Plenary

The next item is the business statement and announcement, and I call on the Trefnydd to make the statement. Lesley Griffiths.

Diolch, Llywydd. There is one change to this week's business. The motion to agree the Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016 (Consequential Amendments) Regulations 2022 has been withdrawn from today's agenda. Draft business for the next three sitting weeks is set out on the business statement and announcement, which can be found amongst the meeting papers available to Members electronically.

Thank you, Trefnydd, for your statement. Can I ask for a written statement please from the Minister for Health and Social Services on the impact of tourism on health services, particularly in north Wales? As you will know, north Wales is a beautiful place for people to visit, and we have many thousands of people who come to enjoy everything that we've got to offer on our doorstep, but one of the things it does give pressure to is our health service, because, of course, some people will require unplanned care during their visit. We know that we have a health board that is in under pressure, particularly at Ysbyty Glan Clwyd, which is smack bang in the middle of the heart of the tourism belt in north Wales, and I wonder whether this is something that could be properly considered by the Welsh Government in terms of whether enough resources are being given to our health boards to be able to cope with the significant numbers of visitors that we get. As I say, we want to welcome them, but we also need to make sure they have a good experience, particularly if they fall ill.

Thank you very much. Just last Thursday, the Minister for Health and Social Services attended the Cabinet sub-committee for north Wales, which I chaired, and representatives—the chair and chief executive—from Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board were present. It was actually a topic that we did discuss, and it was certainly raised by the chief executive with the Minister. I don't think there's a need for a written statement currently, because, certainly, from the discussions that were had, it was clear from the health board that this is something that they take into consideration.

The chaos in Westminster isn't just something we can witness as spectators—it will have profound impacts on how Government operates in Wales. I would request a debate straight after recess so that we can decide how to protect devolution and the interests of the people of Wales. By then, there'll be a new UK Prime Minister, and I want there to be a plan so that the First Minister can make demands of that Prime Minister, like stopping attacks on human rights, withdrawing the threat to Welsh legislation, and that Westminster should give us the billions they owe Wales for HS2 and promised European Union replacement funds that haven't materialised. Can we demand a new Wales Act, devolving rail infrastructure, the Crown Estate, broadcasting, anything that needs protecting from these wreckers in Westminster? We cannot allow our fate to be decided by default or indifference; we need to make these demands, and I'd like a debate, please, so that we can make those decisions as a Senedd.

Thank you. I certainly don't disagree with your comments around the chaos that we are seeing in Westminster. Clearly, it's been a very paralysed Government, and continues to be so. But I do want to reassure you that, as Ministers—and obviously, the First Minister directly with the Prime Minister—we continue to engage with the UK Government, to make sure that issues that are of very high importance here and also to the people of Wales are considered at every opportunity. As you say, by the time we come back after the summer recess, there will be a new Prime Minister. I'm sure the First Minister will seek an urgent meeting, and, if there is an update, I will ensure that happens.

I want to ask for a Government statement on the census, the first part being about the population changes in Wales. Population change is a good proxy for relative affluence, as the more successful areas have a higher population growth rate, while the poorer areas have a relative or actual population decrease. I'd like the statement to include how the Welsh Government is going to promote growth in the areas with population loss. The second part of the statement would be on Welsh language growth and decline by council areas. I predict that Monmouthshire will have its largest ever Welsh-speaking population, but that Ynys Môn will continue to show a decline in both actual and percentage of Welsh speakers. I'd like the statement to discuss the number of areas with over 70 per cent Welsh speakers.

I would also like to ask for a statement on knotweed and the responsibility for its eradication. One of my constituents had this reply from Natural Resources Wales: 'Landowners have the responsibility to contain the spread of knotweed on their own land. If it has got to the point where it is spreading onto neighbouring land, the neighbour has the ability to contact their council and local police force on 101 to get them to enforce a notice on the landlord, to force them to contain the spread'. The council denies it has the powers. Can a clear statement on responsibility be made?

Thank you. Just in relation to your question around knotweed, I know the Welsh Government has recently published an updated information sheet, which is aimed at community and voluntary groups, with advice on taking action on land they manage where there is Japanese knotweed. So, we are very well aware of the problems that it causes, and its occurrence throughout Wales. And as you say, the responsibility for it always lies with the landowner. The Welsh Government does continue to work with partners, and that includes Natural Resources Wales, and obviously all our local authorities, third sector, et cetera, to be able to control and eradicate it here in Wales.

In response to the census, the Minister for Finance and Local Government did publish a written statement welcoming the first results from the 2021 census, and I know the results were also laid before the Senedd. The Minister is looking forward to the publication of further data in October this year, and that will include more detail about the population in specific areas of Wales, and important new topics such as gender identity, sexual orientation, veterans of the UK armed forces, as well as information about how many people speak Welsh.

Minister, last week, Swansea Council confirmed that a new initiative has been launched so people know leisure operators at Caswell beach have the skills and experience to provide safe and fun activities, delivered to the highest standard. This partnership with the RNLI and the Welsh Surfing Federation is a great idea, and with the growth in the number of people taking up water activities such as surfing, paddle boarding and kayaking, this charter will hopefully give people confidence about the skills of those who run activities at the beach. As you plan Government business for after the recess, would you agree to a debate in Government time for the Senedd to reflect on this year's summer period, what has worked well, and what we can do to further enhance our tourism offer, and, in particular, how these sorts of initiatives can improve both the safety and enjoyment of our beaches for all those who use them? Thank you.

Thank you. It's certainly good to hear about such an initiative from Swansea with the RNLI, and I think it's a really good opportunity to remind people of the importance of water safety, particularly in hot weather. Unfortunately, we see far too many accidents and fatalities at this time of year. So, it's certainly, I think, very well worth highlighting in the Chamber today, and it's important that we do learn what has worked and make sure that we share best practice.

I'd like to ask for a written statement on the steps that the Welsh Government is considering to take to help care workers in the wake of a big increase in fuel costs. I discussed the issue with officials in Unison yesterday. Care workers in rural areas, in particular, have to drive distances between the houses of the people they care for, and the money they receive is not enough to pay for the fuel in their cars and maintenance costs. The truth is that they are subsidising their employers, and have to cut funding from their family budgets to do that. I know that the main levers are in the hands of the UK Government in terms of reducing prices and allowing greater claims on a tax-free basis, but I'd like to ask what the Welsh Government is considering as actions, from direct payments to trying to encourage paying these workers on a weekly basis, or allowing investment from employers in pool cars, electric cars perhaps. We're talking about a situation here where austerity is really biting, and we're talking about workers who are caring and very key.

Thank you. I think you raise a very important point. I'm aware that the Deputy Minister for social care is aware of the concern around this, and obviously the cost of fuel is something, as you say, where the levers are with the UK Government. I'm sure the Minister will continue to have discussions with local authorities, but also with UK Government counterparts.

I wonder if we can have a written statement on what contribution the Welsh Government could make to a just global transition. Bangladesh has been absolutely devastated in the last few weeks by really appalling floods in Sylhet, where at least 100 people have been killed and, according to the United Nations, 7 million people have been displaced. Most of the Bangladeshi diaspora in Cardiff come from Sylhet, and I know that some have lost family members who've been drowned. There's been very little coverage of this in the press, either drowned out by the tragedy in Ukraine or by the psychodrama going on in Downing Street. There's a wonderful photograph, which tells several thousand words, which I've just tweeted. It describes, 'We are not on the same boat #ClimateInequality' and 'We'll be dead by COP27'. This is just a huge reminder of the injustice of the poor, who are suffering the inequalities of the impact of the climate emergency created by the rich countries of the world. It is our obligation, surely, to assist the countries of the south, who are affected most by the climate crisis. We have a fantastic Wales for Africa programme. Could we have a statement from the Minister for Social Justice about how we could consider widening our international work to take account of the appalling injustices being created by the climate emergency in the poorest parts of the world?

Thank you. Jenny Rathbone, I think, raises a very important point. As you say, this is not something that has been very widely covered in the media. The flooding in Bangladesh is very concerning, and our thoughts are with the nation, and, as you say, with the Bangladeshi community here in Wales, who must be very worried about friends and family who've been affected by this catastrophic climate event.

The budgets for our international sustainable development have increased over the past couple of years, but these remain very much focused on our sustainable development work in Africa, and, as you say, we have a fantastic Wales for Africa programme here. I know that, at the current time, there are no plans to widen that Wales for Africa programme to include other nations outside of the continent.

On the broader point you raised around the challenge of tackling the climate emergency, requiring everybody to work together across geographic and sectoral boundaries, I know you are very well aware, as part of our global responsibility here in Wales, we were a founding member of the Under2 Coalition. It's been incredible to see how that coalition has grown over the years; it now brings together 260 Governments, and they represent 1.75 billion people, 50 per cent of the global economy. We continue to provide funding to the Climate Group's Future Fund, and the key role of that group is how they can empower developing and emerging regions to accelerate emission reduction, for instance, in a just way, to leave no-one and no place behind.

Minister, I recently met with the Road Haulage Association, also known as the RHA, alongside Welsh Government officials, some civil servants, and alongside other groups and organisations, to talk about the huge skills shortage in the industry and the challenges that they're facing with recruitment and retention, as well as simply the lack of respect that they receive in their trade. I knew things were bad, but believe me when I say I really didn't realise how bleak the situation was at present. Between February and April this year, there were a whopping 1.3 million vacancies in the logistics industry, and that number is only getting bigger day by day. The average age in the industry is 49, with many set to retire in the coming months and years ahead, and it's vital that we all do what we can to plug the shortfall. We need to encourage people from across Wales to get involved in the industry. Working in haulage or logistics doesn't simply mean being a heavy goods vehicle driver. There are a vast array of jobs and opportunities in the sector, and everything needs to be done to raise awareness of this, and we all have responsibility. There are several routes to get young people into the industry, Minister, such as apprenticeships and traineeships, but in England there are two more great routes, which are skills bootcamps and T-levels. According to the RHA, the skills bootcamps have been a huge success, with courses being oversubscribed, and the T-levels are a fantastic way to put logistics on the curriculum. T-levels are an alternative to A-levels and help students get into skilled employment. Each T-level involves an in-depth industry placement, giving students invaluable experience and the content of them to meet the needs of the industry. So, I'd like to request a statement about what the Welsh Government is doing to encourage more people to pursue a career in logistics and haulage, and what discussions has the Government had here in Wales about introducing T-levels right here for the people of Wales. Thanks.

Thank you. I know the Minister for Education and Welsh Language has had specific discussions around T-levels with the UK Government, but I think it's fair to say the UK Government haven't been particularly helpful in this area.

You mentioned the logistics sector. You can translate that into many other different sectors who are really struggling with the number of skills shortages, and, I have to say, leaving the European Union has not helped in any way.

Trefnydd, I've been contacted this morning by a family living in Pontypridd who are hosting a newly arrived family from Ukraine. Whilst all is going well, they have been told that it will be a number of weeks before their guests will receive any of the financial support they are entitled to beyond the initial £200. Whilst the host family have offered to buy what they need, the guests are naturally keen to be financially independent as quickly as possible and have approached the local foodbank for support now that their initial money has run out. Would it, therefore, be possible for the Minister for Social Justice to update Members via a written statement on any discussions that are taking place with the UK Government in relation to the delays in processing applications for financial support and how the Welsh Government is working with foodbanks to ensure that they are in a position to support any Ukrainian families turning to them for support? Thank you.

Thank you. You raise a very important point on refugees who are now here in Wales from Ukraine. I know the Minister just this morning was in a meeting around this issue. I will certainly ask her, if over the summer recess there is anything to update Members on, for her to do a written statement.

Just on your specific question around foodbanks, I know my own foodbank in Wrexham just last Friday helped several families who were here from Ukraine, and the Minister herself visited Wrexham foodbank about a month ago specifically to see what could be done to support them. I think I'm right in saying that there is some guidance that has been given to foodbanks, but I will check that out, and, as I say, I will ask the Minister to update us if necessary.

I thank the Trefnydd.

Item 3 this afternoon is a statement by the Minister for Finance and Local Government: a fairer council tax. I call on the Minister, Rebecca Evans.

Diolch. Our programme for government and co-operation agreement with Plaid Cymru commit to making reforms to council tax to make it fairer and more progressive. In December, I announced that I would be consulting this year on an ambitious package of reforms as the starting point on a journey towards meeting those aims. Our published work last year concluded that to meet those aims in the shorter term, we would need to consider a revaluation to allow us to change the bands and tax rates. It also highlighted the need for us to improve our national support scheme and examine the framework for discounts and exemptions. In parallel to this work, we will continue to work on alternative ways to raise local taxes that may share the burden more fairly in future, such as a local land value tax.

I am taking a phased approach to designing a new system because I am keen that everyone has the opportunity to contribute to this work. The consultation I have launched today sets out a road map. It represents phase 1 of a multistage conversation, seeking views in an open and collaborative way. I will take into account everything we learn from this phase, and I hope to be in a position to launch a consultation on detailed proposals in phase 2 next year. The consultation I am launching today aims for a fair and progressive system that rebalances the tax burden on households, funds services that benefit everyone, is a tax that connects people with communities, and has regular updates built in it to keep it fair in future.

I have worked closely with the Plaid Cymru designated Member, Cefin Campbell MS, on this shared priority. I have continued to meet local government leaders to gather views from across Wales. I have established governance arrangements, through which we are engaging with partners who are key to delivering what we set out to achieve. These include practitioners in local authorities, the Valuation Office Agency and the Valuation Tribunal for Wales. We have continued working with respected expert institutions in this field, including the Institute for Fiscal Studies.

There are a great deal of positives about the council tax system that we shouldn't lose sight of. It has stood the test of time since the 1990s and it represents local democracy in action. Overall, it is a very efficient and stable tax, raising £2 billion every year for essential services like schools and social care—services that we can't do without. It also has low administrative costs, is well understood by taxpayers, and its underlying basis, property value, is a good broad indicator of people's wealth relative to one another. However, I do recognise that it is not perfect. The system we currently have places a higher tax burden proportionately on people with lower levels of wealth. As Members will know, all properties in Wales liable for council tax are placed in one of nine bands, based on property values from April 2003. This means the tax is nearly 20 years out of date, and what we pay no longer reflects our circumstances. The amount of council tax charged for band I properties is three and a half times as much as band A, yet homes in the top band could be worth more than nine times as much as those in the bottom band. It is this Government’s view that a revaluation should take place, and we should aim to implement a new structure for council tax based on up-to-date values. If we were to do this, the consultation seeks views on doing so from April 2025.

While house prices in Wales have grown significantly since 2003, I want to be clear this does not mean that everyone's council tax will increase. The system we design will remain a relative one. Previous research suggests up to 75 per cent of households would either be unaffected or would see their bills reduce. I also want to be clear that the purpose of revaluation is not to increase the total amount raised from taxpayers, but to redistribute the burden to ensure the fairness and integrity of the system. This exercise would open up an opportunity to add bands to the top or bottom ends of the scale, which might help create tax rates that are more progressive. There will be further points when we can consider how best to redesign the system. From 2025 onwards, and for the first time in the history of council tax, we want to deliver rolling revaluations to avoid the distortions in bills that we know can occur when updates are postponed over many years. We want to introduce a cycle of revaluations to not only provide clarity for taxpayers and delivery bodies, but to ensure the council tax burden is redistributed fairly on a regular basis.

Moving on to our system of council tax support for low-income households, from today I am seeking views on improving our national council tax reduction scheme. I am proud that we have continued to maintain entitlements to reductions for around 270,000 vulnerable and low-income households. As the cost-of-living crisis worsens, support of this kind is even more vital to thousands of struggling households. But take-up of the scheme could be improved. The regulations are complex, and we are prevented from making in-year changes where needed. As the roll-out of universal credit scales up, it introduces further complexity into the way that people apply for support and the way their entitlement is calculated. I am keen to generate views from practitioners and others about how we can simplify or modernise the scheme to make it as easy as possible to access.

Another key element of the consultation focuses on council tax discounts and exemptions. Many of the current arrangements have been in existence since 1993. Some help to recognise household circumstances and people's ability to pay, and some make practical sense from a tax-collection perspective. I want to ensure our decisions are fair and fit for a modern system. It needs to be easy for practitioners to administer and clear for people to understand. I look forward to hearing ideas about this through our consultation. The consultation I have launched today seeks views on a path to ambitious change. This is why these reforms need to be part of a national, civic conversation with the people of Wales. I'd like to reassure Members and the public today that if we undertake the reforms that we are seeking views on, we would consider targeted transitional arrangements for those who may need time to adapt to any changes.

Finally, I want to be very clear: individuals will see no immediate changes to their bills as a result of the consultation I am publishing today. We have a great deal of work to do before reforms can be introduced. These reforms will be significant undertakings that will need legislative time and the support of Members from across this Senedd. I welcome all comments on phase 1 of our consultation, and I will keep Members informed of developments.

The Conservative spokesperson, Sam Rowlands.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and can I thank you, Minister, for bringing forward today's statement on a fairer council tax, one that I've been looking forward to and I'm sure many of us have been looking forward to as well? Can I also welcome your balance of comments in terms of recognising some of the positive elements of council tax as it currently stands? I think you said that there are a great deal of positives about the council tax system that we should not lose sight of, that it has stood the test of time since the 1990s and represents local democracy in action, which I'm sure we'd both want to continue seeing take place. I also acknowledge where you've pointed out some improvements in the system that could and should take place as well.

In responding to your statement today, Minister, I'd like to also welcome the fact that you're going out to consultation on the future of council tax here in Wales. As we know, council tax impacts every household up and down Wales, and it's vitally important that we encourage as many people as possible to engage with any process of change, including one around council tax. It's even more important when we know many people are facing uncertainty with the future cost of living that we're all looking at at the moment. But, one concern I have with consultations, Minister, which I'm sure you may share from time to time, is that we often don't receive a big enough response, with many parts of our community missed out. So, in light of this, I wonder what assurances you can give that this consultation will ensure people from all walks of life are included and listened to.

Secondly, Minister, as we know from your statement today, the council tax proposal will see a complete revaluation of all 1.5 million properties in Wales, with the aim of ensuring valuations are up to date and people are paying the appropriate amount of council tax. Certainly, we'd want to see as up-to-date information as possible. I agree with that. Of course, this revaluation will be the first since 2003 in Wales, which was controversial at the time, because one in three households received a higher bill than they were used to paying. It's vitally important that any change leads to a fair transition for council tax payers and will not force anyone to fall off a financial cliff edge. So, in addition to this, it's crucial that those on fixed incomes, such as pensioners, who may not have significant income in proportion to their house value, are properly considered as well. So, Minister, how will you ensure that any revaluation won't see the same mistakes of 2003, and that hard-working families and those on fixed incomes won't be hit with those higher bills?

And finally, Minister, I note from today's statement that you're now using the term 'a fairer council tax', which I'm sure we'll all be positive about, but you were previously talking about council tax reform, perhaps a stronger statement previously. And I wonder if this is because Welsh Government now believe that your proposals are not sufficient enough reform to be calling it true reform. Minister, I can certainly accept that the current system for council tax does need some review. However, I'm not sure that your current proposals are real reform. So, in light of your consultation, I'm wondering whether you foresee any alternatives to a revaluation, and a few extra bands being proposed as well. For example, in the consultation, we could see suggestions such as a proportional property tax, which I know some Members in this Chamber would support, or a local income tax, for example, or even perhaps a council tax linked to the energy efficiency of your home to help incentivise people to make their houses more energy efficient.

I'm very grateful to Sam Rowlands for his contribution this afternoon, and his keenness to work collaboratively on what is such an important agenda in terms of making council tax fairer. I suppose the reason why we've referred to our consultation as making council tax fairer, rather than council tax reform in itself, is because 'fairer' is the outcome that we want from this, and the 'reform', if you like, is the how we get there.

