuine need. Many in Cardiff will have heard the Trefnydd's contemptuous dismissal of my question earlier today. We've heard claims from Plaid Cymru MSs in the past that the additional learning needs funding gap was less severe in Wales than elsewhere—comments that teaching unions quickly criticised as out of touch with the reality facing schools.

And last week, there was an appearance of going even further, with Government Ministers appearing to cast doubts on the future of Flying Start. Whether or not that suggestion proves accurate, it has caused significant concern among those people delivering and benefiting from the programme. Will the First Minister take the opportunity right now to provide clarity and guarantee that funding for Flying Start will continue, as well as the prioritisation of those most in need? Children in some of Wales's most deprived communities should not pay the price for the Government's failure to properly cost its election promises.

To be open here, I was listening to the Trefnydd giving what the Member called a 'contemptuous' answer. What the Trefnydd said earlier was that she believed there was poverty in all parts of Wales that needed addressing. And I absolutely get—I absolutely get—the fact that the Member is standing up for the people of his constituency, as I would expect him to, but we have to, as a Government, recognise that we have urban poverty that we desperately need to get to grips with and we have rural poverty that we desperately need to get to grips with. In some instances, they're the same answers; in some instances, they're different answers. So, there's no contempt whatsoever there.

There's a specific question on Flying Start, and I have heard Labour Members raise questions about the future of Flying Start. We're somehow being accused of wanting to take money away from fighting child poverty when this is the party that has been criticised by his too often for wanting to spend too much on tackling child poverty through the childcare offer. This phase of the childcare offer is literally being delivered through Flying Start. This is building on what Flying Start has done. More families living in poverty, incidentally, are not in Flying Start areas than the ones that are in Flying Start areas. Both are really, really important. We want to help them all. I hope that's clear enough.

I'm very proud to serve a diverse constituency in Caerdydd Ffynnon Taf, with people coming from all walks of life. For the first time, many individuals and families placed their trust in Plaid Cymru, and they did this because they believe it will make a positive, tangible difference in their communities. I have spoken to many constituents over the last few months who are concerned about the rise in hate crimes, poverty, housing issues and other matters that negatively impact on their lives and the lives of their families.

If we are to be a truly ambitious nation, we must place social justice at the heart of our agenda. An unequal Wales will continue to leave people disenfranchised and left behind. A more equitable Wales, where people can receive different levels of support to achieve a fairer outcome, could accelerate our ambitions for a more equal nation. First Minister, people have different starting points in life and face different barriers, so how will the Welsh Government ensure that equality and equity are at the heart of delivering its programme for government?

I'm grateful for the question and the sentiment, and I couldn't agree more. It was very humbling, back in May, to see different communities in their geographical location, in their diversity, turning to Plaid Cymru and putting their trust in us, and we have to repay that trust. That's what it's all about. On social justice, I say, 'Hear, hear.' I hope that speaking loud and clear from this programme for government is the sense that this is about equity, it is about fairness, it is about equal opportunity, it is about social justice. We don't want the national development agency to be there to make Wales rich for its own sake. We want it there to make us prosper in every sense, where everybody feels a part of a flourishing nation that I know we can be. The measures on education are very much geared to making sure that education opportunities are there for everybody.

The attack on universality that we had earlier today, our belief in universality and making sure that we bring all parents in to the support that can be given through childcare, whilst, at the same time, emphasising the need to tackle child poverty through the Cynnal payment, I think all of that reflects something that I'm very proud to stand by. We will be measured by the way that we adhere throughout to those values of ours and, yes, building a united, peaceful Wales that rejects division is something that means an awful lot to, I know, the benches that I sit on, but hopefully all of us here too.

First Minister, you call tackling child poverty the defining mission of this Government, but a defining mission surely requires something to be defined. In July, when I challenged your Deputy First Minister over Cynnal, I said that what she presented was a plan to plan, not a plan. She told me that she was baffled by my question. Well, I have now read your programme for government, and the bafflement should be on your benches. Four years of Government, and on your defining mission, you promise to develop another plan that will then set the targets, benchmarks and milestones. Cynnal itself remains something you merely seek to pilot. This is not a four-year delivery programme; it is a promise to work out later what success should look like.

First Minister, your new ambition already resembles Swiss cheese: impressive packages, but full of holes and left to ferment, increasingly difficult to disguise. So, please answer the question your programme does not: by 2030, precisely what measurable reduction in child poverty will your Government deliver?

I've heard a lot of this plan-for-a-plan business. Government works out solutions to the problems we face as a nation. That's what Government does. We have a manifesto that sets out things we have decided, and it's clear what we need to do because the evidence is there. There are things that we have done already. The rolling out of childcare has begun. It's not something that's going to happen in the future, it is happening already. The introduction of free school meals has already begun, and there has always been a phased approach to that. Our measures on health aren't being planned, they are being implemented right now. But at the same time, you use the tools at your disposal: you use the civil service, you use civic society in Wales. We come here in committees in the Senedd and recommendations will be made by the committees that you sit on for Government to do things that we haven't thought of doing yet. That is how it works. We always seek solutions to the problems that Wales has. If you thought fighting an election, 'There we are, we've done the thinking; let's just settle down and do it', that's not how it works.

On Cynnal, it's a really good example. We know what we're trying to do with Cynnal. There are practical difficulties with implementing it because we don't have the powers. Again, a good example of why we need the tools at our disposal. But we think we've found a way of doing it: we're going to pilot it. The working group has already met four times. It's not something that we're planning how we're going to address this. It is happening, guided by my Deputy First Minister. I'm not going to apologise for thinking out carefully how we make decisions that will improve the lives of people in Wales.

Thank you for the statement.

I've got two issues, and I genuinely really want to understand this. You keep using the phrase, 'I want the people of Wales to decide their future' in relation to the issue around independence, and I really would like some clarity on that. What does that mean? How will you measure it? How will you make sure you know what the decision is by the people of Wales? And just to put on record, I'm anti-independence, but, absolutely, we need more powers here in the Senedd.

Secondly, on child poverty, you have my absolute support for all the measures on child poverty that you're introducing, and the universality of it. That is essential, for Cynnal and, obviously, the roll-out of universal free childcare as well. Just to put on record as well, it was me as a Liberal Democrat who made the deal with Labour for the 12.5 additional hours from Flying Start to be rolled out. That was a deal two years ago, and we want to see more. And I do want to just come back to your Deputy First Minister and myself. When we were previously on the back benches, we were like a stuck record, saying, 'Give us targets on child poverty, give us targets.' So, I'm really interested: what are your targets and when will we hear about them? Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Diolch yn fawr. I remind the Member that she voted against a supplementary budget that was proposing to roll out matters like childcare that were really important to her.

On child poverty targets, this has been a major issue in that we had 27 years of Labour-led Governments that did have targets initially, then they withdrew them. We will bring targets. We are developing a strategy. One of the reasons that we have called for a strategy is that the sector—people working in this area—wants targets. I'd rather work out what targets are meaningful rather than pluck one from the air. The work is being done on that now. In early summer 2027, we will have that strategy, which must include targets. We need to know what we're aiming for.

On independence, I compare the situation in Wales to Ireland, where the Good Friday agreement specifically says that a referendum will be called—. I'm not interfering with what happens in Ireland; they can do what they want to do. But it specifically says when public opinion is clear that there is support for it, then you ask the question. In fact, the UK Prime Minister suggested in the House of Commons last week that the same should apply to Scotland too. It's opinion polling. It's sensing the view of the population. I want to influence people in a positive way, and you too, to engage positively with the possibilities that come from pursuing a particular kind of constitutional change.

But remember, we work with what we have now. We have real ambition for our nation. I want us to embrace all the possibilities of being a normal nation, but we're a Government that works right now with the powers that we have now, looking at the powers that we could have next, and next and next, because it's all about building a nation, which is something that all of us should be interested in.

First Minister, I welcome the programme for government, and particularly the work to embed public health and preventative health across Government. One of the ongoing challenges is that the benefits of having a preventative health programme are often delivered years after the investment is initially made, whilst the pressure on acute services is direct and immediate. In considering that, how will the Welsh Government ensure that preventative health programmes, be that in physical activity, healthy eating, the early years, or tackling health inequality, are safeguarded and prioritised when budgets are under such pressure? And what measures will you put in place to show that preventative health is steering budgetary decisions across Government? Thank you.

It's an important question, and an opportunity to explain what the thinking is behind this. We have, for the first time ever, a Minister responsible for preventative health. That in itself is an important step forward, because what we have now is a champion for preventative action who has been tasked by me to work across Government to focus on that preventative approach. That's a cross-governmental way of working, and I think that's the beginning of something very exciting. I've called it a preventative revolution.

How to fund that and budget for it reflects that it's a cross-governmental responsibility. We've talked about how we've been able to weigh up and balance that preventative spend, but the truth is that elements of everybody's budgets will be part of this. And yes, the envelope is very tight in financial terms, but in making decisions where there are two choices, we choose that preventative approach. We can then make progress in a positive manner, I believe, in terms of ensuring that housing is made healthier, that food choices are healthier through the food strategy, steps within the health service itself, and so on.

One final point that I would make is that there is a view very often that preventative measures, as the Member said, take years sometimes to feed through the system. That isn't always the case. It is possible to make changes within a relatively short period of time in terms of diet, which, for some people, can reverse type 2 diabetes, for example. So, the Government is looking at what can have that swifter impact, because it is possible, whilst also having to look at the longer term picture as well. But I think that there’s a fundamental change of approach here reflected throughout the programme for government.

