Well, just to say, I don't wish to be particularly party political about it, but this is one of the most extraordinary aspects of the settlement from the UK Government: there is not a single penny allocated for capital in that budget. Where we are, you're right to say that inflation is having a significant impact on the capital programme. There's a real knock-on effect in manufacturing costs, on the cost of equipment and obviously also the cost of the workforce, and they will inevitably and inescapably lead to less being delivered for the same amount of money. That is the consequence of there being no further capital allocation into the Welsh Government's budget. What I would say, though, is from an education point of view, the capital allocation for last year—well, the current financial year, the one we're in at the moment—is being maintained, and this current financial year's commitment was a 33 per cent increase on the previous year. So, we saw a sharp increase in this financial year, and that is being maintained. So, that's the overall picture in terms of the trend. However, the practical implication of inflation on the budget is that we are seeing local authorities, further education colleges revisit their plans in relation to construction and new development. There is a pretty much universal pressure, I would say, across the system and a number of projects slowing down as a result of that.
What are we doing as a Government? A few things. So, we are working on a pretty bespoke basis, on a project-by-project basis, really, with authorities and colleges on what that means for them. Where there are additional costs, we're doing what we can to share some of those costs. We have what we call an intervention rate, the level of funding we provide to a new build, and that's generally—not always—65 per cent. So, we would generally bear that. Where we can agree to carry further costs, it's 65 per cent of the cost that we end up carrying, generally. So, that's one aspect.
The other is: I was keen when I became Minister to try to take some of the layers of bureaucracy, if you like, out of the programme to make it nimbler and make it easier, both for authorities and, frankly, also for us to manage the overall programme. So, we've moved away, as you might remember, from the bands that we've had until now. We now have a rolling programme at the end of band B. And what that means in practice is twofold. I would say it's more strategic, because it's a longer term horizon; it's no longer a five-year period, it's a nine-year period. So, you've got greater visibility of plans. But, within that, there's a short-, medium- and long-term set of horizons: three-year short term; six-year medium term; nine-year long term. And that enables everyone to be much more nimble, basically, about how they approach the capital investment programme, and to be—I don't want to use the word 'opportunistic', because it isn't that, but to be able to respond to changes, both positive and negative, if you like, in the market. So, I hope that that will at least bring some flexibility to the programme, which means that the funding can be even more usefully deployed, really. So, I think those two things are the main ways that we as a Government have been able to help.