I'll start where you ended, really, in terms of looking at other ways in which we can achieve an improvement in fairness of council tax. Of course, over the last Senedd term, we undertook a great deal of research that looked at exactly that, really, in terms of different options for reform. We engaged experts in the field through the Institute for Fiscal Studies, Bangor University, Cardiff University and others, and looked at a number of ways in which we could take this agenda forward. One was the local income tax to which you referred, and we discounted that because it didn't have some of the benefits that Sam Rowlands began his contribution talking about, in the sense that council tax is based on property, which is a fixed asset, it's simple to understand, it's difficult to hide your property and so on. So, I think there are definitely some benefits through a property-based system.

We also looked at a potential land value tax, and Bangor University undertook some research for us on that. We're committed to continuing to look at that idea, not only as a replacement for council tax but also for non-domestic rates, although I think that it's well recognised it's more difficult to do so for non-domestic rates. But we're continuing that work, exploring what a potential longer term programme of reform could look like, in parallel with the work that we're undertaking in the immediate term in terms of the council tax reform agenda.

We've also been very mindful of the revaluation and the impact of it. As Sam Rowlands says, there are around 1.5 million domestic dwellings in Wales that are currently liable for council tax, and each is placed into one of those nine bands. A revaluation will provide an update to everybody's tax band, but I think it's important for people who are taking an interest in this already to recognise that just because the value of your property has gone up since the last revaluation, it doesn't necessarily mean that your council tax will go up, because the overall take from council tax is not to be increased; that's not the purpose of this exercise—it's about redistributing that more fairly across the bands.

I think, again, Sam Rowlands is right in terms of recognising the impact of transitional arrangements. I think it is fair to say that at the last revaluation, when it came into force in 2005, we did introduce the idea of transitional arrangements probably too late. We're doing this right from the outset now to explore what those transitional arrangements should look like, because that was one of the lessons that we learned certainly from the last revaluation exercise.

Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Llyr Gruffydd.

Thank you very much, Dirprwy Lywydd, and may I thank the Minister for her statement? It's good to see in it a number of the main elements of Plaid Cymru's council tax reform plans, which we set out in our manifesto, particularly around revaluation; increasing the number of bands, particularly at the higher end of home valuations; and ensuring that council tax is more proportionate to the value of property.

The motive for reform is clear. The current system is dated; to all intents and purposes, it's a legacy of the Thatcher era. This is the most regressive tax on these isles, which levies almost four times as much on the poor as those who are richer, so it's about time that we redistributed that burden more fairly across society and ensure that those who have the broadest shoulders carry a little more of that weight.

Just to pick up on some of the points already made, it's good to see the emphasis on improving the national support scheme and looking at the framework for the discounts and exemptions, because many people will be concerned, particularly older people, that the value of their property doesn't necessarily reflect their ability to pay. So, the first question from me is: what assurance can you give to those people that their circumstances will be fully taken into account as part of this consultation? Also, of course, on the other hand, what's your message to local authorities where there is depopulation and a population that's growing older, which is a factor that could have a significant impact on the tax gathered in those areas? Whilst accepting that this is an exercise that will be revenue neutral, as you said, we also need to ensure that individual local authorities don't lose out when it comes to ensuring the revenue to maintain key services that we all want to see.

People complain that the current system is unfair, and that's quite right, and people also see clear differences in council tax rates across Wales, and the system is inconsistent. I've previously referred in this Chamber to villages such as Ystradowen and Cwmllynfell, around 100 yards from each other but there are hundreds of pounds of difference in terms of their council tax bills. So, one is aware that there are inconsistencies and some unfairness. To what extent do you anticipate that this process will possibly tackle some of those issues, whilst protecting the integrity of local authorities in raising the revenue that they need? There's no getting away from the fact that there are tensions in terms of the divergence between certain parts of the country and others.

Of course, the policy and the proposed change are more timely than ever as we face a cost-of-living crisis. The council tax bill, of course, is one of the most significant bills faced by households every year, and these reforms could be a radical step in helping many households to cope better with what they are currently facing, and we know that council tax payments have been one of the greatest issues in terms of household debt.

I'm very grateful to Llyr Gruffydd for his comments today, and just through Llyr I'd like to thank Cefin Campbell for the excellent work, which we've done, I think, together, on this particular area of our co-operation agreement, and for his really constructive approach and the ideas and challenge that he's brought to the work so far. I know there's a lot more for us to be doing on this, because, as I say, this is just stage 1 of our consultations, which is why it's so important that we do look across a broad range of issues, which Llyr Gruffydd has described today, the first being the council tax reduction scheme and exploring what our plans are for improving that. I think that making the wider council tax scheme more progressive might reduce the demand for support through our council tax reduction scheme, but we still expect that there will be the continued need to support low-income households with their council tax bills, which is one of the reasons why we're exploring what changes we might need to make to the scheme in the future.

Our aim, of course, is to support those who need it, and we have to take into account the wider conditions, such as the roll-out of universal credit, which has had a big impact on council tax and the eligibility for support, and also, of course, changes to the wider economy. We want to take the opportunity to improve the design of the scheme to make it easier to administer and obviously simpler for people to access the support to which they're entitled in the first instance. Our council tax reduction scheme is currently supporting 270,000 households with their bills and over 210,000 pay no council tax at all because of the support that we're able to invest in it. Around 20 per cent of households, that means, receive some help with their bills, but we know that the landscape here is continuing to change, so we need to explore this as part of our consultation. There are some specific questions on this in the consultation, which will help us understand the best way forward.

Then, also, there was a reference to discounts and exemptions. The current landscape there is extremely complex, and the discounts and exemptions have grown incrementally since the inception of council tax in 1993, so I think that the review that we're doing of these is more than timely, I think, in terms of understanding what changes we might wish to make. I think it's probably too early at the moment to say what those changes might be. We have to undertake the work. We have to listen to people through the consultation. But we have established an expert-led working group of officials and local authority practitioners to help consider this specific aspect and to consider the review of the existing arrangements. Around 37 per cent of dwellings are currently subject to one or more discounts, and 4 per cent of dwellings are exempt, so that's a total of almost 600,000 of our 1.5 million properties, so obviously there is lots of work for us to do to make sure that the exemptions are the right ones and the discounts are the right ones in the future. Some of these changes will require primary legislation; for example, were we to make any changes to the one-adult discount, that would require primary legislation, for example.

I thank the Minister for her statement. We know we need more regular revaluations. Every 20 years is not acceptable. We know two other things: a local income tax is preferred by the rich because it will save them money via tax reduction schemes. But we also know that, under the current system, those with the least ability to pay spend a greater portion of their wealth on council tax. Someone living in a property worth £100,000 pays around five times as much council tax relative to the property value as someone living in a property worth £1 million. A £420,000 house only pays twice as much as a £120,000 house. To me, this is unfair, because payment is not proportional to the value of the property and value of property is a good indicator of personal wealth.

My recommendation is that an additional band is added at the bottom and at least two higher bands are added at the top, followed by adjustments on the multipliers being used to ensure fairness. Questions are: should single people on band G and above have a single person's discount? Who benefits from the student discount, students or landlords? And finally, should the bands be split in two, therefore making it much closer to the value of the property?

I'm very grateful to Mike Hedges for those contributions and for his ongoing engagement on the issue of council tax, and I share his concern about the importance of more regular revaluations. I think that it has been far too long since the last revaluation. Painful though I understand them to be, I think it is more important that we do it more regularly, and then the changes won't be so extreme in some cases. So, I think that that kind of regular revaluation is important and that's something that we're consulting on in our consultation that is launched today—so, keen to have those views formally expressed through the consultation as well.

And then, looking to the future, we can consider what technology might be available to us. Can we do rolling revaluations? What would we do with information as it comes through in terms of house sales? How can we be sure that we're not picking up a spike in house sales at that moment in time? So, there are lots and lots of different things for us to be considering in terms of the regularity of revaluations. But that's absolutely our intention, to make revaluation much more frequent.

I think Mike Hedges described perfectly how council tax is a regressive tax; it's not a progressive tax, as we would normally want a tax to be. It very much means that people who have the least and who are least able to contribute are ending up being asked to contribute a larger share. So, this is one of the things that our approach to making council tax fairer is aiming to deal with as well—rebalancing the council tax that local authorities collect.

And I've heard Mike's arguments in terms of the way in which he would like to see the additional bands, and potentially the splitting of the bands to have that much more nuanced size of band as well, so, obviously, we'll be considering that as part of our overall consultation. I think we also need to consider as part of that the appeals system and to what extent we create a system where we get the balance right in terms of not creating too much confusion or likelihood of appeals, but having appeals where they are genuinely, in a sense, ones that are likely or potentially to be changing the band that people are in. So, lots for us to consider. I think the contributions so far have been really helpful and I think have started to kick off our consultation very well.

Finally, Carolyn Thomas.

The benefits of a land value tax are quite clear—it could replace a regressive council tax system, which has no relation to household income, with a system that creates a far greater equality in the distribution of wealth, lowering housing costs for many households across Wales. A land value tax would also help to end land speculation, encourage more efficient allocation of land and provide a sustainable and enhanced source of local government finance. I understand one of the main impediments to the introduction of an LVT is the lack of cadastral mapping. A cadastral database would not only be beneficial for the purpose of taxation, but also in regards to planning and agriculture. So, I was wondering if any progress has been made by the Welsh Government in establishing a cadastral database for Wales? Thank you.

I'm grateful for that contribution, and just want to reassure Carolyn Thomas that we are very much continuing to work on the idea of a local land value tax. The main underlying objective for local tax is to raise that stable revenue for local services in the fairest possible way. And where we can have other advantages, such as the better use of land, I think we should definitely be looking to squeeze as much value out of these things as we possibly can.

The Welsh Government has published the research by Bangor University, and that assesses the feasibility of a land value tax as a possible replacement for council tax and non-domestic rates. And they did conclude that a local land value tax in Wales could raise sufficient revenue to replace the current local taxes, and also that the distribution of liability could be substantially more progressive. So, I think the research has been very positive in that sense, but it does underline that we have to undertake some further work to assess more fully whether or not a land value tax would be evidently better than our existing arrangements, or the arrangements that we will put in place following the work of reform, which is current.

So, within the scope of the research, Bangor University was able to construct a preliminary statistical model to estimate a set of land values. We have never attempted that kind of work in Wales before, and it did enable Bangor then to determine potential tax rates at which a local land value tax would need to be levied to raise revenues broadly equal to the current system. So, it's really exciting work. But I think one of the key lessons that we learned from it was that it's much more challenging to estimate the land values for non-domestic uses than it is for domestic property. So, we're currently continuing the work exploring this, but the point about having that cadastral database is absolutely key. We couldn't introduce a land value tax without one.

I know that elsewhere in Welsh Government there's important work going on in terms of DataMapWales, and that is very much about collecting information across Wales in a useable format. And I do have some really interesting discussions with the Welsh Revenue Authority as well, because they're taking a lead on many of the exciting ways in which we're thinking about the potential ways to use digital and data, and so this is another area where we're doing some interesting work. Because having that kind of database would help us with lots of other policies, in fact. It would help us potentially in future with local rates of land transaction tax. So, we would need that kind of database. So, work is definitely ongoing. I'm more than happy to update Carolyn at any opportunity we have.

Thank you, Minister.

Item 4 is next, and that's a statement by the Minister for Economy: a young person's guarantee, ensuring a better future for our young people. And I call on the Minister, Vaughan Gething.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. We launched our ambitious young person's guarantee in November last year, with the aim of supporting 16 to 24-year-olds to access work, education, training or business start-up support. We made this commitment so that no-one would be left behind, and have committed £1.4 billion a year to support young people across Wales. And the need for the young person's guarantee is as strong as ever. Against a backdrop of extreme economic volatility, the chances of a recession have increased, and there is still a need to help avoid a lost, disengaged generation as a result of the pandemic. That's why we are providing support for over 300,000 young people within the first two years of this Government term.

There is wide-ranging evidence that the disruption that the pandemic has caused has particularly affected young people from disadvantaged backgrounds. The young person's guarantee will help us to prevent inequalities widening further, as a new generation moves towards the labour market. By focusing on people who are under-represented, on those young people who face disadvantage and inequality in accessing work, we will be creating a more equal Wales and a stronger economy. Fourteen per cent of young people aged 16 to 24 are not in education, employment or training. That rate is too high, and our support is wedded to the long-term ambition to reduce this rate to at least 10 per cent. This means reaching and maintaining an additional 13,600 young people through programmes like the young person's guarantee over the coming decades. This is part of the route to a stronger and fairer Welsh economy, where people are supported to fulfil their potential. And we're taking wide-ranging action, tailored to the needs of people facing barriers to work.

Since the young person's guarantee has launched, we have enhanced how young people gain access to high-quality advice and guidance services. Where once there was a confusing range of options, opportunities and advice systems, the Working Wales service now provides a single route to support, coupled with careers advice and guidance. The Working Wales job-matching service also helps young people to find the right employment opportunity. Since 1 November last year, 4,729 young people have accessed this service, of which 2,249 were NEET.

Last month, I also launched our new young person's start-up grant, offering up to £2,000 to help young people to start their own business. This help is backed by one-to-one business advice and mentoring—practical help for young entrepreneurs taking those first exciting steps in starting a business. I'm pleased to say that we have improved access to our apprenticeship programme and other work-focused support. For instance, I have recently launched two new programmes: Jobs Growth Wales+, which will help to support 5,000 16 to 18-year-olds each year who are struggling to gain access to training. The new ReAct+ programme will also support up to 5,400 young people each year, providing practical help with childcare and transport costs. We've also taken steps to extend support into our communities to help young people to start their employment and career journey, including providing community mentors through the Communities for Work Plus programme. Already, 1,700 people have accessed the programme for support since November last year.

The education offer of course remains a key part of the young person's guarantee. During the current academic year, we've invested £98.9 million in sixth forms, £271.8 million in further education, with an additional £4.7 million on personal learning accounts for young people. In order to help young people to find the right course, we've also established a new user-friendly course search platform called 'courses in Wales', with user-friendly information on over 13,500 courses.

Can I thank the Minister for his statement this afternoon? As I've said on previous occasions, I broadly welcome the Welsh Government's intention to provide everyone under 25 in Wales with the offer of work, education, training or self-employment, and today's statement provides us with a useful update on some of the work that has been done in this area.

There's been some welcome progress in supporting young people who want to set up their own business, and today's statement refers to the young person's start-up grant, which offers up to £2,000 to help young people start their own business. The Minister will know that I've called for targeted support for young people who want to start their own business, so I'm pleased to see this funding, and I hope this funding will make a real difference in due course.

Of course, it's absolutely crucial that there is as much collaboration as possible with the HE and FE sectors, and whilst today's statement gives us a little bit of information in this area, I'd be grateful if the Minister could expand on the points highlighted in this statement, and tell us a bit more about the Welsh Government's plans to foster further collaboration in the future.

Today's statement reinforces the importance of supporting young people to gain the skills and experiences they need to succeed, and we need to ensure that young people from all backgrounds are able to access opportunities. The Minister made it clear at the start of this Senedd that there would be a national conversation with young people to ensure their views were central to the delivery of the programme, and I'm pleased to hear from today's statement that that is taking place over the summer. So, perhaps the Minister can tell us a bit more about how that engagement will continue to take place after September, so that they continue to play a part in shaping this programme.

It's important that nobody is left behind, and that young people with additional learning needs, for example, also have access to opportunities. Therefore, I hope the Minister will tell us more about how the Government is working to ensure young people with disabilities are accessing employment and learning opportunities under the young person's guarantee, as well as ensuring that young people from all backgrounds are accessing opportunities, particularly via the generation Z pilots.

Now, today's statement also refers to the ReAct+ programme, which builds on the current ReAct programme and helps empower people seeking work in Wales with a direct application process, financial support and free careers advice. It's great to hear that up to 5,400 young people each year are being supported with practical costs like childcare and transport costs, and perhaps the Minister can tell us what plans he has to build on this really important work.

I thank the Member for his series of questions, and the constructive nature of the tone and content of them. On the start-up grant, it's worth mentioning that, today, the application window's gone live on the Big Ideas Wales website. So, if there are young people who are watching these proceedings, there may well not be, but, if there are, then they can go onto the Big Ideas Wales website to find more information about how to not just apply for that support, but, crucially, the pre-start-up and post-start-up advice, support and mentoring that is part of that offer.

There were a number of questions about the engagement of young people. I'm very pleased to have more questions on this, to expand a bit further. So, in the events we're running up to into September, we've got a range of work that's going to take place over this summer. But, as I indicated in the statement initially, we've already made some changes and reflected on some challenges for us with our initial engagement. We've had 10 different events as part of the start of that national conversation, including direct engagement with a range of people who have greater challenges.

The Member mentioned disabled young people; we know that employment outcomes for disabled people are significantly less advantaged than the rest of the population, as they're much less likely to be in work and much less likely to be in good work as well. So, we've deliberately had part of that engagement with disabled young people. We've also looked at a range of people who face barriers, like, for example, homeless young people, and we've been able to work together with local government, actually, on that, with their homeless service co-ordinators. So, there is work with a range of partners across the piece, to try to understand the particular challenges that young people face.

One of the key issues, actually, was that there's still a lack of awareness about where to go for support. So, there are some practical barriers in getting people to engage in the service, but even if they want to engage, we need to make more visible Working Wales's role as a single gateway. So, we've done the right thing in slimming down all of the different front doors, to have one front door for people to get through, but we still need people to understand where and how to go about that, so that work is going to be ongoing. But I think, for example, the work we're doing in further education will be helpful with that, about a new access point where a lot of our young people already are, to get them to the right place for their future aspirations.

When we go through, not just the continued delivery and engagement we'll have with young people in the programme, but your point about from September onwards, we're looking to establish a young person's board around this. We've got a range of stakeholders helping us to do that, and that should help us to make sure that we continue to engage with a group of young people, to understand if the offer is meeting the aims and objectives that we have as a Government, but, crucially, the needs of young people themselves.

Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Luke Fletcher.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and thank you, Minister, for the statement. Certainly, it's good to see progress being made in this area.

From the outset, I'd like to reiterate Plaid Cymru's support for the young person's guarantee, and our desire, similar to that of the Welsh Conservatives, to work constructively with the Government on this. Especially during this cost-of-living crisis, I think it's important that young people feel that there is an opportunity in Wales, and this, of course, plays a part in ensuring that. Of course, we are currently seeing workers across the country demanding fairer pay and better workplace conditions. Young people often are the most likely to go into uncertain, precarious and low-paid work. So, to that end, I'd be interested in learning more about how the young person's guarantee is working to ensure that young people are aware of their workplace rights and entitlements. Is there, for example, scope to create a 'Know your rights' campaign, for example?

Now, Chwarae Teg recently published a report titled 'Towards a Gender Equal Wales: Responding to a Transforming Economy'. There were a number of interesting findings on apprenticeships in particular. For example, apprenticeships, despite being a key route into many industries, remain heavily segregated on the basis of gender, and, to date, there have also been no targets placed on providers to help address the gender imbalance in apprenticeships, and progress towards closing these gaps remains slow. There was an acknowledgement of some of these challenges in your statement, but, given the stark gender discrepancies between different apprenticeship choices that have been revealed by Chwarae Teg, how is the young person's guarantee working to tackle these imbalances? And would the Government consider placing requirements on apprenticeship providers to tackle these inequalities?

Of course, an important element to also consider, as we head into the future, is the risks posed by automation. It is estimated that 25 per cent of jobs will change due to automation and 10 per cent of jobs will become fully automated. And this links to the Chwarae Teg report, because women make up 70.2 per cent of the workforce in roles that are at high risk of automation, 50.3 per cent in medium risk and 42.6 per cent at low risk. On top of reducing gender discrepancies in educational course selection, what systems are in place to ensure that women and girls are being given an equitable opportunity to be represented in the next industrial revolution of automation and green industries?

An important element to further consider is those who are self-employed. Self-employment has increased in Wales over the last 10 years and now accounts for nearly one in seven workers across Wales, and it's welcome that the young person's start-up grant is offering up to £2,000, as well as the additional support through the one-to-one mentoring. Given the Bevan Foundation's recent report that found that the average income of a self-employed person is less than two thirds the income of an employee, and also noted that it carries risks of financial insecurity and poverty, what safety nets are in place to support those young people who struggle with being self-employed, especially during such uncertain times, as we recover from the pandemic and are in the midst of an unprecedented cost-of-living crisis, beyond, of course, what you've already outlined? Long-term support will be key to their success.