However, public support for the sector cannot be unconditional. Where the Welsh Government provides support through grants, investment assistance, trade promotion or wider economic development activity, people in Wales rightly expect that support to reflect our values and responsibilities. It's important that we recognise legitimate ethical concerns while supporting a focus on high-quality jobs that the sector sustains in communities across all parts of Wales. It's therefore essential that Welsh Government support is guided by a clear and consistent ethical framework. While decisions on arms exports remain reserved to the UK Government, it is right that the Welsh Government is clear about the principles that guide our own engagement with the sector. We recognise the need for greater clarity in how these decisions are made. That is why we are developing an ethical defence investment framework for Wales.

The purpose of the framework is not to exclude the defence sector from engagement with the Welsh Government, nor to duplicate UK export controls or licensing arrangements. Rather, it is to provide a consistent basis for Welsh Government decision making where devolved support is being considered. In developing the framework, officials are engaging with stakeholders and learning from approaches being taken elsewhere in the UK. The framework will recognise the legitimate role of the defence sector in supporting national security, democratic resilience and economic prosperity, while ensuring Welsh Government decisions are informed by appropriate ethical considerations, including respect for human rights and international humanitarian law.

Our approach will be based on enhanced ethical due diligence. In practice, this means retaining the existing UK legal and regulatory framework while introducing additional ethical considerations to support Welsh Government decision making in the areas mentioned earlier. This will be a proportionate approach designed to provide greater transparency and assurance without creating unnecessary barriers for businesses operating responsibly, legally and in support of our economy and security. The framework will focus on activity taking place in Wales and on the specific projects, products, services or technologies seeking Welsh Government support. This will help ensure that decisions are informed by a clear understanding of the activity being supported, its intended purpose and, where appropriate, its known end users.

We're also considering the introduction of a proportionate self-declaration process for businesses seeking particular forms of Welsh Government support. This will provide additional transparency and assurance while avoiding unnecessary burdens on businesses operating responsibly and within the law. This framework will also inform Welsh Government participation in defence-related trade missions, exhibitions and business-to-business events, helping ensure a consistent approach across relevant areas of activity. As part of this work, we will also consider how the framework can support innovation and dual-use technologies, recognising that many of the technologies driving economic growth, including cyber, artificial intelligence, semiconductors and advanced manufacturing, have both civilian and defence applications.

Given the significance of this work, and to ensure a consistent approach, I have asked that, where legally and practically possible, any decisions relating to new Welsh Government investment support for defence sector activity are not finalised until the framework is published and implementation arrangements have been fully considered. Should a decision on Welsh Government support be required before publication of the framework, it will be taken by the Prif Weinidog, taking account of relevant considerations. This is a temporary and precautionary measure to ensure that future decisions are considered against the framework from the outset. I want to be clear that this does not represent a withdrawal of support for the sector, nor does it affect existing contractual commitments or the day-to-day relationship between the Welsh Government and defence-related businesses operating in Wales. It does not prevent ongoing engagement, discussions, due diligence or exploratory work with businesses where no investment decision has been taken.

Wales has a proud tradition of championing human rights, international solidarity and the rule of law. We recognise and value the contribution of the workers, businesses, researchers and apprentices across Wales whose skills, expertise and innovation strengthen our security, resilience and economic prosperity. We reject the false choice between ethical responsibility and economic opportunity. At a time of increasing threats to security in Wales and beyond, Wales can support a strong, innovative and responsible defence sector whilst remaining true to the values that define us as a nation. We can take a balanced and proportionate ethical approach that reflects those values, while continuing to support high-quality jobs, investment and innovation across Wales.

The framework we are developing will provide a clear and transparent basis for Welsh Government decision making. It will ensure that support for the sector is guided by consistent principles and informed by appropriate ethical considerations. Publication of the framework will provide greater certainty for businesses, investors, universities and workers across the sector, helping to give them a clear understanding of how the Welsh Government will engage with and support defence-related activity in the years ahead.

We don't want to delay or add uncertainty, and that's why I've asked officials to bring forward the final framework for publication this autumn. Given the pace of geopolitical and economic change, the framework will be formally reviewed after 12 months and kept under regular review thereafter to ensure it remains relevant, proportionate and effective. That is the balance that we are seeking to achieve, and I look forward to providing further updates to Members when the framework is published in due course.

Thank you for your statement, Minister. At a time of rising geopolitical tensions and a fragile economic outlook, we should not be placing political ideology ahead of Welsh security, Welsh jobs and Welsh investment. What we should be doing is everything possible to bring defence investment into Wales and secure the skilled, well-paid jobs that come with it. This is a sector that employs thousands of Welsh men and women and contributes £1.5 billion to the Welsh economy, and there could be so much more. My concern is that this framework risks doing precisely the opposite and rejecting those opportunities that are presented. It risks discouraging investment, creating uncertainty and giving defence companies another reason to take their investment elsewhere.

And as usual, it will be the Welsh people who pay the price. They will lose out on jobs, Welsh businesses will lose out on investment, and communities will lose out on the economic benefits that come with both. If we look at a case in Marshall Land Systems, they are moving into Merthyr, creating hundreds of jobs and supporting Welsh families. That's exactly the kind of investment that we should be fighting for. It's also a clear example of the positive impact that defence investment can have on a community, and yet it's exactly the kind of opportunity that this framework could put at risk, through uncertainty and additional barriers.

There's also a serious question about what you've told the Senedd. In your statement today, you said that interim decisions on defence will be taken by the First Minister. Yet, in an earlier statement, you said that all decisions would be deferred until the framework has been finalised, so we need clarity on this point. Because businesses considering investing millions of pounds into Wales deserve clarity from this Government. And let's be absolutely clear about what's being proposed here today. The United Kingdom already has a national system governing defence exports. Companies exporting controlled military and dual-use goods are already subject to the UK's strategic export control regime, with applications assessed against national criteria and strict ethical requirements. Yet, your Government now wants to introduce an additional test that defence companies elsewhere in the United Kingdom will not have to face, creating a distinct competitive barrier for those seeking to set up in Wales.

So, what exactly does this additional test achieve and what happens when a company fails it? Defence investment is not trapped within the border of Wales; companies can expand in England, Scotland or elsewhere with ease. Investment can move, and when investment moves, the jobs, the supply chain and everything else go with it. So, before you introduce this framework, what assessment have you carried out of the economic consequences for Wales? What assessment have you made of the jobs that could be lost as a result? And how can you seriously ask this Senedd to support a framework when you've not released the criteria by which companies will be judged? That appears to be becoming a pattern with this Government—big on announcements, but remarkably short on detail. So, Minister, what exactly are the criteria? What will cause a Welsh defence company to pass or fail this test? Who will make that decision, and on what basis will they make it?

There's another issue that simply cannot be ignored. Your party has a long record of opposition to significant parts of the defence sector. Now, your Deputy Minister, Mark Hooper, once said that attending an arms fair is indefensible. Your culture Minister described an arms fair as 'a contemptible event', yet thousands of Welsh men and women attend these events to support those industries every year. And Plaid Cymru has explicitly opposed the renewal of defence systems such as Trident in years past. Now, those aren't my words, those are the recorded positions of Members of your own party and your front bench. And now that same party is introducing a framework that could determine which defence companies receive Welsh Government support and investment. So, Welsh businesses are entitled to ask a very serious question: how can they have confidence that this will be an evidence-based framework, rather than an ideological test shaped by Plaid Cymru's long-standing hostility towards the defence industry?

Minister, national security is one of the first responsibilities of any Government, and securing good jobs, investment and prosperity for the people of Wales should be one of the first responsibilities of this Government. Neither should be sacrificed for ideology. So, we call upon you today, for the sake of the industry, to scrap this framework, remove the uncertainty, back Welsh worker, welcome defence investments into Wales. And we can all get on with the job we were elected to do, to grow the economy, put Welsh jobs, Welsh prosperity and our national security first. Diolch.

I thank the spokesperson for his contribution and his questions. First of all, I'd just like to point out that it is normal, given the specifics and nature of this sector; most democratic Governments around the world recognise that through having a specific legal and, often, ethical framework as well governing this sector. Scotland, the Scottish Government, has an ethical framework governing this sector. The Northern Irish Government has an ethical framework. Effectively, the UK Government has an ethical framework in its export arms licensing policy. So, what we are simply seeking to do is to bring the Welsh Government in line with all of those other responsible democratic Governments across the world that recognise, when it comes to this sector, because of its sensitive nature, you need to have a proper framework in place. Indeed, I have to say, the representatives of the defence sector that I've engaged with have indicated a willingness to engage positively with the development of this framework, because they regard themselves, as individual businesses and a sector, as being ethical. They see nothing to fear here, they want to engage with us in the process of its development.

The framework is not finalised yet, so I can't give all the detail. I'm trying to update Members as much as I can through an interim written statement that I gave, through an oral statement, and I will return to the Senedd once we have the framework in place, because I think, in this area, because of the legitimate interest that Members have, it's important that you are involved at every stage in the development of the process. In terms of the interim decisions, in my interim written statement, I made it absolutely clear that we would defer where it was practically and legally possible, and I've reiterated that today in the statement that I've made.

I think it was a shock to both of us then. We were both looking at each other wondering what was going on. Llywydd, I really welcome the fact that we're having this debate and discussion, because the TUC congress just happened and there was a big debate about defence and the future of jobs versus, I guess, peace, security and resilience and so forth.