Thank you for the series of questions. I think it might be helpful to say that a number of the questions you asked were really about how effective will the support and guidance aspects of the variety of programmes we've put in place be.

On the point about knowing your rights, about understanding what you're entitled to in a workplace on a basic level when it comes to pay, but then you get into other challenges, frankly, as you go up through your time in working life and understand how your pay reflects around other people's, it's part of the reason why this Government is positive about trade union membership. Trade union workplaces are safer, more productive on average, and better paid than non-unionised workforces. I should, of course, note that I'm a former trade union steward myself, as well as a former trade union lawyer. But, there's a serious point here about knowing your rights and what you could and should expect in the workplace as well. But actually, much of the young person's guarantee is with people who are near the labour market or job ready. Some apprentices know what they want to do and they don't struggle with the choices they make. Lots of young people in further education have a career path that's mapped out for them. Lots of the other work we're talking about, though, is persuading people to get nearer to the labour market, to be ready, and that's where lots of the support is there and available.

Jobs Growth Wales+, for example, is about young people who may not be job ready. It's taking on the best of both Jobs Growth Wales and the traineeships. There's a wage subsidy to help people into doing things as well. Our challenge is we're dealing with more than one cohort of young people in the sense of how job ready they are and the support they'll need. So, different people will need a different range of support. Interestingly, that's been really important from young people's feedback already, that they want more personalised support that understands them, how ready they are, and whether they're actually ready to plan their longer term future or not. There's still a fair amount of uncertainty, and we're still not sure how much that relates to the pandemic or a broader generational difference that you may be closer to than me, but there's a challenge about understanding how the support we want to provide is actually going to be useful for the people we want to work with and for.

That includes your point on the risks of automation. There are opportunities in automation and AI, and lots of things we're doing. In fact, lots of young people coming through their education today have an entirely different view on the way the world already works and how it should work, and that's why lots of the challenges are actually going through education in the way we're trying to help teach young people not just to be able to use technology, but to design and build it. I regularly reflect on the lectures I've had from my colleague the climate change Minister on the importance of coding and making sure it's something that is seen for both boys and girls, because the talent isn't distributed in just one gender and not the other. You'll see that there's a lot of proactive support that we're doing to try to make sure that boys and girls see opportunities in a whole range of careers. It is often about getting women into careers that are still seen as traditionally male-dominated ones. That's part of the reason why that support and advice is important. I'll continue to reflect on the points about what more we can do with providers as well as encouraging people themselves to have a broader view on what they could and should do with the talent that they have.

Thank you very much for your statement and your description of all the varied things that you're doing to try and capture all these young people. Because I agree with you that 13,600 young people who are not in education, employment or training is a really worrying statistic, because everybody needs to make some form of contribution to society, and if you're between 16 and 24 and you're not doing anything, obviously a lot of young people become agoraphobic, mentally ill or get dragged into activities that are harmful, whether they're legal or illegal. So, everything that we can do together to sort them out is really very welcome, particularly as disabled young people have had a really challenging time during the pandemic, because they've found it that much more difficult to continue their learning online, and some of them, including some of my constituents, are feeling they're falling between cracks. So, I'm hoping that we'll be able to pick them up.

I've had recent discussions with the Construction Industry Training Board and Community Housing Cymru about the retrofit skills training programme that we obviously need to have to decarbonise all our homes. It's a bit of a chicken-and-egg scenario, and I'd welcome your views on how we approach this. Because we can't be training people up if the work isn't there, but equally, if CHC are saying they can't find the people who've got the skills to do the sort of work that's required, it's a very difficult situation. So, I wondered how you're approaching that, and how many people have started, if not completed, retrofit skills training courses, so that we have some idea of the programme that we need to do over a period of years.

I can't give you a figure for your last question, Jenny, about the number of people who have started a course for a retrofit programme, but this is an active not just topic of debate but practical delivery from myself and the climate change Minister. The optimised retrofit programme should mean that we improve the quality of housing stock, make it more sustainable and actually end up giving people a helping hand to a career that will be more useful as we carry on in the future and, frankly, more and more expected. You know, the housing stock of the future is largely built. We'll continue to build new houses, but actually, what we need to do is improve the stock of the housing that we've got. That is something that will be deliberately taken account of in the net-zero skills plan that I'm due to bring back in the autumn, and there'll be plenty of challenge, both within Government as well as outside, about what that's going to look like. Because, as I say, there's a real economic imperative as well as a whole range of things that go right across the programme for government, so you can expect more than one Minister to take an interest. I'm confident that I'll continue to face questions from you, in and outside the Chamber, about the practical progress we're making, and I recognise the importance of the issues.

I thank the Minister.

The next item is a statement by the Minister for Education and Welsh Language on 10-year Welsh in education strategic plans. I call on the Minister for Education and Welsh Language, Jeremy Miles.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. It's my pleasure to be here today to update Members on the Welsh in education strategic plans, namely the plans of our local authorities to grow Welsh-medium education over the next 10 years.

As a result of new guidance and regulations for the WESPs, local authorities have prepared new, more ambitious plans that provide opportunities to more learners, including those with additional learning needs, to access Welsh-medium education and learning opportunities. We’ve worked together with local authorities to review and revise draft plans, and I’m pleased to tell you that the process of approving the strategic plans has begun. While there is still work to do, working with local authorities, we are expecting to be on track to approve the plans by the end of July. I look forward to seeing all plans being operational from September, and am very confident that every local authority will be in a position to embark on their next 10-year WESP cycle together.

I’m delighted to tell you that all 22 of our local authorities have committed to their ambitious 10-year targets of increasing the provision of Welsh-medium education. These targets match the milestones of our Welsh language strategy, 'Cymraeg 2050: A million Welsh speakers'. Some local authorities have gone the extra mile and have set targets that exceed our expectations. We want 26 per cent of year 1 learners receiving their education through the medium of Welsh by 2026, rising to 30 per cent by 2031. This is a target that I have every confidence in achieving with these WESPs in place.

I’d like to draw attention to some of the commitments set out in these plans. There are exciting developments on the horizon. There is a clear emphasis on increasing the number of primary school settings across Wales with commitments to establish 23 new Welsh-medium primary schools and to expand 25 Welsh-medium primary schools over the next 10 years. The revised plans show that a high percentage of these developments are to be realised during the first five years of the WESPs, and that more often than not, they are made possible with the support of capital funding from the Welsh Government.

Cymraeg, the Welsh language, belongs to us all, and it’s important to recognise that everyone has their own unique journey when it comes to learning and using the language. Working together to produce the WESPs has provided some great opportunities to see just what can be achieved. The Curriculum for Wales, which allows all schools and settings to introduces the teaching of Welsh from the age of three, has provided an opportunity for us to plan differently. It’s wonderful to see so many local authorities taking advantage of these opportunities. One such example is the 10 authorities that have decided to focus on moving their schools along a language continuum by increasing the provision of Welsh available.

Having said that, we must remind ourselves that the WESPs are a planning framework that cannot be implemented without cross-sector support. I know that there has been an army of individuals representing schools, parents, and organisations at all levels who have been actively involved over the last year in developing the WESPs and the draft plans of local authorities. I’d like to thank you all for that work, and also to thank you in advance for the work still ahead of us to support the implementation of the new plans from September. Your commitment is recognised and valued. I wish also to recognise and commend the officers at the local authorities for your commitment and perseverance through one of the most challenging times that we have faced in decades. It has been admirable. Your continued engagement with each other and with us has ensured that plans to grow Welsh-medium education over the next 10 years are as ambitious as they can be. Thank you to you all.

I thank the Minister for introducing this today and giving us sight of the statement beforehand. May I start by welcoming the general direction of today's announcement? As a pupil who benefited from bilingual education, it's good to see that Welsh-medium education for primary school pupils is a priority, because it's important to catch children early if we're to develop the language.

I'd be eager to understand how the 23 new schools will be distributed across the country. Are they focused on settings where there are fewer Welsh speakers? Also, what timetable are we looking at so that these projects can go to tender and be constructed? Will you ensure that this budget increases with inflation? If projects don't happen for a few years, and inflation continues to rise, how can we ensure that this doesn't go over budget?

You mention expanding 25 other schools. How can we be confident that these expansions will be adequate? You note the aim of having 26 per cent of year 1 pupils receiving their education through the medium of Welsh from 2026. Are we on the right track at the moment to achieve this, or do some of these new schools need to be built in order to attain that target?

I've raised this next issue with you previously. If these new schools are to be built, they will also need to be staffed, of course. Now, taking those 23 new sites and ignoring the 25 expansions, as well as the new requirements of the Curriculum for Wales to increase Welsh-medium provision in English-medium schools, we will need hundreds of new Welsh-speaking teachers. How will this be delivered, and how will we ensure that we have a good range of teachers from diverse backgrounds and with diverse life experience? Has any consideration been given to how to attract mature students into teaching?

My final point relates to the transition from primary to secondary education. Although the growth in Welsh-medium education in primary schools is to be welcomed, it's more difficult to achieve this in secondary education because of the numbers and catchment areas. So, what work is under way to allow smooth transition between a pupil leaving year 6 having being educated through the medium of Welsh and starting in year 7 in an English-medium or bilingual school? We all faced challenges as we transitioned from primary to secondary, and we do need to ensure that any barriers that exist because of language change is reduced and resolved.

So, thank you for the statement once again, Minister. As I previously mentioned, the Welsh language belongs to us all across Wales. Thank you.

I thank the Member for the questions and for his support for the statement generally, and the questions are very valid. In terms of the location of the new schools, the 23 new Welsh-medium schools will be located in 15 local authorities, but they will stretch from Pembrokeshire to Merthyr to the Vale, so across Wales. And 10 local authorities are also focusing on moving current schools along the linguistic continuum. So, when the plans are published in due course, after they're officially approved, the Member will be able to see in detail what the plans are in every part of Wales, and the picture looks different in every authority. It depends on where they already are on their journey towards increasing provision. Some, in terms of the workforce question, as he asked at the end, will need to recruit additional teachers. He'll see in the plans that there is an analysis of the requirement that will be needed to ensure they succeed in the plans. That is also included in the 10-year workforce plan, and we'll be looking every two years at the current situation, so that we keep track in real time of the success in terms of recruiting larger numbers. But for other local authorities, where the emphasis is on moving schools along the continuum, it's a question of developing the skills of the current workforce for them. So, there is a mixture of needs, and he'll know that the 10-year plan does contribute significantly to the recruitment into that sector.

In terms of timescales, it's a 10-year plan, but we need to see progress in each year, and various objectives across Wales are based on periods of five years, for example, so that we see progress in the first year, for example, and then actions being taken in the longer term within that decade. Every local authority will be expected to present an action plan for the first five years and they will be monitored annually. So, they will be publishing those after publishing the WESPs.

And he asked a very important question about the role of sustainable communities for learning, namely our investment plan in the educational estate generally. I want to consider how we can make the best use of the capital programme to ensure that we support our ambition of 1 million Welsh speakers. I mentioned in the statement the £76 million fund that has been allocated for new schools and school expansion plans, but I also want to see what more we can do to ensure that progress in the strategic plans happens with the broader plans with our partners in local authorities across Wales.

Thank you, Minister, for your statement this afternoon. I welcome two things specifically, namely your honesty in this statement—your honesty about the political challenges that you faced in terms of ensuring that every local authority does fully commit to these plans, and also your honesty in terms of the ongoing challenges, the very real challenge that we're not just trying to meet demand but we're also generating demand, and what do we mean by real equal access to Welsh-medium education, because the fact that a Welsh-medium school is available doesn't necessarily mean that that is an option when there are new English-medium schools in communities, and that children would have to travel miles away to access Welsh-medium education. That isn't equal access. And neither is it equal access when you have new English-medium schools and Welsh-medium schools that desperately need investment and aren’t getting that investment.

So, there are very real challenges, and we have been discussing this. One of the things that concerns me in terms of the WESPs, and my experience of them as a councillor too, is the fact that you can get the most ambitious plan, the best plan in the world, but it’s about actually delivering those targets. That’s what we haven’t seen to date, and that’s the ongoing concern in terms of seeing reports from some county councils that do state that they’ve not delivered against their targets, and the plans don’t demonstrate exactly how they’re going to do that.

Time and again they say that the demand doesn’t exist, without ever asking why the demand doesn’t exist. Because if additional learning needs aren’t met, if equal access in terms of transport isn’t delivered, if that school isn’t within walking distance of the community, then the demand won’t be there, because it will be an ongoing battle, and I do think we need to go back to those local authorities. I think it’s disgraceful that some local authorities have no intention of creating new Welsh-medium primary schools over the next decade. What are we going to do about that? You’ve just said that it’s 15 local authorities who are committed to this. This is disastrous news for the Welsh language, and I’m greatly saddened about this if we are serious about reaching a million Welsh speakers.

I would like to have some transparency as to where exactly the 23 schools will be. We’ve also seen Carmarthenshire County Council committing that 10 English-medium schools will transition to Welsh-medium provision. That’s to be welcomed, but what about those areas where there isn’t access to Welsh-medium schools, and Welsh-medium secondary schools particularly?

There is so much to welcome, of course, and I don’t want to be entirely critical. Things such as the investment in the cylchoedd meithrin—that is a major step forward. But as has been said to me recently, there is a new nursery being established in Cilfynydd in light of the loss of Ysgol Gynradd Gymraeg Pont Sion Norton in that area of Pontypridd. It’ll be full from September onwards, but where is the Welsh-medium primary school so that those children can continue their journey, because there’s a risk that they will be lost to Welsh-medium education if the pathway isn’t fair and equitable?

Well, the easiest thing in the world is to suggest that things are not ambitious enough, but it’s just not true. It’s just not true what the Member said. What’s your definition of ambition if not to recognise that these are the first WESPs since 2014 that are driven by a target calculated by the Government, not by the local authorities? So, if that isn’t a sign of ambition, and the fact that we have set what we think is the objective, and that all local authorities have accepted that objective—. If every authority reaches the lowest part of the range, we’ll be on track to reach the objective in 2050.

So, I don’t agree at all that there is insufficient ambition in these plans. Work has been happening to ensure to ensure that they are ambitious. But the Member is right to say that this is a tool, if you like, for planning, and we need to deliver the objectives in the plans. That's entirely true, of course. I don't accept that we haven't had success so far; success has happened across Wales, but it's not happening in every authority, I do accept that as well. And we need to ensure that the plans that are agreed are also delivered. And we'll be doing everything we can as a Government to ensure that.

I've already mentioned in my answer to Sam Kurtz one of the things that we want to do, namely to ensure how the investment plan can reflect not just the broader plans that councils have but ensure that growth happens in terms of the strategic plans jointly with the broader plans that they have, so that the situation is equitable rather than one being prioritised over the other. But I do accept also that the legislative measures are not available for us to be able to enforce some of these outcomes. That's why we're having discussions with you as a party, as part of the co-operation agreement, to ensure what more we can do in terms of legislation to strengthen the statutory framework that underpins these plans.

You are right to say also that the geographical element can be challenging. The current strategic plans happen on the basis of a local authority area in its entirety, rather than at a community level, a lower level than that. So, what more can we do to strengthen our ability to plan on that basis? But there has been a geographical element in the discussions that have already happened. And certainly I think, when the Member sees the final plans, she'll be able to see that.

You asked the question why all local authorities aren't opening a new school. Well, some local authorities allow 90 per cent and more of their children to go to a Welsh-medium school already. So, it's a question of demographics. So, it's much more complex than that criticism suggests. But it is important to ensure that we do keep a watching brief to ensure that progress does happen, and so I have been clear that we need progress in every year. So, there will be annual monitoring on the basis of the action plans that will be published by the authorities after these WESPs, and they will be available to all of us to scrutinise and to ensure that that progress does happen from year to year.

Thank you, Minister, for your statement today. I'm proud of the record of achievement that my local authority has for delivering Welsh-medium education in Cynon Valley and the ways in which they've taken advantage of Welsh Government funding to increase provision, with, for example, a £12.5 million expansion of Ysgol Gyfun Rhydywaun currently under way, and the new £4 million purpose-built meithrin set to open next week at Ysgol Gynradd Gymraeg Aberdâr. All of this is essential if we're serious about meeting our challenging goal of a million Welsh speakers by 2050.

Last week, I visited a newly formed Ti a Fi group at Cilfynydd, which is also set to open its own meithrin in a few weeks' time. The key issue raised with me there was the challenge of finding qualified Welsh-speaking childcare staff, which I know from our previous interactions Welsh Government are looking to address. As part of this, the specific issue of a lack of continuity between the qualifications required to become a Welsh-speaking childcare worker and the qualifications required to become a Welsh-speaking teaching assistant was raised with me, with both being entirely separate courses with no easy way to move from one to the other. While accepting the fact that there needs to be progression between these courses, will the Minister commit to expanding this interface to see whether more can be done to streamline the process and make it easier for qualified Welsh-speaking childcare assistants to become teaching assistants and vice versa?

I thank Vikki Howells for that question, and it is something that I know she feels passionately about, and we've discussed this issue one-to-one outside this Chamber as well. She is right to say that it is very important to ensure that the provision that we have for the early years allows and encourages parents to choose education in all periods for their children through the medium of Welsh. Significant investment is happening in order to expand the number of Welsh-medium provisions over the term of this Senedd—some 150 extra provisions. But I do accept the challenge that she lays down, that we need to ensure a smooth journey to qualify to teach in whichever period of education, statutory and early years. And one of the questions we're looking at at present is the language continuum in terms of qualifications, and understanding where on that common pathway linguistic qualifications fall, so that we have a clearer understanding of what's available in order to train teachers, to train adults generally, to teach Welsh, and also the qualifications that are available in the school. So, that work is complex, it is innovative in this Welsh context, but it has just started. I'll have more to say about that, hopefully, in due course.

Finally, Luke Fletcher.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I'm sure the Minister can guess what I'm about to draw his attention to. I raised with you last week my concerns with the speed at which Bridgend are going in relation to Welsh-medium education. Looking at the Welsh in education strategic plan published by Bridgend County Borough Council, they state that the Welsh Government has set the target of increasing Welsh-medium learners in the borough from 8 per cent to 14 to 18 per cent over the course of 10 years. I would have liked to have seen a higher target. I'm sure he was probably expecting me to say that, but I do think there are some valid concerns amongst campaigners on how serious BCBC will be in reaching its targets.

You only need to look at the situation now: significant investments in expanding English-medium schools, one school receiving £900,000; my old primary school moving to a new site, but its current site being turned into another English-medium school. Unless areas like Bridgend push harder and faster, then the Government will struggle to hit its targets. I'd be interested to learn from the Minister what incentives are there for local authorities to improve the situation, but, more importantly, what will happen if local authorities don't reach their targets, because, since the very first targets were set, very little has happened in areas like Bridgend.

And you're probably wondering why I'm asking this question in English—it's to make the point that the language is for everybody. My family chose to send me to a Welsh school; I've come from a non-Welsh-speaking family. I want all parents to have that choice, if they so want, to do that. But that can only happen if they're able to access Welsh-medium education in the first instance.

Well, I agree with the Member's last sentiment, certainly, and that is the underlying principle behind the entire enterprise that we're engaged in in relation to the Welsh in education strategic plans. I note the Member has got his disappointment in early. I think perhaps the other way of looking at this is that each authority, including Bridgend, has agreed to an ambitious plan. But, as I mentioned in my answer to Heledd Fychan earlier, it's incumbent on all authorities—that includes Bridgend, but every other authority as well—to commit to delivering those plans, and we have—. I've described the granular monitoring that will take place year on year to make sure that is happening, both from a staff perspective but also from an investment perspective, and I will be looking at what more we can do with our sustainable communities for learning plan to make sure that we see progress in relation to delivering on the WESPs alongside any authority's broader ambitions in relation to education in their own particular area.