You've talked about what happens in Scotland and in Ireland. I guess my question is: have you talked to the UK Government to see whether what we're going to be producing here is going to be that much different to what they already have? What I'm really concerned about is that if the framework comes out in the autumn period, we then have a debate and discussion, I'm assuming, about what that framework then looks like, we have a back and forward—. In the meantime, there are contracts on the table, jobs coming to Wales. Could those defence companies, other manufacturers et cetera—AI you've mentioned—then say, 'Actually, you know what, this is taking way too long. We're going to go and have a chat with Stephen Kinnock, the Secretary of State for Wales'? And then, while you're trying to work through this new relationship with him as well, could we then end up in a position where we're going around the houses, everyone's looking at each other and somebody's looking for an answer?

For me, this is about the jobs that are already here, protecting those. I completely agree in terms of having an ethical framework, as a trade unionist. I get all of that, I totally understand that. But, for me, this is about the companies that we already have here. Wales has more than 200 companies serving aerospace, defence, more than 50 organisations in maintenance, let alone all the colleges and all of the training et cetera, and the really good apprenticeship jobs that are here as well.

You've talked about the global situation. You've talked about what is happening as far as NATO is concerned. Lots of discussions. Everyone talks about, 'How much money are we going to chuck in the pot? Why is this more important than actually building homes for people?' I don't think that it's one or the other. I totally appreciate and understand where you're trying to go with this. My biggest worry in and amongst all of this is that we slow things down. Because like you're saying—you're not saying that this is about telling people, 'Don't come and invest in Wales.' You're not saying that defence manufacturing jobs are something that your Government would be against. Although defence, I don't think, was mentioned in your programme for government. I don't think that word was there. So, I was a bit confused, really, because I was looking through it and I was like, 'The word isn't there.' Based on what you've said today, there seem to be a lot of contradictions.

So, for me, can you guarantee that, whatever you do, you'll do in social partnership, the trade unions will be fully involved and engaged, and that this is about job security in the wider sense as well? We're talking about good jobs across the whole of Wales.

Yes, I'm really—

Sorry, that's—

I'm really grateful—. If the Member has concluded—

Yes.

I'm really grateful for those comments, questions and suggestions, and also the spirit in which they were made as well.

The last point that you were making—I think it’s absolutely important that we will involve trade union partners in the development of the framework. The defence sector, actually, is a highly unionised sector, and I think that ensuring that we have trade union and worker voice in the development of the framework—. And we have to be mindful, absolutely, of our responsibilities to the workforce in this sector. The defence sector and the related sectors employ, already, over 16,000. There's been substantial employment growth, even in the last 12 months, and these are, by and large, high-paid, higher than average, jobs in the advanced manufacturing sector, which is a sector that we want Wales to build even further on its strengths. We have a higher manufacturing base than other parts of the UK. We've managed to maintain that in the UK. We don't want to stay there. We want Wales to re-industrialise even further, and those advanced manufacturing skills are highly relevant to the context that we're describing here. And there are further opportunities that we want to explore.

In terms of timing—. And, yes, what we're trying to do with the framework is get the balance right between these two really important and legitimate aims of public policy and of society. We want to see the economy thrive and generate the high-paid jobs, good jobs, everywhere, to coin a phrase. We want that, and we want it to be done in a way that's consistent with our values. I think it's really important, not just in this context, but in every context. It's not business over here and ethics over there. Many successful businesses and founders will say, actually, the most successful businesses in the world are the ones that marry those two together, so that, actually, you're in a situation then where you can be proud to go to work. You can be proud of the work that you do. If you know the ethical framework is there for what you do, then that is the way to actually motivate, not just yourself, but the workforce et cetera, and the communities that depend on these businesses. That's true in every sector, and that's why, as I said, nobody that I've spoken to in the defence sector has said, 'We don't want an ethical framework.' Many of them said, 'Look, we want to behave in the most responsible way that we can, and we want to engage on that basis.'

The issue of timing—yes, I think that you're right. Obviously, we want, for the reasons that I think will be well understood as we're developing the framework, where we can, to defer decisions until after the framework has been published, and after you, as a Senedd, and civil society and everyone else, and the sector have been able to see it. We will. But, obviously, there may be some time-critical situations where it is not practically possible or legally possible for us to defer, and that's why I set out again in the statement today that there are exceptional circumstances that every Government has to allow some flexibility in relation to, and it's true in this case as well. But I've set out in this oral statement how we will deal with those, if they arise.

Thank you for the statement, but I have to say, I'm really disappointed. This is not an ethical defence framework. It is nothing more than an ideological blacklist that risks Welsh jobs, investment and national security. Defence and aerospace employ 16,000 people in Wales, they generate £3.7 billion in turnover and they contribute around £1.5 billion in gross value added. These are highly skilled, well-paid jobs supporting communities across Wales, and I thank each and every one of those working in our defence industry and, indeed, in our defence forces.

Yet, just when defence investment is increasing, this Plaid Government has ordered investment decisions involving the sector to now be put on hold. There has rarely been a more dangerous time to send such a hostile message. Russia is waging war in Europe, hostile states are targeting our infrastructure, NATO allies are strengthening their defences. It is almost, with making statements like this, that old saying, isn't it, 'Nero fiddles whilst Rome burns.'

Our freedom and democracy exist, Wales exists, because brave men and women, previously and now, in our British armed forces are willing to put their lives on the line to defend them. But courage alone is not enough. They need aircraft, they need vehicles, communication systems, protective equipment and ammunition. And we need those jobs for Welsh people here in Wales. If Members support our armed forces, they must also support the people who design and manufacture the equipment that they have to go to war with and fight with, that keeps them safe. There is nothing grubby or unethical about that work. It is honourable, and it is vital to our security.

Wales should be competing for a greater share of rising UK defence spend and encouraging responsible defence companies to invest here. Instead, this Government—Plaid Cymru Government—is creating uncertainty as businesses decide where to place new contracts and jobs. Mind you, that attitude is unsurprising from a party that has refused to commit an independent Wales to full NATO membership. Your hypocrisy—not yours personally, but your group, your Government—is breathtaking. Defence workers are treated as morally suspect while an Opera Cymru production is advertised as a 'celebration' of nationhood, honouring as three giants the men responsible for a terrorist attack on an RAF bombing school less than three years before the second world war. One of those, of course, was Plaid's then leader, Saunders Lewis. Plaid subsequently adopted neutrality in the war against Nazi Germany. Lewis used explicitly antisemitic language, and wrote that Hitler had 'fulfilled his promise' to remove Jewish financial power from German economic life.

Instead of subjecting the people who equip our armed forces to an 'ethical' test, Plaid Cymru should apply one to publicly supported arts organisations that celebrate or platform those who have committed or glorified violence against the British state, whether it is an opera hailing Saunders Lewis and his fellow arsonists as national heroes, or public funding connected with Green Man while the festival gave Kneecap a stage. And in its first week back, it is absolutely disgusting that this Plaid Cymru Government shared a platform with Sinn Féin leaders, despite that party's long association with the IRA's campaign of terrorism.

So, Minister, how many investment decisions have been suspended? How many jobs, do you believe, are at risk? I agree with you, Jason—not often, but today, on your comments today. Were employers and trade unions consulted? Will lawful Welsh firms be blacklisted simply because Plaid Cymru disapproves—and you do disapprove—of their industry?

An ethical defence policy distinguishes between aggressors and those who protect us from them. Wales should stand firmly with our armed forces, with the workers who equip them and with our NATO allies. We should also stand firmly with the ethical framework that the UK Government has in place. This framework should be withdrawn, and I will be more than happy to vote against this later today.

I'm always disappointed when you're disappointed, Janet, and there were so many strands to that, I could be tempted to disappear down a few rabbit holes. But, look, let me just say this: surely there should be some agreement between us that there should be an ethical framework for business in general that should be applied.

I'll give you an example: when the UN guiding principles on global business and human rights was agreed at the UN, who was the first Government in the world not just to endorse it, but actually to produce a national implementation plan that created an ethical framework for every sector of business? Well, I'll give you the answer: it was the UK Conservative Government in 2013. So, look, you can judge us on the framework when it's published, okay. I'm giving you an update on where we are in the process. So, by all means, hold us to account in terms of the content of that when that is ready.

I think you do mischaracterise our position in so many different ways. I don't have time to respond to all of them. But I was absolutely clear in my statement that we're creating an ethical framework that we believe is a solid foundation for the sector because it gives transparency. There is nothing to fear here for the sector. It's not a prohibition of the defence sector. I recognised in my statement that there is an important and legitimate role for the defence sector in the defence of democracy, not least in the uncertain times that we're living in, but it needs to be done in an ethical way. And I would have hoped that that would have been the basis for consensus across the Chamber, because, ultimately, the way we defend democracy in all ways is ensuring that we can actually point to the values that we are, ultimately, trying to defend.

Whilst foreign affairs and arms export licences are reserved to Westminster, decisions about how Welsh public money is spent are made here in Cymru. Plaid Cymru demonstrated leadership, acting on a long legacy of peace, leading the Senedd's endorsement for ceasefire in Gaza in 2023, the first nation to do so. This small act led to huge hope for a nation who, I assure you, felt all hope was lost. Now, in Government, Plaid Cymru can go even further by showing leadership on international human rights law.

A freedom of information request by Amnesty International found that the previous Labour Welsh Government had given £500,000 to a company supplying military components to Israel, despite assurance otherwise from the then First Minister. This shows a clear need for accountability and a more responsible way of investing in our communities, so it's reassuring to hear that this Welsh Government is committed to taking a different approach, developing this defence ethical framework, which no previous administration has done, establishing a clear and ethical approach to defence and security in Wales grounded in human rights, international law and our commitment to peace.

Recognising the genocide in Gaza was a starting point, and concrete action is now what we need to follow. So, will the Minister please confirm what difference this ethical framework will make in the manufacture and export of arms in Wales, and what are the expectations on companies once that framework has been launched?

I'm grateful to the Member for her contribution and for reminding us, in the world that we live in, why this is so important, of course. When we have—. We have, in the case of Israel, of course, and in the case of Myanmar, two states where United Nations commissions have found that they have been guilty of being in breach of the genocide convention, the most serious and egregious breach of international humanitarian law that is imaginable.

The framework will help ensure, first of all, that our decisions as a Government—. Because the UN principles that I referred to place a responsibility on us, as a state actor, as a Government, to ensure that, in our engagement with business, we are doing so in a way that is consistent with those principles and with the wider framework of international humanitarian law. So it gives us the framework whereby we can hold ourselves accountable in relation to the decisions that we make, basing them, in an accountable and transparent way, on ethical principles, and in a consistent way.

In terms of companies themselves, as I said, the framework is still in development, but in essence, of course, we will expect the companies involved to confirm that their operations in Wales that we are supporting are in line with the framework that we have agreed. So, at both levels, it gives us that transparency, that consistency and that assurance that what we are doing is consistent with our values, which is what you would want in any context.

Minister, you say you don't want to delay or add uncertainty, but forcing businesses through new self-declaration processes risks doing exactly that. We have businesses like IrvinGQ in Llangeinor, working on parachute systems and naval decoys; we have Raplas Technologies in the Vale of Glamorgan, developing innovative 3D printing technology for defence. These are precisely the businesses that we should be helping to grow, not burying under paperwork. So, Cabinet Minister, what guarantee will you give Welsh small and medium-sized enterprises that the self-declaration process will be simple, proportionate and workable, and that small defence companies won't need a team of lawyers just to comply?

We will, obviously, in developing the detail of the framework, be engaging with companies of all sizes within the sector in order to ensure that, as I said in my statement, the process that we design is proportionate. We recognise the reasonable point that the Member makes, that we cannot apply the same expectations to large multinational corporations to small and medium-sized businesses, and that will be a factor in the design of the process in this case, as it is, of course, in already current frameworks. In any situation currently where we give money in relation to projects, there is a process to go through in terms of fair work and other considerations. But the point in terms of SMEs is well made and it certainly will be a matter that we will give due consideration to.

Diolch, Lywydd. I must, firstly, declare an interest as a former Ministry of Defence supply chain specialist. Many Welsh defence companies operate several tiers down complex and dual-use supply chains and may have little control over or even knowledge of the eventual end use of the components they produce. I'm happy that you spoke about Ireland earlier. They've already been through something, and Invest NI has already recognised that neither it nor its client companies can fully track the final destination of goods once they enter into complex global supply chains. While military and dual-use exports are already subject to UK export control regimes, this new framework will add additional uncertainty and compliance costs to Welsh companies. How will the Minister ensure that Welsh companies are not expected to undertake due diligence that they cannot practically perform or duplicate functions already being carried out by the UK export control authorities?

Thanks to the Member for his question and for the knowledge that he was able to bring to it. As I said, I think, in the statement, where possible we will seek to build on the existing UK framework, where that has a tier of knowledge and information that is relevant. I think it is fair to say, absolutely, that the global context in terms of supply chains is complex here. We have to be mindful of our ability to fully audit, and some of this will be context specific. So, in designing the framework, we will have to focus very much on the activity in Wales of the entities in question, being mindful of our own resources and the information available to us.

Now, Wales is already recognised for achieving one of the highest recycling rates in the world, and to justify the investment and the changes that are required from businesses and consumers, the scheme must deliver additional benefits beyond the high levels of recycling that the people of Wales already achieve at home.

The scheme will include metal and plastic drinks containers from day 1. Glass containers will also be in scope from day 1, but reflecting our manifesto commitment, we will work closely with Exchange for Change, and the wider drinks industry, on a pragmatic approach to glass. This includes the four-year transition period, during which no deposit will apply and in which no DRS-specific labelling will be required, as well as the phased introduction of reuse.

Working with Exchange for Change, our focus is now on the scheme’s implementation by October next year, and on supporting businesses, delivery partners and consumers to be ready for launch. In doing so, we will work to ensure Wales secures the benefits of the scheme, including reduced litter, the capture of high-quality materials for recycling back into the economy, and a clear pathway towards the roll-out of reuse. The coverage of all materials ensures that the scheme can tackle the litter seen on our streets and in our communities, of all drinks container types, from the outset. It also means that we can not only retain more valuable materials within the economy, but it also puts in place a pathway to the roll-out of reusable drinks containers, and the benefits the best schemes in the world are already delivering internationally.

Litter is not only a blight on our communities, it also imposes costs on local authorities, on taxpayers and on land managers as well. As DRS has been proven to do in other countries, by preventing litter and capturing drinks containers of all material types, it'll not only keep the materials from polluting the environment, or posing a hazard to people and wildlife, but it'll also reduce the burden of litter management and clean-up activities.

With Wales having experienced significant wildfire incidents this summer, as climate change increases, it is important as well to avoid preventable sources of ignition. With the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service having identified discarded glass bottles as one potential cause of wildfires—as sunlight passing through glass can, of course, focus heat onto dry vegetation and ignite fires—it is a reminder of the risks that littered glass in particular can present.

A successful deposit-return scheme will therefore help deliver cleaner communities and public spaces in our town centres, parks, beaches and countryside. As a Government, supporting businesses, particularly our small and medium-sized enterprises, to successfully transition and benefit from the scheme is a priority. We will therefore work with Exchange for Change to ensure that small and medium-sized businesses are fully engaged as we progress to implementation.

The success of the scheme depends on the participation of businesses of all sizes, and the regulations therefore include low-volume producer exemptions, exemptions as well for smaller retailers where that's appropriate, and flexible return arrangements. Together, these measures provide certainty and reduce compliance costs, and the four-year transition period, of course, for the deposit on glass also gives businesses more time to adapt.

Following on from the passing of the legislation by the Senedd earlier this year, the appointment of the deposit management organisation is a significant step forward to the delivery of DRS here in Wales.

Maintaining current recycling performance is not the only aim of the scheme. It is also to capture valuable materials that would otherwise be littered, lost from the recycling system, or collected at a lower quality, whilst also laying the foundations for moving further up the waste hierarchy towards reuse.

I am confident, therefore, that by working collaboratively with, and in partnership with Exchange for Change, the deposit-return scheme will be successful in reducing litter, as I've said, but also in supporting the transition to reuse and reinforcing Wales's position as a global leader in resource efficiency. This, Dirprwy Lywydd, is an investment in cleaner communities, in a stronger circular economy, and in a more resilient Wales for future generations. Thank you.

Thank you, Minister, for your statement. We're clearly driving forward with the deposit-return scheme, but I simply don't think this Chamber or the general public, certainly Welsh families and Welsh businesses, truly understand what is coming next October, whether the scheme includes plastic, aluminium or glass containers. The fact that we're virtually empty here in the Chamber just shows that people don't understand it. So, I really thank you for allowing me to do this very briefly.

Let me begin. This is the current system of recycling in Wales. We have the highest recycling rates in Wales. Yes, shop, containers, home, Trolibocs, council, they sort it out, they make the money. Okay. This is what's going to happen now. We're going to go to the shop, we're going to buy containers, they're going to have a 20p flat rate on them, they're going to go to homes, and we've got to return them to retail. We've got to take them to these vending machines to get our 20 pences back. Meanwhile, the council have still got to pick up all the low-value recycling. Think about this here, I'm going to talk about this in a minute. Okay, that's the new system. I'll show you this outside if you want more detail.

Obviously, DRS was introduced by the Conservatives in the Environment Act 2021, and I do not understand—[Interruption.] I know, that's why I left. [Laughter.] We are going to have a second parallel system that requires people to drive, transport and return these containers separately. Why are we moving material around twice? Think of the emissions. Why are we building a system around thousands of reverse vending machines? The shops have got to buy these machines. We're locking ourselves into technology that belongs to the past. When you get to the machine and you put your bottle in, you get a paper ticket. It's not the 1980s. It's ridiculous.

And then there's the cost. This is the most serious point for me. Cost of living—every family in Wales is feeling the cost of living. Now we're being told that every drinks container will carry an extra charge. Say you're buying a 24-pack of water bottles, that's £4.80 to the bill upfront. Yes, we're told we can get it back, but we all know not every deposit will be redeemed. You'll lose your paper ticket. Some families just won't get round to doing it. And what about online food delivery? For people that don't want to or can't go to supermarkets—the elderly, the vulnerable, people with health conditions, disabilities—how do they get back their 20p? So, Minister, here's your first question: how will people that use online delivery and don't go to supermarkets get their 20p back?

And where does all this unredeemed money go? It goes into a private scheme administrator, sitting in a bank account earning lots of interest. A private, not-for-profit organisation, chief execs paid very nicely, and there's very little public understanding of who controls that money and how it will be spent. So, second question, Minister: how long will those unredeemed 20 pences be kept in that private bank account earning interest, and who decides how and when that money is spent?

Oh, perhaps the biggest issue of all is one that's not been discussed today at all in the statement: council revenues. This scheme quietly removes some of the most valuable recyclable materials, like aluminium, from local authority recycling streams—the materials that help councils generate revenue and offset collection costs. For years, councils have built recycling services around those materials, and now we're proposing to remove them and hand control elsewhere.

I've got letters and statements here from companies and member organisations in England—the Association of Directors of Environment, Economy, Planning and Transport and the National Association of Waste Disposal Officers—lots of different companies that recycle for local authorities, basically saying, and I quote from one of them, 'DRS would duplicate a system that is already costing local authorities hundreds of thousands of pounds each year', and they want it to be paused. This is in England. So, my third question to the Minister is: what impact assessments has the Welsh Government done on local council revenues in this new system?