But I accept—though I have accepted already—that there is a limit to the range of powers that the Government currently has where those plans aren't met. So, I am keen, as I know is he and his party, to look at what more we can do in that area in the event that we don't see the progress we want to see. But I would invite him to embark on the journey over the next 10 years with a sense of optimism, and to make sure that we all work together to see that these plans actually are delivered.

And a late request to speak from Huw Irranca-Davies.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer; I apologise.

I simply want to come in on the back of Luke's comments there, because there is a fair degree of confidence that the Minister has expressed in Bridgend, and also in the Rhondda Cynon Taf patch of my constituency as well, in their WESP plans going forward. But I met with Meurig, the award-winning headteacher, the other day, and I think he would really welcome a visit, alongside Huw David, the council leader, as well to talk about the plans and how they pan out, not just in the next 12 months, five years, but the 10 years, so we can really realise that ambition. But I have to say these are all building blocks. It is a journey. It was great over the last year simply to see two new Mudiad Meithrin opening within the borough, funded by Welsh Government, planned with the local Welsh-speaking community, with the local authority as well. But it is a journey. But it would be great to have you down there sometime and discuss with all of us as Members and the local authority how we can achieve these targets.

I thank Huw Irranca-Davies for that question and that invitation, which I'd be happy to accept. Meurig in his comments at the awards on Sunday was very clear about the need for making sure that every single child in Wales that would like to have access to Welsh education has that, and I certainly share that ambition, as I know does Huw Irranca-Davies as well.

Thank you, Minister.

In accordance with Standing Order 12.24, unless a Member objects, the three motions under items 6, 8 and 9, the Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016 regulations 2022, will be grouped for debate but with separate votes. Item 7 has been withdrawn.

Any objections? [Interruption.] No, do you want to speak to them all together? [Interruption.] Yes. So, you're not objecting to the grouping. No objections to the grouping.

I call on the Minister for Climate Change, Julie James.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. There are three sets of regulations being debated under this motion today. Members will be aware that I had originally also tabled a set of consequential amendments to primary legislation as part of this package of subordinate legislation, but, given the number of reporting points received from the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, I have withdrawn that statutory instrument so that the necessary corrections can be made. I will retable it, hopefully later this week, so that it can be debated as soon as we return in September.

Turning to the three SIs that we are considering today, I will take a few moments to explain as concisely as I can the purpose and effect of each of these, although Members will appreciate that, as is often the case with subordinate legislation, some of the provisions are quite complex and technical, so please indicate if there's anything that's unclear and I will do my best to clarify it.

I will start with the Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016 (Housing Association Tenancies: Fundamental Provisions) Regulations 2022. This SI will ensure that housing association tenancies that currently benefit from rent protection will retain that rent protection when converted into occupation contracts.

Next, the Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016 (Amendment of Schedule 12) Regulations 2022. Schedule 12 sets out arrangements for current tenancies and licences that will convert into occupation contracts when the 2016 Act comes into force. The purpose of Schedule 12 is to ensure that this transition is as seamless as possible and that the parties to existing tenancies and licences are treated fairly when their tenancy or licence converts into an occupation contract, with the correct balance being struck in respect of both parties' rights and obligations. To this end, the amendments being made by this SI include protecting the existing rights of 16 and 17-year-olds who currently hold certain types of tenancy or licence; provisions ensuring, amongst other things, that current tenancies and licences relating to supported accommodation will convert into occupation contracts and that any tenancy or licence relating to supported accommodation that has already been in place for more than six months cannot convert into a standard supported contract; providing for starter tenancies to automatically convert into introductory standard contracts; ensuring that a landlord is only liable to pay compensation in relation to any failure to provide the contract holder with information on the protection of any deposit paid in relation to a converted contract that was, before conversion, an assured shorthold tenancy; ensuring that where a converted contract was, before conversion, an assured shorthold tenancy that included a rent variation term, that term will be carried over into the converted contract and not be supplanted by the rent variation term at section 123 of the 2016 Act; protecting as far as possible the rights of any current holder of an assured agricultural occupancy; and ensuring that for fixed-term tenancies, where the fixed term ends after 1 December and the contract becomes periodic, the six-month no-fault landlord's notice will apply to that contract.

I call on the Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, Huw Irranca-Davies.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd, and thank you, Minister. We considered this suite of regulations during our meeting yesterday and laid our report straight after.

Thank you, Minister, for your kind comments about the work that we've done and the engagement that you've had with us on this. In respect of your opening remarks, we do love 'technical and complex'. The suite of regulations today is part of the third tranche of subordinate legislation required to support the implementation of the Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016.

Our technical reporting point across all three regulations concerned a drafting matter related to the Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016 (Amendment) Regulations 2022, namely that the provision of the Act that requires regulations to be subject to the affirmative procedure has been omitted from the preamble and the headnote. We note that the Welsh Government response agrees with this point and states that as the error is technical in nature, a corrected version will be used on making.

We noted that each set of regulations was not subject to consultation and we raised these as merits points. The Minister explained, in response, that this was because the amendments again were technical in nature. Specifically, as regards the amendment regulations and the amendment of Schedule 12 regulations, the Minister told us that that this was also due to the fact that none of the amendments they contain make any substantive changes to policy positions set out in primary legislation. Our report also highlighted that several issues addressed by the amendments were raised with the Welsh Government by external stakeholders seeking clarification on the application of the legislation and were discussed with them.

The regulations subject to the debate today are all being made using Henry VIII powers, as they amend primary legislation. In raising this as a merits point for the amendment regulations and the amendment of Schedule 12 regulations, we drew attention to the Stage 1 report of our predecessor committee in the fifth Senedd on the Renting Homes (Amendment) (Wales) Bill, which sought clarification on the justification for the inclusion of Henry VIII powers in that Bill. The clarification provided by the Minister at that time is included in the respective reports.

We have also reported on the Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016 (Consequential Amendments) Regulations 2022, and our report raised a significant number of points. Whilst I acknowledge, as the Minister indeed said in her opening remarks, that they have been withdrawn from today’s agenda and will not be voted on today, it may be helpful if the Minister could clarify whether there is any impact on this suite of regulations and the implementation of the 2016 Act as a consequence of the withdrawal. Diolch yn fawr iawn, Llywydd.

I'll refer Members to my own declaration of interest form in terms of property ownership. Thank you.

I will start by referring to the housing association tenancies fundamental provisions. Now, whilst I note there were no matters of special interest to the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, I am pretty disappointed that there has been not too much consultation with our much-valued housing associations. On one hand, I acknowledge that these are only consequential technical amendments, but they will have a direct impact on housing associations.

However, the Minister will be pleased to learn that we do not object to subsection 2A. We will be abstaining on these. In fact, I think it reasonable to expect that where a housing association tenancy is a secure or periodic standard contract, the rent payable to the landlord may be increased from the beginning of any rental period by a written notice specifying the date not later than four weeks.

I can't see how subsection 2B is fair. If we look at housing association properties, in my own constituency, in Aberconwy, Cartrefi Conwy have a wide-ranging portfolio, but some flats and houses are exactly the same. So, therefore, whilst I acknowledge that the effect of subsection 2B would only be temporary, meaning that a notice of increase does not take effect if before the date specified in the notice the contract holder gives notice to end the contract, should the tenant still be resident for a period after the date when the rent should have increased, I believe, on a point of fairness, that the tenant should still be liable for the higher rent, or you're going to have the people who are staying on actually paying more rent than anyone who serves their notice. So, given that there are elements of the housing association tenancies that I agree and disagree with, we will be abstaining on these regs today.

Turning to the two other regs, amendment and amendment to Schedule 12, I am concerned about the amendment to Schedule 8A. Schedule 8A lists those types of standard contracts that can be ended with two months' notice under a landlord's notice or break clause, rather than the six-month notice period that applies in relation to all other standard occupation contracts. I actually believe that landlords should be able to end standard occupation contracts within two months, not six, so we cannot support the amendment to Schedule 8A. So, we will be voting against, but I really do think there is an urgent need for you, Minister, to perhaps more widely—.

I will acknowledge that we had a very good meeting last week with Propertymark and other agents, but we've got some really valued private sector landlords, registered social housing landlords, providing properties, and the last thing I want to see is people in my own constituency and across Wales losing out because private landlords are deciding to go into a more lucrative holiday-let sector, losing out and ending up in temporary accommodation. We have far too many people now in temporary accommodation, and not for just a few weeks, but for several months, and pushing people out of the rented sector is going to just make things worse. I spoke with a stakeholder today, even, with 250 properties in Wales, 100 in England, who is now considering just getting rid of the portfolio in Wales and moving over to England, because he finds that the regulations in Wales now are becoming so top heavy that it's just—. They can go and do it elsewhere in the UK and provide good-quality housing.

Mabon ap Gwynfor.

Thank you very much, Llywydd, and I also want to declare an interest that's on the public record too.

This discussion comes at a time when the housing crisis is getting worse and worse, day by day. Renters and landlords alike live in worry for this growing crisis, with landlords fearing many will sell up and stop renting homes due to the new regulations, and tenants facing the threat of eviction. So, let's have a reality check.

At the moment, roughly 500 people a month can be moved into permanent accommodation. With Ukrainian refugees as well, there are around 10,000 people trying to find a permanent home in temporary accommodation at the moment. Indeed, research from the Bevan Foundation recently suggested that a rising number of people in Wales were at risk of homelessness because of a shortage of affordable properties. Data collected from 1,775 rental adverts across Wales indicated that only 24, or just 1.4 per cent, were at a price fully covered by the housing allowance. There were previously thought to be 130,000 landlords, but notwithstanding the response of the First Minister earlier to a question today, Rent Smart Wales say that the real figure is thought to be only 90,000. The private rented sector is so bad, the number of properties available is dropping all the time. That's one of the reasons why we're seeing rents go up so much; it's down to supply and demand.

The journey of the renting homes Act through the Senedd has been marked by delay after delay, while renters have been left to fend for themselves in an increasingly hostile climate. In reaction to the delay in implementation, Shelter Cymru said the delay had been a great surprise with no-fault evictions doubling over the past 12 months, primarily due to house sales. In this regard, the toxic combination of a UK house-price bubble and major rules may be extra impetus to some landlords who are already thinking of getting out of the game, is what we are told.

While we'll be voting in favour of the regulations today, because we're certainly supportive of the Act and want to see it implemented successfully, we also need to be clear that the Act doesn't go far enough. We welcome the commitments in relation to housing in the co-operation agreement and are determined to work collaboratively to deliver for tenants across Wales. We are moving, albeit slowly, in the right direction in Wales, and it's up to the Government to ensure that help reaches those who need it most as soon as practically possible.

The Welsh Government needs to look into the banning of huge requirements for renters, such as huge deposits, or the need for wealthy guarantors, which prevent them from securing accommodation. Further to this, Government should help establish tenancy unions for knowledge and support to help renters, enabling people to know their rights and access them. Most of all, the Welsh Government needs to address supply and affordability issues. We need to build tens of thousands of social homes. While vital work is under way to regulate phosphate levels in rivers, one unintended consequence is that it has effectively brought social housing development in affected areas to a standstill.

The Minister to reply to the debate, Julie James.

Diolch, Llywydd. In conclusion, I would like to thank Members for their support, I hope, in voting for these. I'm very disappointed, but not surprised, that the Tories don't see fit to support amendments designed to protect tenants' rights—no surprise there, really. Although it is disappointing that we can't get consensus on this.

Llywydd, we are now very nearly there in terms of implementation of the renting homes Act. I will shortly be making three further implementation SIs, which, again, are technical in nature, and are being made via the Senedd's negative procedure, so will not be subject to Senedd debate, and I'll publish a further written statement explaining the purpose and effect of these.

As I mentioned earlier, I will also shortly be relaying the consequential amendments SI with the necessary corrections made to that instrument, hopefully later this week, so that we can debate that last SI in September. And just to confirm that there will be no impact on the implementation date as a result of the withdrawal of the consequential amendments regulations, nor is there any impact on the three that are here today, because they're stand-alone SIs implementing different parts of the renting homes Act.

And then, just addressing some of the issues that Members have raised in particular on these SIs: housing association tenancy regulations are about a relatively small sub-set of tenancies, and the regulations are about preserving the existing arrangements, Janet, and not about changing them. I would have thought you'd welcome that, actually. These particular amendments are about preserving the existing arrangements, and not having the renting homes Act bite on those existing arrangements.

On six-month notices, our principle is that someone not at fault should have at least six months' notice of possession. Schedule 8A sets out some limited exceptions, for example, where there is a service occupancy for employment purposes only.

In terms of private landlords threatening to leave the sector, this is something that's raised with me every single time we discuss housing. It's just no worse here than it is anywhere else. Interestingly, the UK media are reporting a similar anticipated exodus of private landlords in England as a result of the house price rises there, although, of course, in England it's impossible to know, because they don't actually have an equivalent to Rent Smart Wales. And so, we're actually in a better position here, because we do have contact with all our landlords, and we know where they are.

Just in terms of the stakeholders that we've engaged with, they include the National Residential Landlords Association, Propertymark and Community Housing Cymru, representing associations. My officials attend regular meetings with those bodies, and obviously NRLA and Propertymark are in the PRS. On the consultation point, the regulations focus primarily on preserving and protecting existing rights, so the consultation is on the wider Act.

The proposal is to agree the motion under item 6. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. Therefore, I will defer voting under this item until voting time.

The proposal is to agree the motion under item 8. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. Therefore, I defer voting once again.

The final question is that the proposal is to agree the motion under item 9. Does any Member object? [Objection.]

Nothing if not consistent, Darren Millar.

So, we will defer voting under item 9 as well.

Item 10 is next. These are the Corporate Joint Committees (General) (No. 2) (Wales) Regulations 2022, and I call on the Minister for Finance and Local Government to move the motion—Rebecca Evans.

Diolch, Llywydd. I move the motion. The Corporate Joint Committees (General) (No. 2) (Wales) Regulations 2022, along with a handful of minor ancillary statutory instruments that will be laid shortly, represent the final substantive tranche of legislation to establish the legal framework for CJCs. I'm grateful to Members for their consideration of these regulations and the previous three tranches of legislation that have provided for these important new public bodies.

The regulations before us today include provision applying the local government performance and governance regime to CJCs. They also deal with their overview and scrutiny. At the end of June, CJCs' duties commenced, which have big impacts for local authorities and people living in their areas. The CJCs are required to prepare a strategic development plan and a regional transport plan. The CJCs are also now able to exercise a power to do anything to enhance or promote the economic well-being of their areas. This makes it possible to bring city and growth deal governance arrangements alongside other strategic planning for the region. CJCs represent a consistent and accountable mechanism to support regional collaboration where it makes sense to do so. How a CJC delivers its functions and operates will largely be for determination by its members. The flexibility enables CJCs to differ between geographical areas to meet the specific needs and ambitions of their region. I will shortly be meeting each of the four CJC chairs and members to hear about the progress that they have made and to understand their ambition for regional collaboration. Diolch.

In terms of these regulations put forward on CJCs, we certainly support that closer link with local authorities, and so, from our side of the benches today, we will be supporting the motion.

Does the Minister wish to respond?

Do you wish to respond?

Only to say thank you very much to the Welsh Conservatives for their support today. I'm grateful to Members for their interest in this. As this is the final substantive tranche of legislation to establish the legal framework for CJCs, I just want to recognise all the work that's gone in by officials in getting us to this point, and also to the stakeholders who have helped us so greatly on the journey.

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

Item 11 is next, and that's the Restricted Roads (20 mph Speed Limit) (Wales) Order 2022. I call on the Minister for Climate Change to move the motion—Julie James.

Diolch, Llywydd. I move the motion. Section 81(1) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 provides that

'It shall not be lawful for a person to drive a motor vehicle on a restricted road at a speed exceeding 30 miles per hour.'

Subject to provisions of section 82 and 84(3) of the Act,

'a road is a restricted road for the purposes of section 81 of this Act if (a) in England and Wales, there is provided on it a system of street lighting furnished by means of lamps placed not more than 200 yards apart.'

Section 81(2) of the Act enables the national authority, being the Welsh Ministers in relation to Wales, pursuant to section 142(1) of the Act, by Order, to increase or reduce the rate of speed fixed by section 81(1), either as originally enacted or as varied under that subsection. Section 81(3)(aa) of the Act provides that such an Order,

'if made by the Welsh Ministers, is to be made by statutory instrument and approved by a resolution of Senedd Cymru.'

Before the Welsh Ministers make an Order under section 81(2) of the Act, they are required by section 81(5) of the Act to consult with the Secretary of State, which has been done. Once the Order comes into force on 17 September 2023, as intended, the general speed limit for restricted roads will reduce from 30 mph to 20 mph in relation to Wales. The provisions of the Act are not otherwise amended by the Order.

The traffic authority for our highway, the Welsh Ministers in relation to trunk roads and special roads and the relevant county or county borough council in relation to other roads, will therefore retain the power under section 82(2) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 to direct

'that a road which is a restricted road for the purposes of section 81 of this Act shall cease to be a restricted road for those purposes'

with the result that a general speed limit for restricted roads would not apply to such a road. In addition, while an Order under section 81(a) of the Act imposing a speed limit on a road is in force, that road shall not be a restricted road for the purposes of section 81 of the Act, meaning that the speed limit imposed by that Order would apply in any such circumstances. Subject to these provisions, the default speed limit for a restricted road in Wales will reduce from 30 mph to 20 mph.

The Order seeks to address the issues of road safety and the effects from vehicles and roads on the environment and communities. It seeks to improve road safety, encourage a shift to more active forms of travel, and improve the local economy and environment in Welsh communities. The delay in the coming into force of the Order is intended to enable traffic authorities to prepare for the new legislation, to publicise the proposals and to enable appropriate amendments to be made to traffic signs legislation. The proposal to introduce a slower speed limit also aligns with Wales's well-being goals and other strategic priorities, such as improving air quality and carbon reduction.

There is overwhelming evidence that lower speeds results in fewer collisions and a reduced severity of injuries, and consistent evidence that casualties are reduced when 20 mph limits are introduced. On average, 80 people a year die on Welsh roads, 80 families whose lives will never be the same again. Just published are the 2021 accident statistics, and during this year, over half of all road accidents—53 per cent—occurred on 30 mph roads. Pedestrians are five times more likely to be killed at 30 mph compared to 20 mph, and 52 per cent of all casualties were killed on 30 mph roads during 2019. Moving to a—[Interruption.] Yes, sure.

I also looked at those police statistics. Did you notice that 3 per cent of the accidents occur on 20 mph roads, but they only account for 2.5 per cent of roads in Wales? So, actually, the accident rate is higher by 0.5 per cent and pretty much aligned with the accident rate on 30 mph roads.

There are some issues around how you use statistics, obviously, Mark, but actually, if you use the mileage of the road compared to that, that doesn't entirely hold.

The evidence shows us that moving to a national 20 mph speed limit for restricted roads would make them safer, save lives and encourage more of us to walk and cycle. Research has shown that public opinion will support the change, and, where a 20 mph speed limit has been implemented, support has grown. There is also evidence that 20 mph limits lead to more walking and cycling, which is a priority for the Welsh Government. Introducing a slower speed limit where people live will help us all to make walking and cycling the most natural way of getting around for shorter distances and weaning ourselves away from relying on private cars. More walking and cycling along with slower traffic speeds will produce more cohesive and safe communities for people to live, work and socialise and is therefore beneficial for people's mental as well as their physical health.

This is not a blanket 20 mph change, and we are working closely with local authorities to identify potential roads where speed limits will be reduced to 20 mph and those that should remain at 30 mph. The presumption to a default residential speed limit of 20 mph is a programme for government commitment.

Will you take an intervention?

Yes.

I think that's a—. I'm sorry, I'm sure you want to get on with things, but I think that's a really important—[Laughter.] It was the way she was looking at me then. I think that's a really important point that residents are listened to, and I give these proposals a very cautious welcome. I think, on the whole, residents in Caerphilly, in certain areas like Rudry, Bargoed and Castle View, will welcome them. But residents must be listened to, and if you could confirm that these proposals will still give residents the opportunity to be heard where they feel 20 mph is not appropriate for particular roads.