Now, let's look at our friends in Ireland. They're about two years ahead of us. I noticed the statement said that it was working well in other countries. Well, I've spoken to our counterparts over the Irish sea. There are constant problems with the machines. They either break down or they fill up quickly. People hate them. It creates litter. Listen to this: Dublin City Council has spent hundreds of thousands of pounds—I think it's about £800,000—cleaning up after scavenging for bottles and cans from litter bins. They pull all the litter out, they find the valuable product, they don't put the litter back in.

Control, like the plan for Wales, is with a non-government organisation. That organisation now sits on €98 million of unredeemed deposits, because that's what happens when you devise a system that hasn't been thought through on the impact to everyday life, what we're asking people to do, to take their containers back to the vending machines. My goodness, there's enough to do in life already. And by removing those valuable recyclable products from household waste management in Ireland, bin collection charges—it’s a slightly different system to us here—have gone up by 30 per cent.

If litter was the issue, there are simpler and cheaper ways to tackle it. For me, I would scrap this scheme and we should be improving and modernising our world-leading kerbside recycling system. Part of the extended producer responsibility tax could be ring-fenced by UK Government with Barnett consequentials to invest in the latest technology, so these high-value materials can still be picked up kerbside, and we can start building processing plants here in Wales.

Minister, DRS is a reform too far. It will have a massive impact on Welsh recycling records, Welsh communities and Welsh pockets. Please: pause, wait.

Well, what I would say initially is if we pause, if we wait, then I have no doubt that you would be on your feet then complaining about the risk of fraud. Because the rest of the UK is moving in this direction, okay? And everybody who was up in arms saying, 'Oh, if Wales isn’t moving in this direction then there will be fraud, there will be all sorts of problems and all sorts of concerns'—[Interruption.] The other parts of the UK would be the first to complain. So, we are all on a journey here, but what we have to recognise is that Wales is starting from a very different place.

We are asking producers, local authorities, consumers as well, to do something different. But if we are asking them to do something different, then we have to see a benefit from that, and including glass in the scheme is one benefit that we want to realise, because we need to keep that glass in the system. The one element that you have neglected, I think, in your analysis, is that this takes us closer to reuse. It's not about recycling. We need to move further up the waste hierarchy. Reuse would allow the same bottle to stay in use a number of times, reducing costs in terms of businesses that have to source those materials regularly. So, there are other benefits.

Littering, I mentioned in my statement. We have good records for recycling in the domestic space. We have regulations around improved recycling in business and in the workplace. On-the-go littering is a big problem, but this can be a big part of the answer, as we've seen from some of the international examples, where we can really bear down on on-the-go littering. A Keep Wales Tidy survey showed that drinks-related litter is on 43.6 per cent of our streets—nearly half of our streets are littered just by drinks-related litter. This can take us a step along that journey, reducing costs then, of course, for local authorities, for the work in terms of collecting some of that. And I mentioned the dangers from broken glass as well—well rehearsed. We know that there's more that we can and we need to do.

It's a deposit. It's a deposit; it's not an additional cost. Yes, those return points need to be accessible, of course they do, but there is no deposit payable in the first four years. This is a process of education, a process of working now with Exchange for Change to make those points as accessible and as easy to reach as possible. They won't only be in retail. I can imagine there'll be public spaces where those return points will be available as well. Where people tend to go or gather, we can provide them. And that as well is something that I think we need to keep in mind.

And council revenues, there are new waste streams coming online. Plastic film is one that's being trialled and developed now. There will be an additional stream of revenue coming for that. So, it's about striking that right balance.

The key thing for me coming from this statement today is that we now have a DMO here in Wales that brings us that partnership. That UK-wide partnership is embedded, really, because it's the same DMO that's delivering these services in all parts of the UK. And of course it's business led, it’s industry led; Exchange for Change is industry led. So, they can work with businesses, and we and others can make sure that we speak up for the communities as well in that process, as we work to delivering the operational model.

Some people want to scaremonger. There are legitimate issues that will need to be addressed over the next 12 months, but that's the point: we work up to October and the start date. I can't wait for us to get a point where, in five years' time, potentially, when the deposits kick in in terms of people paying, we will see a real material difference on the ground.

Thank you, Minister, for your statement. I really welcome this update, building on the work of successive Welsh Governments. The appointment of a deposit management organisation for Wales is a vital step forward. Exchange for Change's new role as that common UK administrator makes sense in terms of joined-up working and providing clarity for businesses. I'd like to start by thanking everyone in Wales who recycles. It's due to them that Wales ranks so highly in terms of worldwide recycling rates.

In terms of today's statement, firstly, that four-year phased approach for glass is critical in ensuring the success of the wider deposit-return scheme. It's important that businesses and consumers are given that feed-in. We should remember too it's estimated that a phased approach will be more cost-effective. I'd expect lots of work to be going on in the background, so could you set out what the next key milestones are that we can expect as work progresses?

Secondly, the examples for low-volume producers and smaller retailers are important. I'd be grateful if you could set out a little more of the Welsh Government's current thinking around this. We know the key determinant of the scheme's viability is linked to things like how the scheme works, the level of fees or wider infrastructure, not necessarily just business size. So, what will constitute low volume and what will be done to ensure there are no unintended consequences?

This is my last question. Members may have seen the briefing produced by the last Senedd's cross-party group on littering, which was chaired by Mick Antoniw, on a deposit-return scheme. That document really powerfully makes the case that in addition to the scheme's immediate benefits for reducing litter, the greatest long-term carbon savings will come from well-designed reuse models built on that infrastructure—a once-in-a-generation opportunity indeed. Minister, you hinted at that and the importance of reuse in your statement, but could you say a little more about how this will be embedded across Government so we don't let this opportunity slip?

Thank you very much for welcoming this. Clearly, we're building on work that was done previously by our predecessor Government. It's something we inherited, but it's something we're embracing, and we're working hard to make sure that it works for everyone.

The biggest milestone is October next year, of course. That is when the scheme goes live across the UK. I know people have been concerned that we have been a little bit behind the curve in terms of appointing the DMO, so work is now happening on an official level to identify exactly how that is going to be achieved. I'm happy for a briefing to be held for Members—it's something I think we should do more of—just to sit down with Members, to respond to some of those concerns that some people are still raising, but also maybe to talk through the process in finer detail.

With the exemptions, you will be aware that some of the exemptions were outlined in regulations—from export shops to drinks supplied before the relevant commencement of the scheme. Small product lines are defined in the regulations, but also 'drink now' sales and hospitality. You will have situations where something is bought on premises, drunk on premises, so there are clear exemptions there. Again, I'm happy to write to you with that list in totality.

On the final point you made, the benefits of reuse are clear to us all. I touched earlier on the fact that it reduces costs in terms of having to source bottle after bottle and raw materials to produce those containers. But also there's a benefit in environmental terms in not having to keep creating those materials. But the quality of recycled material as well, when it is recycled, is much better, which, of course, is more valuable in terms of revenue streams. But keeping valuable resources like that in circulation for as long as possible is what we're trying to achieve here.

There are also additional economic benefits embedded in the whole process, because if we are reusing bottles, then we need reuse hubs, we need washeries, and those create jobs. I've seen a figure that a properly implemented DRS scheme would generate potentially up to 3,000 jobs across the UK. So, there are multiple benefits that we could realise here, but it is a transition. It's not going to happen overnight and neither should it, because things have to be introduced in a pragmatic and practical way. But that is the journey that we're on and one I'm determined to pursue.

Thank you, Minister, for your statement this afternoon. We on these benches do not believe that glass should be included in this scheme. It has been a position we've taken for a long time and we just think it complicates the situation and adds confusion to it. One thing that has to be crystal clear about any recycling scheme is that people have to understand it and buy into it, and the more you can simplify it, surely the better that has to be.

As someone who used to come down the link road into Cardiff Bay and see the massive landfill site that is by Grangetown there, one can really appreciate the steps that have been taken in recent years to make recycling an integral part of what we now all do, and the industry that's been built up in recycling and reusing the products that we use in our everyday lives. That makes perfect sense, and it's something we should embrace. I commend the previous Government for what it did in getting the recycling rates up. But I fail to see why the Government wants to carry on penalising the hospitality sector and bringing glass within the orbit of this scheme that it's proposing. I know you touched on it in your response to the Labour spokesperson, but given that there was a 10-week delay in announcing the operator of the scheme, how are you going to catch up that 10 weeks, nearly three months, between now and next October, which is due to be the start date, to make sure that it does go live in October next year?

The other thing that is really important is providing clarity on how the interaction between DRS and EPR will work. An exemption from the EPR fees for glass containers in the scope of the DRS is an essential precursor to the inclusion of glass. Although the Welsh Government have committed to this, they are yet to determine how the exemption will work in practice. This is particularly challenging given the difficulty in tracking where the container will end up for sale at the point it is placed on the market, as well as the different ways the producer fees for DRS and EPR fees are calculated, by unit or by weight. So, can you offer some clarity on that point, please, Minister?

And then there's resolving the regulatory uncertainty of the reuse. The reuse targets included within the regulations for the DRS are not currently compatible with the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020, given that the exemption of this was not granted. How are you going to overcome that particular aspect? Because you need to be compliant with the UK Act, otherwise you're going to be in the same position as Scotland found itself in. And maintaining accountability for post-transition periods. The transition period for glass, were it a 0 per cent deposit, is applied and there are no additional labelling requirements, which will end in 2031. At this point, a number of issues will come to the fore, including how the return of glass containers is managed within hospitality, the risk of fraud, of glass containers sold in other parts of the United Kingdom being redeemed here in Wales, the additional cost incurred by producers for other rolled-out glass return points, and how the aforementioned reuse targets will work in practice. So, some clarity on that. While you've got the four-year grace period, I think it's really important that we understand how this will be implemented after that four-year period.