Yes, indeed; I'll get on to that shortly. [Laughter.]

The 20 mph programme supports 'Llwybr Newydd', the Wales transport strategy, by making it easier and safer for people to walk and cycle. The process that local authorities have to go through to bring in lower limits, the traffic regulation Orders, is slow, complex and expensive. Despite millions of pounds invested previously, only around 2.5 per cent of the road network is currently subject to a 20 mph speed limit. We estimate that this will rise to 35 per cent when the policy is implemented. Rather than introducing it street by street, authority by authority, we are being bold and choosing the smarter way, to introduce it for everyone at the same time. This change in the default speed limit by way of legislation offers a consistent approach across Wales to bring it in on restricted roads in Wales.

Not all restricted roads are deemed to be suitable to be reduced to 20 mph and an exceptions process developed can be used by highway authorities as guidance to assist them to identify which roads or stretches of road should remain at 30 mph. We are continuing to evolve these exceptions collaboratively as we move through the process by working with local authorities. We've refined the original proposal from the taskforce group for the first phase settlements, and we are now working with pilot areas to review their experience before the next iteration of the guidance in advance of the national roll-out. But, ultimately, local knowledge will be key, and local residents will have a say, of course, in how their street should be.

The future of our towns and cities depends on our ability to move around sustainably and on solutions that have a positive impact on public health, the environment and communities. That is why, Llywydd, we will use the principle that walking, cycling and active travel must remain the best options for short urban journeys, and a 20 mph default speed limit will help achieve this. The introduction of a national 20 mph speed limit would be an important and far-reaching policy. If passed, Wales would be the first country in the UK to introduce the change.

We are asking you all to be part of this change and make our communities understand the wider benefits of 20 mph. This change is a generational one and will need time to embed. It will need to be accompanied by an important communication and marketing campaign and behaviour change initiatives. Achieving behavioural change is challenging, but Wales has previously shown that we can do it successfully with policies such as organ donation, the banning of smoking in public places and limiting the use of plastic bags. It does, however, require a collaborative effort between agencies, local authorities and by communities. We need to bring speeds down so that lower limits and slower driving are normalised. Diolch.

The Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee. Huw Irranca-Davies.

Diolch, Llywydd. Far from the weighty policy matters here, we've got some technical and merits points to raise in terms of making Welsh law accessible first. The Order is made in exercise of the power in section 81(2) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. Article 2(2) of the Order provides that the reference in section 81(1) of the Act to '30 miles per hour' is to be interpreted as a reference to '20 miles per hour'. So, as such, when the Order comes into force, it will be necessary for a person to locate both the Act and the Order in order to understand the default speed limit on restricted roads in Wales. This is to do with accessibility of the law. We asked the Welsh Government whether it had considered using the power in section 81(2) to instead make a textual amendment to the speed limit in section 81(1), which would assist in making Welsh law in this area as accessible as possible to road users.

In its response, the Welsh Government has said it accepts the need to make Welsh law as accessible as possible, however the drafting approach has been driven by vires issues. We were told that the wording of the power in section 81 is not explicit as to whether textual modification of the rate of speed is authorised. Further, there is no express ancillary power to make consequential changes to the section to deal with differentiation in the rate of speed across Wales, Scotland and England. So, the Welsh Government considers that if the UK Parliament had intended for there to be such ancillary powers, it could have included them at any of the times in recent years where amendments have been made to section 81 of the 1984 Act, including via the Wales Act 2017.

To make the textual modification approach viable at a practical level, the Welsh Government believes that the Welsh, Scottish and UK Governments would need to agree on the approach and keep each other informed of any changes when they occur, which the Welsh Government considers would be difficult to achieve in practice. Given that the recently agreed new inter-governmental relations structures are intended to provide for better inter-governmental working, we would be grateful for further clarity on this point, as to why this couldn't work. Now, this is particularly important given that in response to our merits point, the second merits point we raised, the Welsh Government confirmed the Department for Transport and the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency have been fully briefed about the Welsh Government plans, and plans are in place for driving test requirements and the printed highway code to be amended accordingly.

Our third merits point notes that no formal justice impact assessment has been undertaken for this Order. The justification for this is set out in the regulatory impact assessment, which concludes that there will only be a slight impact on the criminal justice system. As our report highlights, the assessment states that a number of factors have influenced the Welsh Government's conclusions, and the Welsh Government has confirmed to us that it has taken into account the fact that there are further eligibility requirements for speed awareness courses other than simply recorded speed, and that there are differences between a lowered speed limit put in place in a defined pilot area and a national default speed limit that might have an impact on the number and the type of speeding offences committed.

Let me say from the outset to everyone here that I am 100 per cent in favour of taking action to improve road safety here in Wales. The Welsh Conservative group really have no problem in seeing reduced speed limits on roads where there is large pedestrian activity, such as outside busy places of worship, schools, playgrounds and high streets where cars are permitted. As Edmund King, the president of the AA, said,

'20 mph limits work best where they’re needed—outside schools or hospitals, or places where other vulnerable road users may be encountered.'

End of quote. However, I alongside the Welsh Conservatives, strongly believe that the speed limit should remain at 30 mph here in Wales. It is evident from the sheer number of letters and e-mails that I and my colleagues have been inundated with over the past few weeks that the trialling of the 20 mph speed restrictions is causing major problems on busy commuter roads, and is undeniably a problem faced by communities all across Wales. From Buckley and Mold in the north to Caldicot and Abergavenny in the south, people have contacted me in their droves to express their concerns. The 20 mph speed limit has caused traffic congestion, frustration for drivers, and ill feeling amongst residents—quite the opposite of what the intentions are behind this policy.

The Department for Transport published a report on 20 mph speed limits in 2018. They concluded that the 20 mph speed zones have made no impact on road safety, and drivers have only reduced their speed by 0.7 mph in these zones. Also, speed was not the most common factor involved in road accidents. The biggest contributing factor to accidents was, in fact, a failure to observe on the part of both motorists and pedestrians. There is also the potential additional hazard that drivers that are frustrated by traffic congestion and slow speeds will exceed limits and drive without due care as soon as they leave these 20 mph zones.

Sustrans have said that a default 20 mph speed limit could save around six lives per year, but we can do more. Let me just tell you how: it's a fact that in Wales we have the highest percentage of drink-drive casualties in Britain, according to Department for Transport figures. Official figures show that drink driving rose from 110 to 130 in Wales from 2019 to 2022. Personally, I find it very hard to take on board any stats during the COVID lockdown because it's not a true representation of what our roads have actually looked like over the years. So, Minister, as much as I believe each life is important, you don't have to be a mathematical genius to see how many lives would be saved if the Welsh Government provided more funding, more resources and more guidance to support and combat drink driving. The UK Government has invested nearly £20 million into the THINK! drink-drive campaign since 2007, helping to save almost 1,000 lives. Why not invest some of that money, say by freezing the road improvement programme, into tackling this problem?

Are you taking an intervention from—?

No, not at this moment.

That's okay.

And I really fail to see how air quality will be improved by forcing higher fuel consumption, thereby creating more emissions. Vehicles today are designed for maximum efficiency and fuel economy at particular speeds, and it will not benefit the environment if cars are stuck on gridlocked roads pumping out pollution day after day.

Presiding Officer, more people die on roads from drink driving, so I'd be 100 per cent behind the Welsh Government delivering an effective plan to discourage people from doing so and ultimately stop driving recklessly once and for all. There is a long-standing suspicion that the Deputy Minister's pilot scheme was insincere and just a simple smokescreen for plans that were already a done deal. How can anyone be certain that the results of these scheme are even accurate when they were conducted during lockdown?

I urge the Welsh Government today and everybody here who's going to be casting their vote to listen to the concerns of local residents and businesses, owners of various properties as well those who are on the roads consistently before permanently imposing these damaging and counterproductive 20 mph limits on communities across Wales and think long and hard. Twenty is not plenty. Minister, if you're really serious about road safety, then bring in the 20 mph in areas that they are really needed and please spend the money on deterring drink drivers off our roads once and for all. Thank you.

I welcome these plans. Introducing speed limits of 20 mph on these roads that we're talking about will make our communities safer and will make them cleaner and healthier places to live. This will also save lives. Every life saved is more important than anything that we can measure or evaluate. Avoiding any bereavement is a great thing and a good thing.

These measures will also help us reduce the dominant role of cars in our lives and our communities, our streets will be more attractive, and the atmosphere will be safer for bikes and pedestrians, never mind people with disabilities and young children. And these measures will certainly help our environment. Less fuel will be used, there will be less congestion on the streets, and this will improve levels of air pollution and noise pollution.

Having said this, there are some concerns that have been mentioned about the fact that a blanket approach is being used. There are places that currently have speed limits of 30 mph that are not residential areas, such as a road that connects housing estates or those on the outskirts of villages and towns. I would like to know more about the exceptions that can be made for valid reasons and also about the resources that will be available to make those exceptions, while adhering closely to this principle of reducing speed in the places where people live and children play. Some communities on trunk roads are concerned that they would not be captured under this protection, such as those along the A470 or the A487. Minister, they need the same level of safety. This is true across Wales. Could you please provide us with information in response to this concern?

Now, I know that the Institute for Welsh Affairs proposes that the new restrictions, as we have heard already, will reduce regional inequalities and will improve inclusion in communities. Could you give you more information on this, please? I've heard from constituents in Monmouth, where the new rules have been in place for some time, and I would like to know whether lessons can be learned from that pilot. Some drivers are still getting used to the new limit; is it possible for some time to be given before penalties are introduced in order to help people become accustomed to this? Is it possible for the signs to be clear? In some places in Monmouth there are signs that contradict each other on the same road—some signs say 20 mph and others say 30 mph still.

Finally, Minister, when you respond, could you say what steps you would take to encourage ordinary people to understand why this change is being introduced? I know when you talked earlier you talked about behaviour change, and how important that is so that people feel that this is something that is happening for them rather than something that is just happening to them. I would appreciate hearing more from you about that. As I said, some concerns, but generally, of course, we do welcome this greatly. Thank you.

As the Minister will be aware, I represent the community of Buckley that's taken part in the pilot scheme for these proposed changes, and what's important to me, Minister, is that we do learn the lessons from this trial. It's critical that we learn lessons from Buckley and the other areas across Wales. But it has to be about a mature relationship between local authorities, who understand their local communities and the communities they serve—in this particular case, Flintshire County Council—and the Welsh Government.

I must say, the correspondence I have received reaches far further than just Buckley itself, it reaches right across the community of Alyn and Deeside, which I represent. Now, my residents have genuine concerns about many arterial roads. Many do support 20 mph on most roads, including housing estates, near schools et cetera, but they do want exemptions for those main and arterial roads, and I understand and share these concerns. I have to be frank about that. So, Minister, if we are going to make 20 mph a default position—not a blanket position, but a default position—we do need to find a way that local authorities are empowered to identify these particular roads. An example of a particular road is Liverpool Road in Buckley in my own constituency. They have those powers, they apply those exemptions, where they deem necessary. So, can you confirm clearly and on the record today here in the Chamber that local authorities will have the power to do this with, and in communication with, the local communities who have that local knowledge? Diolch yn fawr.

I'm grateful to be able to contribute in today's motion on the Restricted Roads (20 mph Speed Limit) (Wales) Order 2022, in which Wales, of course, could become the first nation in the world to adopt the 20 mph default speed limit on residential streets. I say 'could', but I'm sure that the Labour whip is as strong as possible for all the backbenchers on that side of the Chamber as well.

I'd first like to outline my sheer disappointment, Llywydd, that today's motion has been given just 30 minutes on the order paper. For such a significant shift in the way people live their daily lives, 30 minutes, in my view, is nowhere near enough.

If you don't draw too much attention to that, I may well extend the time, you never know.

Very generous of you, Llywydd. I will not mention it again. [Laughter.]

So, as Natasha Asghar mentioned, we certainly support letting our councils put 20 mph speed limits outside schools, hospitals and other areas, and I've certainly seen that impact on the school my daughters go to, where I've seen that safety for them outside that school, especially at busy times of the day, is important. But this blanket approach across our communities, across urban roads in Wales, without recognising the vast differences in our communities, seems to me like a knee-jerk reaction. This may work in city centres where there's good infrastructure, good public transport in place, but many of our villages and towns that are linked by 30 mph roads at the moment simply do not have that same transport system, the same connectivity, the same infrastructure—it's nothing like Cardiff, it's nothing like Swansea, Minister. These rural villages and towns are going to be suffering because of this.

As we know, the Welsh Government's currently trialling this scheme across areas in Wales, including, as the Member for Alyn and Deeside pointed out, in Buckley in north Wales, where I had the pleasure of meeting up with residents and local representatives last week. In meeting with those residents in Buckley who've had the speed trial in place there, they highlighted to me a number of issues that they believe they noted with their eyes and noted around them. They believe they see a higher level of pollution, they've observed more accidents and more delays. And they also feel that Government have not been listening to them and to their concerns through this process. And they're concerned about the level of pollution, because what they observe is cars and drivers having to drive in a lower gear, churning out more fumes. They believe they've seen more accidents, because they believe they've seen more drivers distracted with having to try and live within this new speed limit. And they've also seen some significant risks—I'll give way in just one moment, Jenny Rathbone—they've also seen significant risks in their interactions with cyclists as well, because they're now actually seeing cyclists overtaking cars, which seems a bit ridiculous. Jenny.

As a cyclist, I agree that it is perfectly possible to go at 20 mph as a cyclist, but that is a good reason for having 20 mph for cars. Surely you understand that it will take over a year before this actually becomes the default option, and that gives us plenty of time to educate people that it is going to be a default 20 mph, except where we designate 30 mph.

I absolutely accept that logic and understand that completely, but what's happened here is that residents have not being listened to by Government in terms of the concerns that they've raised throughout this trial. As the Member has mentioned over there, it is a trial, you're right, but you'd expect the concerns and the information raised by residents would be taken into account— [Interruption.] Well, it has been brought forward today, in this motion here today. Let's move on.

In terms of the cost, Llywydd—we're talking about £33 million, as has already been mentioned—I'm sure that that could be better spent on employing more teachers, doctors and nurses here in Wales. Along with this, there's real concern that there is going to be a massive impact on business and the economy as well, because it simply won't allow ordinary people to get on with their normal life activities at the same rate, such as getting to work, dropping the kids off at school. People will be spending more time in their car, rather than getting on with what it is they need to do.

In addition to this, a huge concern regarding the introduction of a 20 mph speed limit is whether people will be able to abide by this and the enforcement of this as well. So, just this morning, a constituent of mine contacted me from Buckley saying the following: 'Only this morning, as I was just pulling onto Liverpool Road, I was nearly taken out by a car overtaking six other cars. Luckily, I slammed my brakes on in time, but, if traffic was coming the other way, it would have been fatal.' There is no enforcement taking place there at the moment, and my understanding is that the police capacity to put further enforcement in place will not be there.

Another constituent wrote to me and said, and I quote, 'Drivers checking their speed constantly, not giving their full attention to road conditions, as well as impatient drivers trying to overtake will make the roads more dangerous, not less.' [Interruption.] I'm just sharing information; they don't like to hear what constituents or residents have to say. I'm sharing information that they are sharing with me.

It's clear the Welsh Government has not properly consulted with those who have undergone this trial. It has caused real anger across many of our communities. In addition to this, it's clear, for those who have undergone the trial, it simply hasn't worked and won't work. So, in light of this, I call on all Members of the Senedd to reject today's Order, which could have a dangerous impact and is a backwards step in how we go about our daily lives in Wales. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Thank you, Minister, for this afternoon's statement.

I would like to welcome this change very much. Yes, I have too received countless e-mails regarding this, and I have to say the majority supported this move. I understand the concerns that were raised, and I'm pleased to see that there will be dialogue between local authorities and so on where it does make sense to opt out. But the truth about it now is that people are contacting us concerned about speeding in communities and nothing can be done because there hasn't been a fatality yet. And that is often the case in these communities, that it is based on someone having to die before the speed is reduced, and that doesn't mean that there haven't been accidents or near misses et cetera.

I very much welcome this, because the truth about it is that many parents do not allow their children to walk or cycle to school at present because roads aren't safe. If we have 20 mph and people adhere to that and there's an understanding that that is 20 mph—. Because 20 mph just outside a school isn't enough. We've been talking here about it being three miles that some children have to cycle or walk to school because school buses aren't available. Therefore, we need to think about all of that surrounding area, and that includes hospitals and so on. People don't feel confident—I'm not a confident cyclist and so on—and speeding traffic is one of those issues that prohibit many people from being able to take active travel. So, I think we need to look at this in its totality.

And I do not agree to say that 20 is not plenty in these communities. You can't on the one hand say that you welcome it outside schools, outside hospitals, but not think about the infrastructure overall, and that is what's being addressed here. I think it will be far easier in terms of messaging and communication that we have this approach, because in my own community 20 mph road signs have been part of the trial here outside of a school, and there hasn't been the reduction required with speeding outside of school because it hasn't gone hand in hand with that awareness-raising campaign. It seems ludicrous that people need to be told or reminded not to speed outside of schools, but that is the reality.

I do agree with one point raised in terms of enforcement, and that is something we do need to look at: what are the other measures that need to be in place to reduce speeding? That can often be extremely expensive, and local authorities don't have that support, and we need to think about it in terms of infrastructure, with widening pavements and so on—all of those things that support active travel, because reducing speed won't solve things where we don't have pedestrian crossings and so on, all the things that make active travel sustainable and an alternative option.

We've had countless e-mails from communities—Jane Hutt will know well the east Aberthaw community, where speeding is a huge issue. This will make a massive difference to that community to feel that they can travel safely around their own village. We know from communities in Cardiff that have been fighting and trying to secure this that they are scared for their children in terms of routes, and the same across Rhondda Cynon Taf. So, yes, there are things that need to be worked out. Yes, we need to think about the impact of trunk roads et cetera, that could become—you know, speeding could worsen in those areas as people try and avoid the 20 mph zones. But it has to be part of that wider approach to making active travel attractive to people, to making our communities safer, and I think there's so much to welcome from 20 mph.

I'm a strong supporter of 20 mph, and I do believe it's right that we turn on its head the current position, so that instead of 30 mph being the default limit and councils having to take forward exception orders in order to put 20 mph in place, 20 mph becomes the default limit and 30 mph would be the exception. I think it's very important for road safety, as we've heard, but also very important in terms of encouraging active travel, cycling and walking, and reclaiming our streets for young children to play and for older people to feel more comfortable when they're walking around. It's part of that wider agenda, I think, to stop the motor car ruling our communities and allowing human beings more space and time to do what they want to do in their own neighbourhoods.

And it will go hand in hand with the improvements that we will see to an integrated transport system, with much better public transport provision, which, as we all know, is such an important part of persuading motorists to get out of their vehicles with all the benefits that brings—environmental and air quality, which are so important for health and the environment. So, I think there's an awful lot in favour of this policy.

I've received a lot of e-mails, as other Members mentioned, yes, some of them raising concerns, but a lot of them very much in support. And there is a pilot that was taken forward by the Conservative administration in Monmouthshire County Council prior to the last local elections—it is now a Labour administration, of course—and that pilot has proved controversial. What I've heard from local people is lots of them do support the policy generally, but they do have concerns particularly with the bypass road that bypasses Caldicot town centre. And to the credit of the new Labour administration, they've listened to local residents, and, of course, local authorities remain the highways authorities. So, they've looked at the powers that they have and the pilot, and they are now, in fact, going to remove some of that Caldicot bypass road from the pilot, having listened to local residents' concerns. So, I think that does show that local authorities are able to act, are able to listen and are able to respond to concerns.

With all that in the background, I think many, many people, when this policy is rolled out right across Wales, will see the advantages and will be supportive, and the more that time goes on, the stronger that support will be. I look forward to communities reclaiming their streets for active travel, for play, for comfort and amenity.

I wasn't going to take part in this debate—

Okay—[Inaudible.]—[Laughter.]

—but having listened to the arguments, I just wanted to make a short contribution. Look, I've been a Member of this Senedd for 15 years, and over those 15 years I've campaigned for 20 mph zones in some parts of my constituency. We've been successful in securing some of them, and the Minister's quite right: it takes too long to secure them. But it takes too long because of guidance from the Welsh Government. There are things that you can do in order to remove the barriers without having to change the default speed limit in all built-up areas to 20 mph.

I've seen the impact that it can have on local communities when there is a speed limit reduction; it can give people confidence to be able to be more active in the way that they travel, and I agree that that's something that we need to try and build in. But I think that there are smarter things that we can do with the resources that the Welsh Government is seeking to apply here in order to introduce this new default speed limit.

Will you take an intervention?

I'll happily take one.

You'll understand this reference. I was a bit of a doubting Thomas when it came to this policy. I've changed my mind completely. Stopping when you're driving 30 mph—six car lengths; stopping at 20 mph is three car lengths. As a father of a 20-month-old, and you'd know this, with several children of your own—children run. You can hold them as much as you like, but they run, and they run into traffic. It's far safer—it is far safer, Darren—and you'll agree with this: when the limit goes down, people's mentality changes. We saw that with drink driving. In a generation, people's mentality on drink driving changed. [Interruption.] Seatbelts are another example. We need to change our mentality on speed, because children walk across all pavements in inner city areas, not just in front of schools and hospitals.

That's right, and, of course, you could reduce the speed limit to 15 mph or 10 mph and even have a shorter stopping limit. I don't think it's necessarily the fact that this is a 20 mph proposal that is the issue, because, as I say, I've supported 20 mph in certain places. It's about whether this is the right use of resources in order to improve safety on our roads and in order to get people to be more active.

Now, we know that we need more investment in cycle routes, for example, and shared active travel routes in our communities. We know also that there is a place for smart speed limits, where they change at certain points of the day, whether that's pick-up and drop-off time outside schools, which we have in some parts of Wales, with a 20 mph zone that kicks in for a short time and then it zips back up to 30 mph, or even seasonal speed limits. You know, in busy places where you have lots of tourists in the summer, it's sometimes more appropriate to reduce the speed limit for the whole of the tourist season—Easter and summer and whatnot.

But I'm not sure that this is the right approach. I'm going to be voting against it. As I say, I've supported these things where appropriate in places in my constituency, and I still have some battles on my hands. But what I would plead with you to do, Minister, and it would cost you a fraction of the £30 million-odd that you want to throw at this particular scheme, is use some of that money instead to simply change the guidance to remove those barriers so that when an issue is identified—. And you don't have to have, actually, a fatality in order to reduce the speed limit to 20 mph; we didn't have fatalities in my own constituency and we managed to do it, so I'm not sure why you're being given that advice, Heledd Fychan, by the local authorities in your region. But if you remove those barriers, if you make it a shorter timescale process, where everybody agrees that a 20 mph limit is appropriate, then we can get on and we can introduce these things.

I think what you're going to have is lots of people wanting to make lots of exceptions to this new 20 mph default, and that's going to gum everything up so that we're not getting the proper strategic approach to our roads and highways. It's going to take those people away from doing the active travel stuff that we also want them to be working on—developing the new cycle routes, putting in the pedestrian crossings where we need them putting in, addressing the other problems in our road and transport systems—taking them away from encouraging people to make that modal shift to other forms of transport rather than the car, and I think it will have many unintended consequences.

Learn from these pilots. People have raised concerns in the pilot areas. I appreciate that some people will just never want to see a 20 mph zone—that's their issue. I'm not in that camp, okay? But you have to listen to people when they raise concerns, and in these pilot areas there have been many concerns that have been raised. So, we shouldn't just launch into this. We should go in with our eyes fully open. There will be unintended consequences if we take this decision today, so I would urge everybody just to think carefully. I agree we need to kill speeds. We need to enforce better against current speed limits, but this isn't the right approach, Minister.

On reading the report, I saw that initially 80 per cent of people were in favour of 20 mph, but last year's consultation indicated that there were mixed results with 47 per cent in favour then. Desktop exceptions became an issue when delivered in reality, following the pilots conducted in Buckley in Flintshire, and officers were not permitted to do local exceptions to remove key arterial routes, as they did not fit the Welsh Government template. I understand there needs to be the national guidance for consistency, but council officers need to have permitted flexibility for local decision making, and I hope, listening to the discussions, that as they are the highway authority that will happen and will override. So, I'm asking the Minister if, following the pilot, whether any changes have been made to the exceptions criteria template that will allow councils to make the local decision rather than the Welsh Government, so that contentious arterial roads like Liverpool Road in Buckley can be made back up to 30 mph. Thank you.

The Minister for Climate Change to reply. Julie James.

Diolch, Llywydd. Can I start by thanking the legislation and justice committee for their input into this set of regulations? Just to answer a couple of the questions that were raised by Huw in his role as Chair, we were anxious to avoid any unnecessary challenge to the regulations, so the vires point has quite a lot of weight with us. And then in terms of the impact on enforcement and the criminal justice system, enforcement will be undertaken by GoSafe, the police, Community Speedwatch and enforcement cameras. The fire and rescue services will be involved, or have been involved, in developing an education programme, so those breaking the speed limit but not excessively can be offered a course if they don't want to take a fine, so very similar to now. Obviously, motorists who have a total disregard for the speed limit will be fined in the usual way and will end up in court, but we don't think there is therefore a huge impact on the criminal justice system, and we think it will diminish over time in any event. So, just to answer those points.

Turning to the contributions, in particular, from Natasha Asghar and people on the Tory benches, I mean, what can I say? Same old Tories. You agree with it in principle, but this particular thing you don't want to do. You agree with climate change in principle, but this particular thing you don't want to do. You agree with health in principle, but this particular thing you don't want to do. You never want to do anything specific. You want to agree it in principle, but never actually take any action at all, and it's just not good enough.

You talk to me about the waste of resources. Where were you when the Westminster Government took millions of pounds off this Government to buy arms for Ukraine? A worthy cause, but a wholly reserved matter. I don't remember a chorus of complaints from the Tory benches about the use of resources then. One of your own Members told me, in this Chamber, that it wasn't his job to worry about resources—a hilarious contribution to that debate. I'll take no lessons from you about the use of resources; you have no idea what you're talking about. That is an absolute nonsense, and you know it.

Darren Millar, I am very distressed at you. You have been a proponent of this all your life. Sam Rowlands had the temerity to say that my backbenchers are following a strict whip. I have to tell you they are not. They are wholly in favour of this. You, Darren Millar, I'm not so sure about you. We'll maybe have to have a conversation about that afterwards. But the idea that this is a strict whip is just not on. I'm not having it. That is just absolute nonsense.

So, I'll just reiterate the points that I was making earlier. On average, 80 people a year—80 people a year—die on Welsh roads; 80 families whose lives will never be the same again. Eighty. Moving to a national 20 mph speed limit for residential roads makes them safer. It saves lives; it stops the ruination of those families' lives and I have to say, not just the families of those people are killed, but the drivers themselves, whose lives are often ruined as well. So, this will save lives, it will make our communities safer, it will encourage more of us to walk and cycle and reclaim the streets for our children.

Will you take an intervention? So, as I said earlier, one of the problems with the current system where they can make the change to 20 mph is the length of time that that takes. If you're going to introduce this change—and I urge you not to—but if you are going to introduce this change and you manage to get the votes to do so today, will you assure us that you will have a compact, short timescale process to be able to allow these exceptions, where there may need to be an exception for 30 mph or 40 mph or whatever it might be, in those places where it is appropriate?

Indeed, absolutely. So, there will be an exceptions process. The exceptions process—. I have to correct my colleague Carolyn Thomas: the exceptions process is not in the gift of the Welsh Government. The exceptions process has been developed by a group working with us and our local authorities to work out the most efficient way of doing the exceptions process, to take into account what is the evidential base needed, what are the views of the local people and the local councillors, and how that authority can make the ruling without the threat of judicial review and challenge of course—that it has the right evidential base—and so that we don't have wildly differing exceptions criteria across Wales. But in the end, it will be the local authority as the transport authority that makes that process.

So, I'm not standing here to make any apology for making roads in Wales safer. Pedestrians are five times more likely to be killed at 30 mph compared to 20 mph, as has been pointed out; 52 per cent of all casualties occurred on 30 mph roads during 2019; and as Mark Isherwood actually pointed out, 2.5 per cent of all roads are 20 mph. Darren, you yourself have been campaigning for years to get that number to come up. This makes us all safer, but it's clearly not a blanket approach. We are the first country in the UK to do this. Go on, Sam.

Would you accept, then, the logic you're taking there, if you take it to its logical end, in terms of vastly reduced speed, reduced risks of death and injury, which could certainly be the case, therefore driving at 1 mph should be the default?

No, because the evidence is, Sam, that for the average journey in Wales, the amount of time it'll take you extra is one minute to save all those lives. It's worth it, isn't it? That's the bottom line. People slow down; you've seen them yourselves. They overtake three cars on a country road and then you end up behind them at the traffic lights. It's really dangerous; they can't see around the corners. I know that you know this. You knew it from your own time in Conwy. Russell.

Minister, I had quite a lot of sympathy for the trials that were undertaken, but you mentioned the cost as well, and then justifying the cost. But I had a letter this morning from the Royal College of Nursing that was entitled 'How much is your and your loved ones' lives worth?' And the letter goes on to talk about that if we have more nurses, if we have a higher rate of pay, it will attract more nurses, we'll have more nurses and that will save lives. And it goes on to talk about that every hour, throughout the day, nurses make life-saving decisions. So, there are other areas that we could spend money on that would potentially save many, many lives. Do you not accept that principle?

Of course there are areas that will save many, many lives, but you know as well as I do that if there's a road traffic accident close to a trauma centre, the hours of waiting go up for the A&E patients as those trauma casualties come in from road traffic accidents. So, that is not—. That's a completely wrong base on which to base it. This saves lives. This saves NHS resources, of course it does. Those 80 people should be saved from death and severe injury, and keep them out of the NHS. That's just a fallacy, the way that you're spinning that around. I've just said what I think about the way that you approach budgets, and I'm just reiterating it now.

Lower speeds mean that people feel more comfortable to walk and cycle. It's safer for children to walk to school, and older people also feel more able to travel independently and safely. I have a 20 mph limit very close to me, and the difference in that village has been absolutely extraordinary, with people out on its streets for the first time in years, able to walk around safely and not be looking over their shoulder all the time. It makes a huge difference to our safer communities. It makes them nicer places to live and work. And the idea that this isn't the case in rural areas is also a fallacy.

I know that you all think that your own inbox is some kind of scientific experiment in popularity and what this policy means, but, actually, we've conducted extensive research on this, and it's as popular in rural areas as it is in urban areas. People in rural areas do not feel safe on narrow country lanes with people going too fast. They do not. They do not feel safe to cycle, they do not feel safe to walk. This is not an urban/rural split, no matter how much you want to make it so. And in urban areas, 20 mph would seem like—. Well, I don't know when the last time was that I was able to get above about 6 mph in any urban area. So, the idea that 20 mph somehow restricts the timing of public transport and so on is nonsense. It probably will speed the number of cars actually travelling over our roads. So, that's just absolute nonsense.

We have a duty to the people of Wales to introduce this measure. It will be one of the things that we do first that we're criticised for by the Tories and then you closely follow. I can list them again if you like: the plastic bags, the organ donation. Let's hope that, one day, over the border will have free prescriptions as well, so you can follow our lead. [Interruption.] I think you've had quite a few interventions, Darren. I'm not taking any more.

I just wanted to correct the record. There was reference there to the plastic bags. We were not against that. In fact, we proposed the charge for plastic bags.

No, I was merely pointing out that Wales went first, and then England followed.

No, you said that we resisted.

And I was making the point that this will be the case—

You said that we resisted.

No, I didn't. I said that Wales went first, and England followed.

You said that we resisted. Check the Record.

And England followed, and this will happen here. So, Llywydd, I absolutely recommend this motion to the Senedd, and I think it is something that will make the people of Wales safer and very proud of their communities. Diolch.

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

Item 12 is the next item. These are the Plant Health etc. (Fees) (Amendment) (Wales) (EU Exit) (No.2) Regulations 2022. I call on the Minister for Climate Change to move the motion and to speak to these regulations again. Julie James.

Diolch, Llywydd. I move the motion. The Plant Health etc. (Fees) (Amendment) (Wales) (EU Exit) (No.2) Regulations 2022 amend the Plant Health etc. (Fees) (Wales) Regulations 2018. The 2018 regulations specify fees payable to the Welsh Ministers in relation to plant health services and, in particular, certain fees payable to the Welsh Ministers in relation to checks of imports of plants and plant products. These fees recover the cost of the work of the Animal and Plant Health Agency in Wales. The purpose of these checks is to protect Wales from the spread of harmful pests and diseases in plants in cultivation and in the wider environment.

The regulations introduce a short-term flat rate fee from 22 July for plants for planting, excluding dormant seeds and bulbs, and cuttings. This reflects the new frequency of checks in the Official Controls (Plant Health) (Frequency of Checks) Regulations 2022. Together, these regulations implement a new risk-targeted inspection regime for imported consignments of plants. The proposed amendments also reinstate fees for suspected infected samples taken on imports. This ensures that the Animal and Plant Health Agency can recover costs for laboratory testing to confirm the presence of a controlled plant pest.

And finally, the regulations extend the movement assistance scheme until December 2023. The scheme supports traders moving consignments of plants, plant products or other goods from Great Britain to Northern Ireland. It will assist traders with advice and guidance to comply with new sanitary and phytosanitary rules. This amendment echoes changes being made elsewhere in the UK. It is critical to ensure businesses and importers of plants and plant products in Wales are not disadvantaged compared to their counterparts elsewhere in the UK. Diolch.

The Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, Huw Irranca-Davies.

Diolch, Lywydd, and for the final time today, Minister. [Laughter.]

We considered these regulations yesterday afternoon, and our report contains two merits reporting points. While we have not sought a Welsh Government response to those points, our second merits point comments on an important matter that is worth highlighting to the Senedd.

As the Minister has said, these regulations amend the Plant Health etc. (Fees) (Wales) Regulations 2018, which specify fees payable to the Welsh Ministers in relation to plant health and certification services. The explanatory memorandum accompanying the regulations states that:

'The fees for plant health checks determined by the 2018 Regulations are being amended in this instrument to reflect the frequencies of checks established under the Official Controls (Plant Health) (Frequency of checks) Regulations 2022'.

The frequency of checks regulations have been made by UK Government Ministers and they come into force next week. As the Minister has made clear, the Welsh Government has given its consent to the Secretary of State to make the frequency of checks regulations. The reason I raise this today for the Senedd is to demonstrate, using this example, the increasing complexity of law making for Wales—two Governments and two Parliaments making bits of the law on the same issue, at the same time.

We are writing to the Minister about the Welsh Government consenting to the frequency of checks regulations, because we have concerns that important matters, such as the interlinks with common frameworks, divergence from EU law, and the fact that the regulations appear to provide for a potentially new approach to policy, haven't been fully aired yet in the information that the Minister has provided to the Senedd. The extent, for example, of consultation with stakeholders in Wales specifically prior to their introduction is also unclear. I simply ask the Minister to reflect on these points in her closing remarks. I hope that it's helpful, in raising this today, to show the Senedd, once again, the increasing complexity in these areas with two Governments simultaneously legislating on the same matters.

I have no other speakers. The Minister to respond.

Just very briefly, we thank the committee for its work. We didn't provide a response as the committee didn't require one, but just to say that Lesley Griffiths and myself have raised this same issue in many inter-ministerial meetings, and indeed, we've written about the working of the framework agreements along very similar lines. I commend the motion to the Senedd.

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? No. The motion is therefore agreed.

Item 13 is next, namely the Regulated Services (Service Providers and Responsible Individuals) (Wales) (Amendment) Regulations 2022. I call on the Deputy Minister for Social Services to move the motion—Julie Morgan.

Thank you, Llywydd. I move the motion.

The statutory instrument before you today amends the existing regulations under the Regulation and Inspection of Social Care (Wales) Act 2016 and regulations that flow from that Act.

These amending regulations are a further step towards realising our goal to professionalise the social care workforce, to continuing to raise the quality of care and to ensure that workers get the support and recognition that they deserve. Registration recognises the professional responsibility of social care workers, who provide vital care and support to people in our communities. These regulations will introduce a requirement that employees and workers in care home services for adults and residential family centre services are registered with the workforce regulator, Social Care Wales. If passed today, they will come into force on 1 October.

These amendments follow on from the mandatory registration of domiciliary care workers and now seek to move the sector from a voluntary phase of registration for current adult care home workers and residential family centre service workers. Registration helps to provide greater safeguards for those who use these services so that they can be confident, as can their family and friends, that social care workers delivering their care and support are appropriately qualified and can be held to account against a code of professional practice set out by Social Care Wales.

The regulations provide for providers of care home services for adults and residential family centre services to employ only those individuals who are registered with Social Care Wales within six months of commencing employment. This was also applied to anyone engaged under a contract with these service providers, including agency workers. Social Care Wales has worked and continues to work extensively with the sector in order to support these workers to register by the deadline in October. Diolch.

I have no further speakers, so I take it—.

I don't know whether the Minister wants to respond to herself. I'll assume that you don't. I have no further speakers in the debate.

Thank you, Deputy Minister. So, the proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? No. Therefore, the motion is agreed in accordance with standing order 12.36.

Item 14 is the next item, the Welsh Language Standards (No. 8) Regulations 2022. I call on the Minister for the Welsh language to move the motion. Jeremy Miles.

Thank you, Llywydd. I move the motion on the Welsh Language Standards (No. 8) Regulations 2022. The regulations allow the Welsh Language Commissioner to impose standards on nine UK bodies in the health sector—eight professional regulatory bodies and the Professional Standards Authority. One hundred and twenty bodies are already captured under standards, including health boards and health trusts in Wales. Including the regulatory bodies under the standards regime will move more health bodies from the old language schemes to language standards. The regulations have been prepared specifically for these bodies, focusing on the services that they provide to the public, but the standards also give rights to health workers if they are subject to a complaint or a hearing in terms of professional practice.

These are part of the jigsaw to deliver the aim of increasing the use of the Welsh language, and that's what's important. The bodies will need support in building capacity to provide more Welsh language standards. The commissioner's office will be available to provide guidance to these bodies, as they go on their language journey. Other partners such as the National Centre for Learning Welsh will also be available to provide assistance to these bodies and their staff, if they wish to learn Welsh, in order to provide better Welsh language services to the public. The co-operation agreement between the Government and Plaid Cymru commits us to introducing the steps that I'm stating this afternoon.

Finally, may I thank the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee for hastening the process of reporting on these regulations once we relaid them? The collaboration of the committee ensured that this debate could proceed today.

Thank you, Minister. I welcome the opportunity to contribute on the standards here today. After all, this is the first complete set of standards regulations to be brought before Plenary since 20 March 2018, over four years ago. There are several reasons for the delay, including the decision by the previous Government to put the standards programme on hold during the debate on proposals to introduce a new Welsh language Bill, and later because of the pandemic, of course.

In welcoming this debate today, which marks the restart of the roll-out of the standards programme, I'd like to look forward instead of looking back. This is because the introduction of these language duties are an important step forward in many ways, which will make a practical difference. It is vital that the Welsh language is at the core of the recovery work in the health sector as we begin to restore services after the pandemic. Regulation No. 8, if approved today, will mean that everyone in the sector is under the same system, and it rectifies the current situation where the work is only half done: the health boards are under the standards system while the bodies that are mainly responsible for oversight of the health workforce are under the language scheme system of the 1993 Act, with us having legislated here since 2011 to create a bespoke system to promote and facilitate the use of the Welsh language in Wales.