And there's the impact on hospitality, which is critical. We hear week in, week out people in this Chamber talking about the pressure in the hospitality sector in their own constituencies. We must ensure that pubs and bars and other hospitality venues are fully considered within the implementation plans, particularly given the cliff edge of 2031. The Welsh Government must address operational impact specific to hospitality businesses, which have not always been adequately reflected in the policy development to date. How are you taking the hospitality sector with you, Minister?

Thank you. There's quite a lot there. In terms of why include glass, given the costs involved and the implications for business, for local authorities and the changes in consumer behaviour that will be required, any scheme that we run in relation to DRS has to deliver meaningful additional benefits for Wales, rather than simply delivering what we already achieve. We need those tangible additional benefits, and without including glass, we don't see that, because we're recycling as we are—much of that is already happening—but we are going further because we do need to move in the direction of reuse, because that's what brings us greater prizes further down the line.

You asked about the 10-week delay. There was a robust appointment process first of all—we needed to be confident that, in appointing Exchange for Change, it was the right decision. I am confident that that is the right decision. One benefit that that brings is that given that they are delivering similar schemes across other parts of the UK, they could hit the ground running. They're embedded in this sector; they understand what's needed. That, I think, will allow us to make sure that we can meet the October 2027 target in terms of going live.

On extended producer responsibility, including glass in DRS doesn't create an entirely new cost burden, because drinks producers using glass already meet producer responsibility obligations under the EPR scheme for packaging, meaning that many costs will transfer from EPR to the deposit-return scheme, rather than being an additional cost. Nation-specific reporting requirements are already in place under EPR, so it's not a new innovation when it comes to DRS as well.

You ask about UKIMA. I am confident that we are compliant with UKIMA. If you want to write to me with what you are suggesting, then I'll look at that, but I'm confident that we're not stepping outside the scope of that in what we intend to do. And there is a transition period. I won't repeat the point I made about the risk of fraud. The biggest risk of fraud is if there's no scheme here in Wales, and there will be.

As regards pubs and bars in the hospitality sector, I think I mentioned earlier that there are exemptions for 'drink on' sales in specified settings. Where deposit items are supplied for immediate consumption at mixed retail premises or on-sale premises such as hospitality, then there are flexibilities and exemptions there. So, again, it's something that we're mindful of, and as we develop the scheme, these are exactly the points that we need to be making sure that people understand.

Thank you to the Cabinet Minister for this update today. I'm really pleased to see Wales continuing to show ambition and lead the way with DRS. We know that at the heart of DRS is tackling litter that we see across the whole of Wales and our communities, improving recycling and protecting our natural environment.

I also welcome the approach that you've taken to the transition. We're asking businesses, local authorities and communities to make a real big change here, so it's right that we really give them the time and the support that they need to get this right. With Exchange for Change now appointed across the four nations, there's a real opportunity here, as you've said, to make the system work much more seamlessly across the whole of the UK.

My question is this: how will the Welsh Government work with the other nations to make sure that the schemes work well together across the UK, while ensuring Wales can still retain its environmental ambition, particularly around glass and reuse?

Thank you. I can assure you that we will continue to work across the UK nations on this. Certainly, I know that a lot of work was done by my predecessor and the corresponding Ministers across the UK—that is continuing. Officials from all four nations are working closely, as are regulators. With the scheme administrator now, the DMO, we have that alignment, in that we have the same DMO delivering. I'm confident that we can work closely together on implementation and that that level of collaboration will continue as we move towards October next year and beyond.

It's important that we progress along the waste hierarchy. We do need to deliver significant improvements in the collection of high-quality materials for recycling and invest early. There are huge advantages to being an early mover in this space. Okay, internationally, there are examples of other countries that have already done this, but, within the UK, we in Wales could be reaping much of the economic benefits, particularly around glass, because I have no doubt that, ultimately, other parts of the UK will catch up with us, but we will have the infrastructure in place. We will have the washeries, the hubs in place to deal with much of this, and the infrastructure and the expertise as well in that space. So, I really see this not only as an environmental policy but also as a policy that will deliver multiple economic benefits as well, and that goes for good governance, I think, in that we're realising a number of benefits from one particular policy.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Minister, this is a hospital pass that was put out by Boris Johnson's Conservative Government, passed to Labour, who embraced it in Westminster, then it came to Labour in Cardiff and now it's ended up on your desk. I think, deep down, you've already acknowledged that glass is the only real solid argument for it, and the rest of it is debatable. We don't actually need it in Wales in terms of plastic and metal recycling. It's complicated, it's going to cause problems for local authorities and it's going to be deeply, deeply unpopular. There are only 11 Plaid MSs in the Chamber at the moment, but I can guarantee you that, when this is implemented, if it is implemented—. It's two and a half years before the next election. I look over there and I see the depleted Labour ranks and I think of the effect of the 20 mph legislation. This will be Plaid Cymru's 20 mph. I would urge you, Minister, to have a good look at this. You have a point about reusing glass. You have a point on that. Maybe at some point in the future that will be viable, with energy costs being so high, but I would urge you please to look at it. And my question is—I suspect from what you've said, so I have to ask it: are you really convinced by this scheme?

Well, I'll refer the Member to our manifesto. We are committed to this scheme. No. 1, of course, it's the law. We have to do it. The law says that we have to deliver this scheme. But we have said in our manifesto that we will deliver the deposit-return scheme, but we will be pragmatic and practical in the way that we do it to make sure that not only does it work for businesses, for local authorities, for retailers, for consumers, for the environment, but for the economy as well. Now, we're all on a journey here in terms of achieving our ambitions around recycling and moving up the waste hierarchy. This is a significant step in the right direction. Our work is to make sure that it's done in a way that delivers and realises the benefits that the DRS has delivered and realised in other countries in the world—from Germany to Denmark, to Lithuania, to Finland, to Latvia. It's there; the proof of the pudding is in its delivery in other parts of the world. We want a part of that.

Since taking up this role in the Welsh Government, I have met leaseholders and I've listened to their stories, and what I've heard from them has truly moved me. Their accounts have stayed with me, and they have shaped my determination to take action on their behalf. That is why I am pleased to announce today the launch of the Wales interim measures alarm grant. This grant will provide financial support to leaseholders who are facing the costs of interim alarm systems that are required to support a simultaneous evacuation policy. Further detail on eligibility and how people can access the support will be available shortly, and I will ensure that this information reaches the relevant people as quickly as possible. And I do hope that this announcement will make a meaningful difference to leaseholders who are shouldering the costs of interim measures.

Turning to the Building Safety (Wales) Act 2026, I'm pleased to say that we are making steady progress with implementation. The Act marks a major step forward in delivering lasting building safety reform in Wales. The Act strengthens the regulatory framework for multi-occupied residential buildings and it introduces new competence requirements for fire risk assessors. The Act also creates stronger mechanisms to hold building owners to account, and it gives residents a stronger voice in matters affecting their safety.

Everyone knows what my view is now, which is that leaseholders should not be expected to pay for remediation costs that they did not cause. And I do believe that, wherever possible, the people who developed, commissioned or profited from unsafe buildings should be responsible. And that's why I worked hard to ensure that the Act did include provisions that allow interested parties to apply to the residential property tribunal for remediation orders and remediation contribution orders covering fire and structural safety defects.

The consultation on the regulations that are needed to support this element of the regime closed earlier this month, and I hope to the lay regulations before the Christmas recess. Over the coming year, we’ll continue consulting on the regulations that are required to underpin the wider regime as part of our planned implementation schedule. And we anticipate that the registration of category 1 buildings will begin in December 2027. I'll keep Members updated as the implementation programme progresses.

The Act complements the extensive programme of reform already delivered through the UK Building Safety Act 2022, as well as the subsequent secondary legislation, and that underpins the new building control regime that came into force in July. The new regime strengthens accountability for duty holders and it embeds the enhanced competence requirements for registered building inspectors and registered building control approvers. Amendments were also made to approved document B of the building regulations last year.

Members will be very well aware the Grenfell tower tragedy is the backdrop to our entire building safety programme. As we remember the 72 people who lost their lives, I would like to provide an update on the progress being made to implement the recommendations of the Grenfell tower inquiry. Over a quarter of the recommendations have now been implemented in Wales, and I expect that number to double by the end of the year. We are addressing many of the recommendations through the legislative changes I have already spoken about. Additionally, we've taken action to strengthen emergency preparedness and to embed the lessons from Grenfell across the system.

Finally, I'll return to our remediation programme. Last week, I met with developers who have signed up to the Welsh Government contract. That was the previous Government's contract. I emphasised that all obligations under the contract must be met or I will consider all appropriate enforcement avenues in relation to any failures. I am committed to accelerating the pace of remediation and to holding developers to account. I will continue to update colleagues as the programme progresses, and I welcome the scrutiny work from Members, which will help us to get this right for the people of Wales. Thank you.

Thank you to the Minister for her statement this afternoon. The Minister told this Chamber today that progress on the remediation has not moved quickly, and I totally agree with her statement on that, but her predecessor said much the same thing. What we've not heard, for nine years may I add, is a satisfactory explanation for why so little has actually been done. I also note that there is not a single remediation figure in today's statement. So, let me put some numbers alongside that statement. As of the summer this year, out of 161 private sector buildings that developers are responsible for, only four have been fully remediated, which is shocking. Seventy per cent have not even started work, though most, we are told, have plans in place. The Minister's predecessor described this as significant progress. Well, Minister, if that is how they describe significant progress, I would hate to see what failure looks like. If those numbers have improved, though, why aren't they included in today's statement?