As well as underlining the wider shift to take forward the implementation of the Welsh language Measure, new language rights that are specific and important are being created as a result of these regulations. The Minister referred to some, but the important ones are: the right for the public in Wales to apply for jobs in Welsh with the organisations in question, and for employees at these organisations to be able to receive Welsh lessons free of charge; the right for practitioners in health professions who have complaints lodged against them to engage with the process in Welsh throughout, both orally and in writing; and the right for members of the public in Wales to be able to see, hear and use the Welsh language in their dealings with the bodies.

Before the introduction of the Measure, there was no effective system to enforce the commitments made by bodies to Welsh speakers, and no body with teeth to listen to complaints. Now, the commissioner is obliged to consider such complaints, which means that individuals who are obstructed from receiving care in Welsh are treated with dignity and respect—something that's vital, given that sick and vulnerable people may have to turn to the bodies in question when they have a complaint or concern about their care under a health practitioner.

In any area of equality, legislative change takes time. The evidence available thus far confirms the value of standards in creating that change. There will also be a duty on those who will be subject to these standards to consider the impact of their decisions on the Welsh language when developing new policies, for example to plan proactively to ensure that the principle of not treating the Welsh language less favourably than English guides the sector's planning into the future.

The Minister for the Welsh language to reply.

Thank you, Llywydd. These regulations allow the Welsh Language Commissioner to consider where the bodies are on their language journey before imposing final standards upon them, thereby considering what is reasonable to expect, but also to improve Welsh language services to the public. The main aim is to ensure practical, daily use of the Welsh language in our communities.

These bodies have been preparing to be captured under the standards regime for years and are ready to proceed in implementing them. The bodies have collaborated fully with us as we prepare the regulations, and they have a healthy attitude towards the Welsh language. I therefore hope that Members will support these regulations as part of our ambition to increase the daily, practical use of the Welsh language.

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? No, there are no objections, therefore the motion is agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Item 15 is next, which is the debate on Stage 4 of the Welsh Tax Acts etc. (Power to Modify) Bill. I call on the Minister for finance to move the motion. Rebecca Evans.

Diolch, Llywydd. Today, I'm pleased to present the Welsh Tax Acts etc. (Power to Modify) Bill to the Senedd for approval. I'd like to begin by putting on record my thanks to all the officials who've worked so diligently over many years on this Bill. As we know, tax is an important and growing area of the devolution settlement. As a Welsh Government, we need, like every executive, a proportionate and effective suite of tools to manage those tax powers strategically and, crucially, to effectively protect taxpayers and the public finances. This Senedd, like every parliament, needs strong and robust oversight of those tools. The Bill ensures this because the changes can only be made or have permanent effect with the Senedd's consent after due consideration is given. This legislation is an important first step along the road to the coherent and transparent system we need to support tax devolution in Wales.

I'd like to thank all of those within the Senedd and beyond who have helped to shape and improve the Bill before Members today. We have listened and amended the Bill substantially to respond to the feedback that there's been to the Bill. At all times, I have tried to understand and reflect on the points made by opposition Members and particularly what our scrutiny committees have said when they have looked at the Bill. The results of those discussions have tangibly changed the Bill in a positive way.

The Bill seeks to ensure Welsh Ministers can respond at pace to changes that need to be made to our tax legislation as a result of external circumstances that we cannot control, such as responding to UK Government tax policy changes in order to ensure that we protect our Welsh revenues. The amendments made to this Bill have been substantial, including the provision of a sunset clause and review process, in addition to further restrictions on the use of retrospective legislation. The changes made mean this Bill is now very different to the one that was first introduced into the Senedd and a better one for that scrutiny.

It's also worth reflecting that I have moved considerably since setting out the original proposal for this legislation. I responded to the outcome of the consultation by restricting the scope of the regulation-making power to include the four purpose tests, a significant reduction in the circumstances where the Welsh Ministers could use the power. Importantly, I've also heard the points made by Members of this Senedd and committed to taking steps, together with the Senedd and its committees, towards finding an appropriate, longer term legislative solution to the issues that Members have raised, but, crucially, ensuring that taxpayers and our budget are protected in the meantime.

It's simply not possible, and nor would it be right, to bring in these arrangements overnight without undertaking the thorough policy development and engagement needed. Passing this Bill will help protect taxpayers and the Welsh budget. It will mean for the next few years the Welsh budget and our taxpayers will not be left exposed because we will be able to respond effectively to external circumstances that impact on our Welsh taxes. To provide an example, if the UK Government introduces a new charging regime similar to the stamp duty land tax higher rates for additional dwellings, then, with this Bill, we can protect the important policy positions that we have developed on second homes. Or, if the UK Government, for example, introduced a change that particularly benefited those seeking to establish new farming businesses, then we could bring in a similar type of change at pace to ensure that our taxpayers are not disadvantaged.

We all know that the current UK Government is no friend of devolution. It's clear from recent days that significant changes to our tax system are on the way, and we know from past experience that the UK Government will not allow us any special favours or special consideration if we do not have the powers to protect ourselves. This Bill will afford us another essential protection for Welsh taxpayers and Welsh public services in such a context, so I cannot accept the argument that there is anything progressive in choosing to vote against this legislation today.

I hope that you can see the good faith with which we have developed this Bill. If passed, I want to work in that same spirit with Senedd Members to establish the long-term architecture for making changes to the Welsh tax Acts, and I ask Members to vote for this motion today. Diolch.

First of all, I want to thank everyone who gave evidence as part of the Finance Committee's scrutiny of the Bill and to place on record my gratitude for the support and advice offered by the clerking and legal team throughout this process. I'd also like to thank you, Minister, for the way you and your officials have constructively engaged with me and colleagues during the amending process. I thank you for that.

It's in this regard that I do believe that the Bill before us today is somewhat stronger than the original Bill that was laid to the Senedd last year. Both the LJC and finance committees made clear that the original Bill needed strengthening to limit the powers of the Welsh Ministers with regard to legislation on taxation policy, so I welcome some of the amendments that we've seen, such as restricting the scope of the regulation-making power within section 1 of the Bill in relation to criminal investigations, changes to the use of retrospective powers and the introduction of a sunset clause. However, it is unfortunate that the Minister did not accept any of my amendments, most of which were in line with a number of the committee recommendations, both from the finance and LJC committees. I believe that these would have strengthened the Bill further and ensured sufficient Senedd scrutiny over the operation of the Act.

As it stands, I'm still not fully convinced that the Bill as drafted provides sufficient safeguards over the use of potentially wide-ranging powers within it. The Minister's amendments didn't go quite as far as I would have liked. However, Llywydd, my main issue with this Bill is one that I stated right at the start of the process: that it's not appropriate for secondary legislation to be used as a vehicle to make changes to primary taxation legislation. It raises fundamental questions about the Senedd as a legislature and its relationship with the Executive. As the LJC committee argued, the Welsh Government should have developed a more strategic, coherent and long-term package of legislative measures to deliver its proposals and objectives in relation to tax. It is important that the Senedd continues to closely monitor the Bill as it's enacted to ensure that the powers within it are used as outlined by the Minister during scrutiny and do not overstep on the Senedd remit. As such, Llywydd, I am unfortunately not able to support this Bill today, and so the Welsh Conservative group will be voting against the motion. Thank you.

I started this process being open-minded on this legislation, as I always do, recognising there are times when one needs to respond to circumstances when such issues arise, but I have to say that evidence provided to the relevant committees scrutinising the Bill, particularly in Stage 1, from some of the most notable legal figures in Wales outlined a number of elements that caused me concern as regards this Bill.

Sir Paul Silk gave us quite compelling evidence when he said that the Bill, and I quote,

'is an example for me',

he says,

'of a more general concern that I have about the way in which the Executive is taking over functions that I think properly belong to the legislature',

reflecting some of the comments that we've already heard. The LJC itself in its report reflected on that, and I quote again,

'It is...profoundly disappointing that the second piece of primary legislation introduced by the Welsh Government is an enabling Bill which inherently leaves all significant policy development and implementation to be determined by subordinate legislation. This means that the Senedd and its elected Members will face voting on such matters on an "all or nothing" basis, because subordinate legislation is not subject to line-by-line scrutiny and is not amendable.'

Concluding eventually that,

'this approach proposed by the Welsh Government is contrary to established parliamentary practice and principles associated with good law-making.'

Llyr, will you take an intervention?

Yes I will, if the Llywydd will allow me more time.

Diolch yn fawr iawn. He raises an important point that the LJC committee raised, but, actually, we looked to the Minister to make amendments to this piece of legislation now in order to be able to deal with issues that have already been taken forward in the UK Parliament and so on in terms of tax issues, but we also said, 'Look at the future about what can be done.' And just to commend the Minister, she has acknowledged those and said she will work on that for future iterations of when we bring this back in front of the Senedd. I think we'd all want to see that. So, I simply want to commend the approach taken by the Minister. She hasn't said 'no'; she's said, 'We just can't do it now—we're going to have to do it in future.'

And I'll come to that in a moment, because I do acknowledge that fact, but I have to say that the weight of evidence given during that stage, for me, made me take a step back and look at this through a different lens, and I do hope—. I'm sure many Members will have read the reports, but you as the committee Chair in Stage 1 debate said that the committee had come to the conclusion that the Bill is not an appropriate legislative vehicle to make these changes, and the committee was of the view that the level of delegated power in the Bill was inappropriate and so on and so forth.

Now, the positive element is that I do recognise that the Government has responded positively to some aspects of this Bill during the scrutiny stages, and I thank the Minister and her officials for their willingness to do that, particularly by introducing the sunset clause, which makes this legislation, to all intents and purposes, temporary legislation, but legislation that could be with us until 2031. So, I'm not sure how temporary that is. But the Minister did respond to Plaid Cymru amendments at Stage 2 by bringing forward her own amendments. She also accepted my amendments at Stage 3, which did two things, namely ensure that the review of the legislation included the broader work of looking at alternative legislative arrangements, and also that Senedd Members will be a more meaningful part of that review and that we all, if we're here at that time, will have an opportunity to have our say.

But there is a more fundamental issue, as we've heard, and that is too much of a slant in power in terms of primary legislation away from the legislature, namely the Senedd, to the Executive, namely the Government. Although there have been improvements, on the basis we cannot allow this legislation to be passed, so we will be voting against it this afternoon.

The Minister for finance to reply to the debate—Rebecca Evans.

Thank you very much, and thank you to colleagues for their contributions this afternoon. I'm glad it's been recognised that the Bill is the result of a considerable body of work by many people, and I would like to put my thanks on record to all of them, and I'm sure that the collaborative way of working that I've tried to adopt has helped to strengthen the existing relationships, which I hope will put us in good stead for the future.

I do want to address the particular point around primary versus secondary legislation and, of course, in ordinary circumstances of law making, where law is made as a result of considered policy development rather than required urgently or in response to external events, it's of course right that the Senedd should determine who is taxed and how they're taxed, in accordance with the constitutional principles set out in the Government of Wales Act 2006. However, this Bill and the power within the Bill are intended to deal with extraordinary circumstances and ones that are absolutely distinctive to tax legislation. To provide an example, there've been many instances where new tax elements of stamp duty land tax have been introduced by the UK Government immediately or very shortly after an announcement is made, and that's generally, of course, to prevent taxpayers from forestalling. But I think that the UK Parliament recognised the distinctive nature of tax legislation when it provided UK Ministers with the power in section 109 of the Finance Act 2003 to be able to make any changes to stamp duty land tax legislation that are expedient in the public interest. The Scottish Parliament provided the Scottish Government with many regulation-making powers in its devolved taxes Act, including the setting of rates and bands by made affirmative procedure regulations. Of course, the Senedd, following the precedent set by the Scottish Parliament, provided Welsh Ministers with a similar suite of regulation-making powers, including the setting of rates by made affirmative procedure regulations. So, this Bill is seeking to build on those precedents, developing that flexible and agile mechanism to respond to external circumstances that are outside of our control, to protect Welsh taxpayers and protect the Welsh budget.

Will the Minister give way on that point?

Yes.

Thank you, Minister, for giving way. One of the reassurances the Minister could give to the Senedd today, in the collaborative way that she has taken forward these changes to the existing legislation and proposals for what comes forward—. In those proposals of what comes next, will she give the reassurance to the Senedd today that she will work with the relevant committees and with Senedd Members here, but also with those outside stakeholders? We don't have to actually replicate exactly what goes on in other Parliaments. We can provide, perhaps, a better way of doing it that suits Wales. Will she give that commitment to do that work in collaboration with others with expertise here in Wales?

I absolutely give that commitment to collaborate with the experts in the field. If colleagues don't want to listen to me today, let's listen to the experts in the field, because when my colleague Rhianon Passmore was asking the Chartered Institute of Taxation in committee if it would be an appropriate mechanism to use secondary legislation, they responded, I think, in the circumstances—particularly in the circumstances of a devolved administration, with the way the devolved settlement works—that it is reasonable, yes. And the Finance Committee Chair asked the Institute of Chartered Accountants England and Wales if the legislation was necessary, and they said,

'I would say, certainly in terms of the ability to react to changes at the UK level, and possibly tax avoidance, particularly given some of the changes that we're seeing, or some of the particular difficulties in the UK SDLT, for those triggers, it's important that the Welsh Government has the necessary powers to make changes, if need be, at fairly short notice. So, a guarded "yes"'.

And we've heard reference to Professor Emyr Lewis and Sir Paul Silk, and when, again, asked by the Chair of the Finance Committee if the Bill was absolutely necessary, Professor Emyr Lewis said,

'I think that legislation is needed to enable swift changes to be made. I think that the idea of giving the power to amend to coincide with international duties is a good one, because it is similar to other powers to amend primary legislation, to make that legislation lawful. I think there is a need for action to deal with the problem that stems from the way that Wales is funded and how the formula in the inter-governmental agreement draws funding away from Wales if there are tax changes made in England, in order to keep up with anything that happens in England',

and Sir Paul Silk agreed.

But if you don't want to listen to me, and you don't want to listen these experts, listen to our colleague Llyr Gruffydd. When I did introduce the Bill, he said here in the Senedd—and he's been consistent on this all along—that his preference would be for a finance Bill or an annual budget Bill. But then he also went on to say that he agrees

'with the Minister, whether that happens or not, we still need the powers that the Government are seeking in the Bill before us today.

'I've said in the past that I have no problem in principle with these kinds of powers being given to Welsh Ministers.'

Seeing that you are quoting me directly, I hope you'll take a brief intervention. I did explain in my opening contribution—

I was coming on to that.

All right, okay. Well, the weight of the evidence from the people that we heard from changed my mind. I change my mind; it would be good sometimes if others did as well.

I've clearly changed my mind, when you look at the ways in which the Bill has been dramatically amended. And the idea behind the Bill has been amended from a very wide-ranging power when we first consulted to something that is very narrow and targeted now. But the point I was going on to make is that I do recognise what you said about the way in which you responded to the evidence you've heard, but, even so, with all the amendments and changes that have been made, I do think that we've probably moved closer together on this journey, and I hope that we can move on together on the journey with what comes next.

I will just conclude, Llywydd, because I do realise I'm over time, by thanking you and your staff for all of your support in this process. And I ask Senedd Members, when considering their vote today and how they vote, just to take this moment and take this chance to protect Welsh taxpayers and to protect the Welsh budget. And I'd ask Members to support the Bill today.

In accordance with Standing Order 26.50C, a recorded vote must be taken on Stage 4 motions, so I defer voting on this motion to voting time.

Item 16 is next, and that is a debate on the first supplementary budget for 2022-23. I call on the Minister for Finance to move the motion. Rebecca Evans.

Thank you, Llywydd. The first supplementary budget of 2022-23 is the first opportunity to amend budgetary plans for the current financial year, which were published and approved by the Senedd in March. I'd like to take this opportunity to thank the Finance Committee for its consideration of this budget and publication of its report. I'll provide a detailed response to its 12 recommendations in due course.

The main change in this first supplementary budget relates to a technical reclassification of budgets to reflect the implementation of the international financial reporting standard, or IFRS 16, as it's commonly known, on leases. The changes relating to IFRS 16 do not affect the spending power of the Welsh Government but simply reflect existing spending plans on leasing arrangements more appropriately as a capital investment. In addition, this budget regularises a small number of allocations from reserves, including an allocation of £20 million to support our response to the war in Ukraine. This allocation will support schemes such as the sponsorship programme, our welcome centres and increasing the provision of good-quality temporary homes with their associated costs.

As is usual for supplementary budgets, the changes also include small adjustments to the overall level of resources available to Wales, reflecting transfers and consequentials arising from changes in UK departmental spending. This budget also regularises approved transfers within and between ministerial portfolios.

Although it's limited in scope, the supplementary budget nevertheless represents an important part of the budget and scrutiny system. In-year supplementary budgets build on the plans set out in the draft and final budget, with a greater focus on the pressures and opportunities that arise in-year.

Since the final budget was published, the increase in inflation means that our budget is worth £600 million less over this three-year period. I'm closely monitoring the position with my Cabinet colleagues, and the impact that the rise in inflation is having on delivering our spending plans.

I will table a second supplementary budget later in this financial year. Any further allocations from reserves this year will be regularised in the second supplementary budget and will include any further consequential changes to Wales that arise as a result of changes to UK Government departmental spending. So, I'd just like to finish by thanking the Finance Committee once again for their scrutiny of this supplementary budget, and I ask Members to support it.

I call on the Chair of the Finance Committee, Peredur Owen Griffiths.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I am pleased to speak in this debate today on behalf of the Finance Committee. The committee scrutinised the first supplementary budget on 30 June and I thank the Minister for her attendance.

The committee’s report was laid before the Senedd yesterday and makes 12 recommendations. First of all, the committee is extremely concerned about the impact that inflationary pressures will have on the affordability of the Welsh Government’s budgetary proposals. Given that these exceptional pressures will persist and could worsen, we ask the Minister to provide an assessment of the impact that this is having on the Welsh Government’s plans. We also ask the Minister to consider bringing forward the second supplementary budget this financial year so that funding can be provided to priority areas as quickly as possible, if urgent action is required.

Turning to specific areas, before I talk about the Welsh Government’s response to the war in Ukraine, may I take this opportunity to pay tribute to those affected by the war and the incredible efforts made by local authorities, individuals and services across Wales to ensure that those fleeing the war in Ukraine are given refuge and a safe place to stay? However, the committee was disappointed that funding received by the Welsh Government from the UK Government to support Ukrainian refugees does not extend beyond the current financial year. We therefore urge the Minister to raise this issue with the UK Government at the earliest opportunity, so that funding for those key services continue to be provided. As the support provided reaches into different areas within the budget, the committee also felt that it was becoming increasingly difficult to understand how much money was being spent in particular areas. That is why we are asking the Minister to provide a breakdown of the funding dedicated to supporting Ukrainian refugees in future budgets.

On this issue, the committee was alarmed by the lack of meaningful consultation between the Welsh and UK Governments regarding the contributions made from devolved budgets towards the £1 billion provided in military aid to Ukraine. We agree with the Minister that devolved budgets should not be spent on non-devolved areas. This is a fundamental principle, and these actions represent a dangerous precedent. We therefore ask the Minister to raise these concerns with counterparts elsewhere in the UK to ensure that devolved budgets are protected from being used to fund non-devolved areas.

Dirprwy Lywydd, I would now like to turn quickly to other policy areas. The committee welcomes the levels of funding provided to the NHS to support its recovery from the pandemic, and particularly to deal with waiting times and the planned care backlog. However, the committee wants further clarity on how the money will be spent. We are also concerned to hear that a number of health boards were unable to utilise the additional funding allocated. Although the committee accepts the significant impact that the omicron variant has had on health service planning, it is concerning that a large chunk of these allocations were not spent. The committee is also highly concerned with the growing strain on NHS staff who are, according to a recent report by Audit Wales, tired, stretched thinly and under pressure. We believe that greater efforts need to be made by the Welsh Government to develop a longer term workforce plan so that these pressures can be mitigated and staff burn-out avoided.