What has happened over the years though? Well, social housing has been remediated using public money, up to 100 per cent of eligible costs, through the Welsh building safety fund. At Celestia in Cardiff Bay, the Welsh Government funded cladding replacement on the social housing block to the tune of nearly £2 million. The other seven blocks at Celestia, including private leaseholders, remain untouched. Same development, same defects, but years waiting. Let me be clear, I do not believe that taxpayers should be picking up more of the bill—exactly what you've said in your statement—for the private developers. Those who have built these unsafe homes and profited from them must pay to put them right. But that cannot become an excuse for private leaseholders to wait years longer than their neighbours in social housing. The Government found the urgency to fix the social side. It must now find the same urgency on the private side.

Plaid Cymru claim they stand for fairness, so I ask the Minister: does she accept that this two-tier approach, faster action for social housing and barely there action for the private leaseholders, has been a failure of fair treatment by the Welsh Government? Just take Meridian Quay in my constituency, for example. Phil Lake, a resident, took an insurance giant to the High Court on behalf of residents. Their claim was worth more than £25 million. Only now, seven years after Mr Lake stepped in, is remediation expected to start, and will be paid through the financial services compensation scheme, not by this Government.

Today, in your statement, you announced a Wales interim measures alarm grant. Any help for leaseholders is really welcome. But, in England, the funding for these alarms began in December 2020. Wales is almost six years behind. And we've been given no budget, no eligibility criteria and no opening date in this statement. So, will leaseholders who have already paid the price for alarms get anything back, because in my constituency, and I'm sure of many of us sitting here today, people are paying around £500 a month for these alarms, which is more than some people's mortgages?

Thank you very much, and thank you for asking a number of important questions, and I will seek to take them one at a time. I agree entirely with you that progress hasn't happened swiftly enough, and that is the fault of the developers. They are supposed to carry out the remediation work on these buildings in Wales. They received that message clearly from me just last week. I met with the 11 developers—.

I met the 11 developers last week, and my message to them was very, very clear. The message was that the pace of delivery is simply not good enough. And I said that if I don't see progress, as outlined in the contract that they signed with the previous Government by the end of this year, I will be bringing their names forward here in the Senedd. I will be taking action. And I think that that is one route that I can definitely tell you about, because I've told them, and that that will happen within this year as we look at the progress reports. I'm hoping that that's not going to happen. I hope that they will really ramp up the work. Because we all want to see the leaseholders feeling protected and feeling safe in their places, in their apartments and what have you.

In terms of the data, I can absolutely give you the latest data, which, as you say, is not good enough, but I can give you the data. So, there are 161 buildings in the programme. By now, 11 buildings have been completed or they didn't need work in the first place. I understand that there are two or three others very, very near to that point as well. Work is progressing on 71 of those buildings, but there's work that's being talked about, but hasn't started yet, on 65 buildings, and there are 14 that are awaiting the reviews. So, it's not good enough, and I agree with you on that.

You mentioned a particular development there in your contribution. I would suggest that Members take the opportunity to come to the technical briefing that my officials will be providing. There will be an opportunity at that point for you to discuss individual buildings. Clearly, I can't go into every single example, in terms of the 161 buildings, here today, but there will be a Members' briefing session held. And those sessions will be held—one this week and one next week. So, there's an opportunity for people to bring their questions forward in that forum too.

In terms of the grant itself, I'm pleased that you've welcomed that, because this has been a concern for many leaseholders, that the costs of putting the temporary alarm systems in place in these buildings while the work is ongoing—. In some cases, leaseholders have had to pay, and that isn't fair. That isn't fair. There are some developers who have paid for it, but there are other scenarios where that hasn't been the case. The grant will be available, and the application process will open very soon for that, and the agent or the responsible body will have that responsibility to make that application, not the developer. It'll be people acting on behalf of the leaseholders who will be able to make that particular application.

In terms of the regulations, as I've said, I've moved swiftly in getting those regulations in place. I am just as frustrated as you about the slow progress here, but those regulations wouldn't be there at all if it wasn't for the work that we did in scrutinising the Bill, in collaboration with the former Cabinet Secretary. So, the right to go to tribunal to claim money back—. We do have to have those regulations in place, and then we have to—. As you say, it is frustrating that we can't start that immediately, but it will come in due course.

I thank the Minister for her statement today. As she said, the origins of this work are following the dreadful events of 14 June 2017, when 72 people lost their lives in the fire at Grenfell Tower. Following the tragedy, the Welsh Labour Government set out to deliver a new building safety programme for the benefit of residents of shared buildings across Wales, regardless of building height or tenure. Change on this scale is complex and time-consuming and resulted in one of the largest Bills ever to be considered by this Senedd. I was very glad to be able to take the landmark Building Safety (Wales) Bill through the Senedd, and I'm grateful to the current Minister, and others in this Chamber, for their collaborative approach, which ensured that a whole series of complex amendments were unanimously agreed at Stage 3. This, Deputy Llywydd, was a Senedd first and demonstrated a desire to get this right.

The legislation that we passed here in Wales is far broader in its scope and ambition than the equivalent legislation in England. Three key principles are fundamental to the Act. First is safety. While we can never eliminate all risks, we can significantly enhance safety by identifying risks and ensuring that these risks are properly managed. The second principle is accountability. The Act ends any confusion about who is answerable for managing building safety risks. It ensures that those responsible for buildings are held to account in law for their safety. The third principle is residents' voice. Residents' experiences and concerns must be heard and addressed.

But passing the primary legislation is only the first step. Our focus must now be on ensuring that the Act is fully implemented, so it transforms safety in multi-occupied residential buildings across Wales. We now need to ensure that the Bill is practical and deliverable, and this means ensuring that regulations are clear and achievable. The Act will be determined by secondary regulations and statutory guidance, and how housing associations, building safety authorities and fire safety authorities are appropriately resourced to deliver their enhanced responsibilities.

So, what proactive steps is the Welsh Government taking to address the specialist workforce shortages ahead of the implementation? I know that Community Housing Cymru has been sharing with the Government feedback from their members across Wales. It's important that the Government listens and shares additional information that will be brought forward by regulations, so that housing associations can effectively prepare. Given the financial impact of compliance, how will the Welsh Government ensure that funding mechanisms support compliance and do not force housing associations to trade off the maintenance of existing homes against the delivery of urgently needed new affordable housing?

I'm very aware of the financial and well-being impact on people waiting for remediation. The Welsh Labour Government proactively supported residents by putting in place contracts with developers, and this Government must continue to do everything possible to remove barriers to progress.

I do welcome the alarm grant announced today, but people need to know urgently if they're eligible, how much this will be and how they can access it. When in Government, I set up the developers forum, which met regularly, and it's really good to hear that the Minister is continuing that work. I look forward to further updates on the pace of remediation, something that all of us in this Siambr want to see.

I'm really pleased that you're also continuing with the Members' briefing, the technical briefing, that I established. Those sessions, I think, are really important for Members to raise with your officials really local issues. That's something we can always get to grips with, and I hope officials can follow that progress as well. But I think it's really important for Members to understand the parts of the Welsh Government and the progress the Welsh Government is trying to make.

But much work remains to implement a new building safety regime across Wales. I said when the building safety Bill passed that I hoped the next Welsh Government would bring forward a remediation Bill to further support leaseholders. So, now, Cabinet Minister, that you're the Cabinet Minister, can you confirm whether your Government intends to bring forward a remediation Bill? Diolch.

Thank you very much to the former Minister, or Cabinet Secretary, who was responsible for steering, very agilely, the Bill that is now an Act during the last Senedd, and I was very pleased to work together with you. And, yes, as you remind us, it was the first time for this Senedd to operate in that entirely inclusive, collaborative way and to pass that legislation unanimously. It is my intention to try and work in that same way with everyone in this Chamber.

You will know that we have committed to bring forward new legislation in the area of housing—a number of specific Bills—in order to give better protections to renters, and to look at exactly what kinds of measures are needed here in Wales as we move forward. And I do hope that we can work together, every one of us, in order to follow the same approach that we followed in the last Senedd. I look forward to having initial meetings with party spokespeople in order for us to explain how we intend to move forward with the legislation—not in this area, clearly, but in the area of housing more generally.

You are quite right, this legislation in Wales is very broad in its scope, and it aligns, of course, with the legislation that was passed in England, but it builds on that and brings different elements in—safety and who is accountable, but also, yes, the residents' voice. I think it is crucial that we acknowledge the residents' voice in all of this, and the importance of including them as we move forward. So, I do intend to announce shortly that we will establish a forum for leaseholders, and the issue of building safety will be something very important that that forum will be discussing. That builds on the work that was happening during the last Government.

I very much appreciate that I had the opportunity to hear directly from the Cladiators as a campaign group, who have been tirelessly campaigning and talking about the work that needs to happen at pace. This morning, I also had an opportunity to meet with representatives from the leaseholders of the Sand Wharf in Cardiff and Swansea Point in Swansea, and to hear directly from them about what the current experience means for leaseholders and the concern and the worry that it causes. And certainly, speaking with them and speaking with the committee as well—. As we move forward, I hope that the local government committee will help us to scrutinise the regulations to do exactly what you suggest, which is to make regulations that will lie under the legislation now to make sure that that is clear and that those regulations are suitable. So, there is that work. There is a lot of work to do under this Act; it's not just passing the Act—there is so much work that needs to happen underneath that, and we do have a timetable for that. But the very first thing that I did was to bring forward that consultation on regulations about the costs of remediation, because I was aware that that was something that was weighing very heavily on a great number of people.

In terms of the expert, specialist workforce that's needed, certainly that is something that we are giving due attention to. As you know, building control departments and planning departments have lost workers, have lost staff, over a long period of time now, and, certainly, we are paying attention to that and how we can bring that expertise back in. Of course, the idea is that there would be three authorities leading on this work, and I think by doing it in that way—and I was pleased to support that amendment to the Bill as well—in doing it in that way—. We aren't expecting all 22 local authorities to take on this burden individually. We're going to do it in a regional way, and I think that that will create the specialist workforce that we are going to need. Thank you.

Can I thank you, Cabinet Minister, for your statement today? There are many sentiments within it that I align with, especially regarding the victims of Grenfell. Our hearts still go out to them and their families.

Every resident in Wales deserves to know their home is safe, that identified risks are being addressed swiftly, and that they will not be left facing years of uncertainty while Governments debate responsibility. Progress must be measured by outcomes. For too long, many people across Wales have faced uncertainty about the safety of their homes, the costs they may face and the timescales for remediation.

We must ensure that those responsible for building failures contribute towards putting them right. Residents who bought or rented homes in good faith should not be left carrying the burden of mistakes made by others. I note the announcement of the Wales interim measures alarm grant, which will provide support for leaseholders facing the costs of interim alarm systems. Now, while any assistance for affected residents will be welcome, leaseholders will want clarity on how many people are expected to benefit, how quickly support will be available, and whether the scheme will fully address the costs many residents continue to face as a consequence of failures for which they bear no responsibility.

Looking now at remediation orders, as well as the need to hold developers to account, the key test is not how many powers are available, but how quickly unsafe buildings are fixed and how many families are able to move on with their lives. There are concerns about the pace of progress. Clearly, we've heard them all today, and you acknowledge those yourself. But people need confidence that meaningful action is being taken now, and that remediation will not be delayed. As always in Wales, we need action, not more bureaucracy.

Minister, there is also a wider challenge here. You have made it clear that increasing housing supply is one of your priorities, with ambitions for 20,000 new social homes by 2030. Now, while increasing supply is important, quantity must never come at the expense of quality. And some of you may have heard Radio Wales this morning, where they were talking about snagging—so many new houses that have got so many faults. Well, we can't have poorly built houses in the first place, and the lessons of past building failures must be fully embedded in future development, so that every new home is built to the highest standard of safety, quality and resilience.

At the same time, Wales faces a housing crisis. We need more homes, but we need safe homes. We need faster development, but we also need public confidence that safety standards are being rigorously upheld. These objectives are not in conflict. They must go hand in hand. We also recognise that public confidence depends on ensuring that all significant safety risks are addressed, whether they relate to cladding, asbestos, reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete or wider structural concerns. People deserve safe homes, clear information and swift action when problems are identified. Therefore, can you, Minister, confirm how many leaseholders are expected to benefit from the Wales interim measures alarm grant? What assessment has been made of whether the scheme will meet the costs faced by affected residents? And what assurances can you provide that remediation work and developer compliance will accelerate well before the planned registration of the category 1 buildings, as you mentioned, in December 2027?

Ultimately, success will not be judged by the number of strategies, working groups or announcements; it will be judged by whether families can sleep safely in their homes and whether the public can have confidence that the failures of the past are not repeated. Diolch.

Thank you very much, Peter, for those questions. Of course, I agree entirely with you: we do have to see action. That is what is important here, and that is why I held that meeting with the developers last week, in order to emphasise that very clear message that we do expect to see progress, and progress at pace, for the benefit of the people living with this ongoing concern and anxiety, because they are constantly reminded of what happened at Grenfell. And I do think it is important—. Thank you for mentioning that. It is important that we remember why we are doing this work. It does all go back to that tragedy seven years ago now. So, that was my message to the developers. I am accountable to leaseholders. I am not accountable to the developers. It is the leaseholders who are at the forefront of my thoughts, and through you in the Senedd I am also accountable to them, and that is why I will bring progress reports to you in this place.

And that close monitoring is happening. My officials speak to the developers on an ongoing basis and are trying to help them remove some of the barriers that are in place. But, at the end of the day, they do have to take their responsibilities seriously, and I do hope to see progress by the end of the year. That is what was in the previous Government's contract. They expected to see the work started by all developers by the end of this year. We are a long way from that point, but that is the expectation I am placing on them, and, if that does not happen, as I have explained, I will then have to take further steps, and I will start to talk specifically about problems in this Chamber, because I am accountable to you in that regard.

In terms of the grant, I am pleased that you have welcomed that. This can be put in place very quickly, and we can get it out of the door as soon as possible. This morning I was speaking to a representative from Swansea Point in Swansea and he mentioned that there are around 240 buildings that he represents, and that those developments could benefit specifically from the grant. In Sand Wharf, there are 100 units that could benefit from this.

The criteria will be made available very soon so that people can scrutinise those, but certainly the grant won't pay for waking watch costs, because those have been significant. We are now moving to grants for the alarms, and I do very much hope that those alarms can be permanent. You can put in temporary alarms that can be adapted for when the work has been completed and retained. So, hopefully that explains a little more on that.

Your point on social housing and the clear desire of this Government to increase the supply of social housing is entirely appropriate. Of course, safety standards have to be maintained. We are talking about community housing and social housing that is high quality, low carbon and safe. That is crucially important. It's part of the ambition of this Government that people in Wales should be able to access a safe and affordable home for the long term.

Thank you, Minister, for your statement today.

I appreciate the update and that this Government is taking this work seriously to better support impacted residents. For years now, residents have been afraid in their own homes and have felt that this issue has not been given the attention it deserves. Despite receiving assurances that their property was safe when they moved in, one resident in Cardiff has shared that they face a £3,000 cost for a waking watch, which costs £15,000 a week between 96 flats, and the management company are having to find £150,000 to install fire-detecting equipment. Without the necessary improvements, residents have faced the possibility of being made homeless as their homes aren't safe to live in. I welcome the Minister introducing financial support as an interim measure while remediation works are carried out. How will the Minister make sure tenants don't have to pay out of pocket for remediation work again? Diolch.

Thank you very much. Yes, like you, I have met leaseholders who are very concerned and who have faced enormous costs, and through no fault of their own at all, of course. So, the regulations that have just been consulted on, when those come into force, tenants and leaseholders will be able to claim costs back for the remediation work. That was one of the specific things that we worked on as the Bill went through, that the tribunals would be able to provide a pathway for tenants to be able to claim their remediation costs back, because it just isn't fair that they have to face, through no fault of their own at all, these costs that are causing so much concern and worry for them.

Cabinet Minister, the building safety programme risks becoming yet another example of taxpayers being asked to foot the bill for failures that they did not cause. England regulates buildings above 18m under its strictest duties. Wales has brought every multi-occupied residential building of any height into the new framework. That's over 51,000 buildings, mostly owned by small private landlords. The Senedd's own committee called the compliance timeline 'unrealistic'. Has the Minister modelled the impact on housing supply and on the capacity of authorities that must enforce it, while residents living in the most dangerous buildings still wait? With housing affordability worsening and house building targets already being missed, can you provide evidence that these measures will not further slow housing delivery? Thank you.

Thank you very much for your question. Just to be clear, we are not asking taxpayers to pay for remediation work; we are asking the developers to proceed with that remediation work.

We're not asking taxpayers to pay; we're asking the developers to speed up the remediation work and, in that way, make the homes safe for the leaseholders who are living in anxiety at the moment, and facing costs as well that, following the introduction of the new regulations, they will be able to go to a tribunal to claim.

In terms of your point that there's a link between this work and the supply of social housing, I don't really see that there is a link there. This work must happen. These buildings must be made safe. The legislation states so. The work to increase the supply of social housing is something that will happen gradually over a period of time. There is a good pipeline of projects in place in that system. So, I don't really see a link between the two things. Thank you.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I welcome the update on the building safety programme and the steps the Government is taking to protect leaseholders and ensure that the homes covered by the programme are safe, and those living in them are treated with the fairness and dignity they deserve. This has been a long time coming. My constituents have waited a very long time for this to be resolved. It's created hardship and worry for my constituents. The commitment to provide financial support to leaseholders facing the cost of interim alarm systems required to support the simultaneous evacuation policy is a positive step, but it's an acknowledgement that, despite all the agreements, we have not reached the stage where work is going to be done everywhere in the near future. My constituents living in fear of being another Grenfell want the obligations under the contract to be met, and the Welsh Government needs to get legally enforceable agreements with guaranteed completion dates so that my constituents can sleep safely at night.

Thank you very much, Mike. You are also emphasising the hardship that some of your constituents have faced and are facing because of this situation, and the need to treat them with dignity, respect and fairness. Certainly, I am doing that. I met with a constituent from Swansea today who spoke about the concern that they have because of the slow progress with the development at Swansea Point in particular.

I understand your point in terms of providing grants for the interim alarms, and that that perhaps is a sign that things are going to slow down. However, what I know can happen is that these alarms can be installed as a temporary measure, but there is a way of adapting them so that they can remain there permanently. So, that is a sign that things can move forward, because those alarms can remain there after the work is completed.

Just to remind you, in closing, Dirprwy Lywydd, the requirement of the previous Government in the agreement with developers was that work was to be started in every building by the end of this year. That was the expectation. Perhaps that expectation hasn't been made clear enough to developers—I think it probably was—by the previous Government, but this Government is determined that the developers will take their work completely and entirely seriously.

I look forward to returning here to the Senedd, not to talk to you about the problems, but to tell a positive story about what's happened in Wales with the building safety programme. Thank you.