Finally, the committee notes with concern the plans by the UK Government to cut 91,000 in the civil service, and further notes that a Barnett share of those jobs would amount to approximately 6,000 jobs being lost here in Wales. The committee is concerned that such cuts could have a disproportionate impact on Wales. As a result, we want further information on the UK Government’s intentions in this area, and assurances that any decisions made at a UK level do not have a detrimental impact on the public sector workforce in Wales.

Deputy Presiding Officer, I am pleased to have been able to speak in today’s debate on behalf of the Finance Committee. The committee welcomes much of the laudable aims expressed through this supplementary budget, but is keen to ensure that Wales’s finances are robust and resilient in the face of increasing economic pressures. Thank you.

I thank the Minister for her statement and welcome the contribution of the Chair of the Finance Committee, and I would like to associate myself with the comments he made around local authorities and the work they put in. I'm contributing to this debate as the Welsh Conservatives' spokesperson for finance, and from the outset I would like to confirm that we will be abstaining on the motion before us, as is the custom of the group on supplementary budgets. During the pandemic, we saw a series of extraordinary supplementary budgets where hundreds of millions were allocated in addition to the final budget, in recognition of the huge response that was required to tackle COVID-19.

This supplementary budget is far closer to the norm that we expect to see—most of the allocations relate to technical changes—but, unfortunately, this budget is set, once again, against the background of even more extraordinary times. I fully understand that the budget was produced at the start of the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the cost-of-living crisis, and so doesn't fully take into account these pressures. However, Deputy Llywydd, it is almost certain that more support will be needed to help ease the burden on people, in addition to what has already been provided, in particular to those people who do not qualify for benefits but need financial help at this time. Minister, what discussions are you having with colleagues from across the UK regarding the possibility of future support? And what planning have you done regarding the type of Welsh-specific support that may be required during the autumn and winter periods? Furthermore, the budget allocates £20 million from reserves as emergency financial assistance for local government to help with the resettlement scheme for Ukrainian refugees, as we've heard. Whilst I, of course, welcome this, I do note with some disappointment that last month the Welsh Government paused its supersponsor scheme. Minister, how effective do you think that this funding has been in putting in place an adequate support network?

There is also the issue of how we support our public services through these difficult times. Inflationary pressures are putting a huge amount of strain on funding services, whilst the cost of things like potential public sector pay increases will need to be met. Minister, what steps are you taking to analyse the financial health of public services in Wales, as well as what future resources may be needed so that additional costs are not borne by service users, local government or services themselves?

With specific regard to the Welsh NHS, what work are you undertaking to better understand the barriers that NHS organisations are facing in actually spending the additional funding being provided to them? As you know, Audit Wales noted that NHS bodies returned £12.8 million of the £200 million allocated in 2021-22. Surely, given the huge strain that the NHS is under, we need to ensure that all of the funding provided is making its way to the front line to tackle waiting times and treatment backlogs. Thank you.

I'll start with reference to the over-allocation against the general capital budget. Obviously, because of inflationary pressures, that is coming under considerable pressure, probably reflected in the fact that the over-allocation in the supplementary budget before us is £68 million, or just over £68 million—down £7.5 million from the final budget. I'd ask, maybe, that you could give us some information about where you're likely to be disinvesting, or at least what process you used for prioritising or deprioritising that particular spend.

I'd like to reiterate some of the comments around support for people from Ukraine. I very much welcome the allocation of an additional £20 million from reserves for emergency financial assistance for local government to support the response to the crisis in Ukraine. We can all be very proud of the Welsh response and the fact that Welsh Government spending is going above and beyond the funding provided by the UK Government.

It is hugely worrying, on that, of course, that the UK Government has raided devolved budgets to pay for non-devolved military spending, and I'm wondering what impact that will have—losing that £30 million—on the budget for this year, particularly in relation to investment in health, education and other key areas. Does this not set a dangerous precedent, in that it could happen more often? What it does do, of course, is highlight how fragile and how weak the devolution settlement is in reality, when the UK Government can take away money that's rightly ours.

I'd reiterate comments by the Chair of the Finance Committee about the disappointment that funding received by the Welsh Government from the UK Government to support Ukrainian refugees doesn't extend beyond the current financial year. The zombie Prime Minister that we have in Westminster, who's in post but not in power, tells us that the UK is in it for the long haul on Ukraine. Well, that's clearly not the case when it comes to supporting Ukrainian refugees, and I would ask you to assure us that regardless of whether the UK Government provides funding, the Welsh Government will do everything it can to continue its support for those from Ukraine who need it.

The question about health has been asked. We are aware that—. Given that health boards weren't able to spend their additional funding allocations last year, can you give us assurances that additional funding for health to help tackle waiting times and the planned-care backlog this year will be utilised fully?

Finally, in the face of the cost-of-living crisis, of course, there is increasing demand for public sector pay to keep pace with inflation. Now, the UK Government's policy is to bury its head in the sand, which could well lead to a summer of discontent. I'm hoping, clearly, that the Welsh Government takes a different approach, and maybe you could tell us a bit about what scope there is in your budget this year to meet any potential increases in public sector pay, because it's wholly unacceptable that our public sector workers are going through the wringer at the moment, whilst the rudderless UK Government is just going through the motions.

The first supplementary budget has usually been a minor event, making slight changes, which this one does. But the supplementary budget comes at a time of high inflation, which is currently at 9.1 per cent—the highest for 40 years—and maybe higher now than when I wrote this. This is a unique experience both for the Senedd and the Welsh Government. Inflation will affect both capital and revenue budgets. We have commodity-led inflation made worse by the declining value of the pound. Those are two issues over which the Welsh Government have no control whatsoever.

On capital spending, the cost of construction has been estimated as rising between 20 and 30 per cent year on year, and, with a shortage of both labour and building materials, it has been reported that supply chain disruption and continued high cost of production will remain a challenge for the British construction industry this year, resulting in cost increases in materials—bricks, plasterboard, cement, concrete et cetera. What these changes mean is that either there will be a need to borrow at a time when interest rates are rising, or there will be a slippage in the capital programme. What programmes are being managed so that expenditure moves into the next fiscal year? One of the nice little tricks that people in finance can always do is slow things down and move them into the next fiscal year. We're at a very early stage in the fiscal year and things could improve, but I don't think that's very likely.

On revenue expenditure, where the pay of public sector employees is the major cost, then in the response of the Welsh Government to the various pay review bodies and in direct negotiation with the trade unions there are two risks. Public sector workers could receive significant real-terms pay cuts, with the danger of salary levels in the public sector falling behind the private sector, leading to an exodus of skilled staff with highly marketable and sought-after skills. Alternatively, pay rises could meet the rate of inflation, but that causes budgetary problems for the whole of the Welsh public sector and, ultimately, for the Welsh Government. The most likely outcome will be somewhere in between, leading to the worst of both worlds.

While traditionally we've had two supplementary budgets, can I repeat my call at the Finance Committee for a second supplementary budget in the autumn term? That will be two months or three months earlier than we normally have it, but I think there is a need for a second supplementary budget, due to the fiscal situation we're in at the moment. You'll then have your normal second supplementary budget as a third supplementary budget at the normal time.

It's important that Welsh Government keeps the Senedd informed of the in-year funding position and its impact on spending. This can either be done via reports to the Finance Committee or regular statements to the Senedd. Ever the optimist, there may be consequential funding to Wales of increasing expenditure in England. The same problems are facing the English public sector, who are starting off from a worse position than we are in Wales, due to two things—the benefit of the Barnett formula and the good management of finance by the Welsh Government.

Whilst the majority of changes identified in the supplementary budget are technical in nature, I do want to focus my contribution on the revised expenditure in response, majoritively, to the war in Ukraine. The supplementary budget identifies also £20 million for the Welsh Government's response to the war. It is a bold statement by the Welsh Government, both supporting the wishes of the Welsh people and articulating the mood of the Welsh nation that we stand in solidarity collectively with the people of Ukraine.

By 9 July, nearly 600 people had arrived in the UK under the Welsh Government's supersponsor scheme and, on 30 June, the Minister told the Finance Committee, of which I'm a Member, that the budget will be worth £600 million less over this three-year spending period than we understood it to be at the time it was settled. So, with inflation hitting a 40-year high, and the Bank of England currently expecting it to increase to further than 11 per cent, these prevailing pressures will definitely impact on the cost of delivering services.

It is then, Deputy Llywydd, imperative that this UK Government and its Treasury seek to support the devolved nations and this place far more systemically in this regard. And as inflation rises so astronomically, they need to do more as people suffer and deliver an annual uplift to budgets to aid this Welsh Government in delivering on its democratic agenda. So, today, Minister, we are suffering, as you know, the most exceptional and unprecedented financial time. It's hurting the economy, it's hurting our constituents, forcing people to heat or eat, and it's harming lives, harming well-being and the mental health of the UK. The UK Government must now act in this capacity in order to make devolution work.

I call on the Minister for Finance to reply to the debate.

Thank you. As a number of colleagues have observed this afternoon, this supplementary budget really does take us back to what we used to know supplementary budgets as being before the pandemic, in the sense that there are very small movements, small allocations, and it's mostly technical in nature. So, much of what we've heard this afternoon and much of what I'll respond to doesn't relate specifically to the supplementary budget, but I think it is an important chance to get some of these important and pressing current issues on the record. A number of colleagues have referred to inflation and asked how this is impacting on the Welsh Government's plans and Rhianon Passmore outlined how our budget is now worth more than £600 million less than we anticipated when we formulated our spending plans in 2021. We're constantly assessing the wider macroeconomic trends and their impact on Wales, but, given that we have only recently agreed the multi-year spending plans to 2025, we're not proposing a fundamental review of these plans at this time, but what we are doing is better understanding the impact of inflation on those plans, and I think that Mike Hedges is quite right in the sense that it will inevitably, I think, lead to some difficult decisions about how we profile some of our capital investments, particularly, but I know that colleagues will be considering that as we enter our next budget period, and we're doing lots of work on that over the course of the summer.

There were some questions about public sector pay, and, of course, it is an absolutely critical issue. The latest figures from the ONS suggest that public sector pay is rising around 1.5 per cent over a three-month period, 8 per cent in the private sector, and that's the largest gap that we've seen in terms of pay growth between the public and private sectors, and, inevitably, that's going to have an impact, I think, on service delivery when people are looking to the private sector for potential different employment. So, we absolutely need the UK Government to step in to this space and undertake to provide a decent pay uplift to people working in the public sector to recognise the work that they've been doing over recent years and to recognise the value of public services.

Several colleagues have referenced the funding that is within the supplementary budget for Ukraine and, as the committee has asked, that Welsh Government endeavours to press the UK Government for clarity on years 2 and 3. At the moment, we only have that clarity in terms of the first year of funding for people coming from Ukraine, and nothing at all on years two and three. And my concern is that the UK Government will just assume that, because people are eligible for support through benefits, they're eligible to work, that they won't need further support, and local government won't need further support to support those individuals. But I absolutely give that undertaking to continue to press these points with the UK Treasury—points that I've already made in regard to Ukraine with the CST at a recent finance Ministers' quadrilateral meeting. And also I was pressing the point that the family scheme needs to have equity with the Homes for Ukraine scheme, because there is a real disparity between those two schemes and the funding and support that the households who are providing kindly their homes for family or strangers to receive. So, that's another area that is of concern.

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is an objection. I will therefore defer voting until voting time.

The next item is a debate on the Welsh Government annual report, delivering our well-being objectives. And I call on the First Minister to move the motion.

Deputy Presiding Officer, last week, the first annual report of this Senedd term was published. It notes the work that we've done towards delivering our well-being objectives. The programme for government of this Government was published less than six weeks after the election in May 2021. This shows our commitment to quickly tackle the challenges facing Wales and to start to implement our radical policy agenda. We said that our Government would be based on trust and ambition, and it would focus on national prosperity and future generations. Our programme for government did note the actions that we would take to deliver 10 well-being objectives in the term of this Government.

In December, we signed a co-operation agreement with Plaid Cymru—a bespoke agreement that includes 46 areas where we have common interests. Some of these measures are included in this annual report, but a full report about what we have achieved together in the first year will be published in December.

Dirprwy Lywydd, in the first year of this Senedd term, we have faced a series of unprecedented challenges—some familiar and others new. We are still facing the consequences of Brexit. It has reduced the size of our economy. It has created a shortage of workers in every part of the community. It has led to a disgraceful situation where the UK Government is ready to repeal an international agreement that it negotiated and signed. Maybe Prime Minister Johnson did deliver Brexit—'Get Brexit done', as he said—but certainly he didn't deliver it successfully, and he has never made Brexit work for the people of Wales.

We have continued to deal with the impact of the worldwide pandemic, the coronavirus. And this virus remains with us. In recent weeks, we have seen an increase in infections, and by now, once again, our hospitals are under strain. Two thousand members of staff are away from their posts because of sickness. More than 1,000 COVID-19 patients are in hospital beds, and there has been an increase in the number of people who need intensive care.

And then, on top of those challenges, in the first year of the sixth Senedd, we have faced an unprecedented cost-of-living crisis, and, of course, the conflict that continues in Ukraine and that has created a humanitarian disaster on our doorstep. The cost-of-living crisis affects all of us. It makes everyday life a challenge for people across Wales as prices increase.

In that context, Llywydd, we will do everything that we can to support people through this crisis. Policies across the 20 years of devolution have put money back in people's pockets: free bus travel for an increasing number of Welsh citizens; free prescriptions for all; free breakfasts in our primary schools and now, free school dinners as well; we've retained the educational maintenance allowance; we've carried on with the council tax benefit; we have the most generous system of student support anywhere in the United Kingdom; and, in September, we'll expand further the most generous childcare offer of any UK nation. Now, Llywydd, there are many more things to which I could point, but I'll make this general point instead: every single one of these measures leaves money in the pockets of Welsh families to help them respond to the cost-of-living crisis. And now, we are going further again. We are providing £380 million to help households, including our winter fuel support payment—a £200 payment for households in receipt of qualifying benefits and a new network of fuel banks in every local authority in Wales.

Llywydd, following the unprovoked attack on the sovereign and independent people of Ukraine, the generosity and kindness of the people of Wales has been steadfast. Almost 3,700 people from Ukraine have now arrived, sponsored by people across Wales and through our supersponsor scheme, and this number grows every day. At the same time, we've given sanctuary to those fleeing the conflicts in Afghanistan and in Syria. To be a nation of sanctuary is an ambition that speaks directly to the sort of country that we want Wales to be. Living up to that ambition takes hard work every single day, but it's work that, as a Government, we are determined to carry out.

Now, Llywydd, we have faced other challenges too throughout this year. The climate and nature emergency has continued unabated, and we have, of course, had to deal with the challenge of working with a UK Government intent on rolling back the clock on devolution at every opportunity. But despite all of these, we have continued to deliver for Wales and we have continued to stand up for Wales.

Llywydd, in last May's election, my party put six key pledges before the electorate. The first was completed within 12 weeks of the election day, when we confirmed full funding for an extra 100 police community support officers—officers who do so much to keep our communities safe. We said that we would address the long waiting times that have built up during the pandemic and we have put in place an ambitious catch-up programme, backed by £1 billion-worth of funding. And we're now beginning to see reductions in those long waiting times for treatment, for diagnostic tests and for therapies.

I have selected the three amendments to the motion, and I call on Andrew R.T. Davies to move amendment 1, tabled in the name of Darren Millar. Andrew R.T. Davies.

Thank you, Presiding Officer, and I formally move the amendment in the name of Darren Millar on the order paper this afternoon. And, before I start my contribution, I'd also like to put on record, over the last 12 months, my group's sincere thanks to all the NHS and public workers who have worked tirelessly in the COVID pandemic that we continue to face today. I know we'll disagree on policy time and time again, the First Minister and I will—that's a democracy—but I was always very grateful for the briefings that he afforded me, and I do believe that in that joint approach, with other parties in the Senedd, there was scope that we could work together on various aspects that people were genuinely concerned about, and I'd used the words 'frightened of', in the light of some of the deep, dark days that we've gone through during the last 12 months. So, I'd formally like to put on the record my sincere thanks to everyone who faced up to the COVID challenge and continues to face up to the COVID challenge.

But I would like to start with the comments that I raised with the First Minister in the First Minister's question session that we had this afternoon. The one overriding narrative that has dominated the last 12 months has been the NHS waiting times, and the scale of that challenge has got deeper and darker as each week and each month has passed, with 700,000 people on a waiting list today here in Wales—one in five of the population—and 68,000 of those 700,000 people waiting two years of more. That is a massive challenge that this programme for government statement today, or debate today, does not do justice to in the way the First Minister's addressed it, I don't believe.

You can point to other parts of the UK that have faced the same COVID challenges that we have here in Wales, and who have actually turned the corner in their numbers. As I highlighted in First Minister's questions today, in England it went as high as 23,000, the two-year wait, but it's now down to 12,000. So, we do need a more coherent plan forward from the Welsh Government on this key issue. We do need to have confidence that the First Minister and his Government have the recruitment plans in place to rejuvenate and revitalise our NHS workforce. As I've raised with him before, such as doctors and doctor recruitment, for example, with training places required by the British Medical Association's own estimation of 200 places a year, and the First Minister acknowledging that that, potentially, could be a true figure, when in fact the Welsh Government are funding anything from 150 to 160 places for doctor training. So, this report doesn't offer us a road map in the way the Government are tackling the serious fault lines that exist within our NHS.

And only last week, I pointed out to the First Minister the Labour commitment on childcare and children in care being housed in bed and breakfasts and unregulated environments, where the BBC report highlighted that 50 children were exposed to risk and 270 children were in an unregulated accommodation setting, despite the Labour Government having this as a key requirement to phase this out as far back as 2015. It's nearly seven years ago that commitment was in place. I understand it's the Government's commitment today to do it, but that situation is still in place.

And then when we look at the cladding issues on housing, whether that be in Cardiff, Swansea, north Wales, across the whole of Wales, residents have felt left adrift by the inaction of the Welsh Government in addressing this key issue. I don't doubt the Minister's own personal commitment to this, but when you look at other parts of the United Kingdom facing up to the developers and actually using the legislative tools that they have to bring the developers to the table, so they contribute to what is their fault—not the residents', not the leaseholders' fault—and putting the remedial measures in place, this debate this afternoon does not talk to those real concerns that people are living with day in, day out, every day of the week, and that is a lack of progress directly at the door of the Welsh Government.

I call on Rhun ap Iorwerth to move amendments 2 and 3, tabled in the name of Siân Gwenllian.

Thank you very much, Llywydd. There is so much that I could, and I do regularly, criticise the Government for. I take my role seriously as health and care spokesperson for my party, holding Government to account on the health service, and I will continue to do that until I see that the people of Wales are getting the health and care service that they deserve. But in the spirit of the end of term, I will start, at least, on a positive note. The annual report makes reference to a programme for government that builds a nation, and I think, thanks to the Plaid Cymru contribution, that we have a programme that can bring real benefits to the people of Wales.

In that sentiment, I move the first Plaid Cymru amendment, which welcomes the co-operation agreement between Plaid Cymru and the Welsh Government on the programme for government. The annual report provides a focus on how the Government could operate preventatively, and that’s particularly relevant in terms of healthcare. But to see that preventative approach having a real impact, so that fewer people ultimately rely on health services, rely on the justice system, for example, an intention isn’t enough. You need funding, you need radical policy, too, and thanks to the co-operation agreement, preventative interventions that are crucial and radical are being implemented, such as free school meals for all primary school children, and the provision of childcare has been expanded. That’s been prioritised, at last. Yes, they’re expensive, but we will as a nation benefit from these in ensuing years when we will have given the best possible start to our youngest generation.

With only six months of the agreement behind us, there are a number of milestones that we’ve already reached—the process of introducing free school meals is in train, we’re expecting Senedd reform legislation, a package to tackle the housing crisis, which is pricing people out of their own communities, and today a consultation was launched for a fairer council tax. Every one of these policies makes its own important contribution to making a future that focuses on the well-being of the next generation. We now have to ensure that the ambitious policies are adopted at all levels of government—here, in local government, where there will be councils from the First Minister’s party and my own responsible for delivering many of these initiatives.

Of course, there are limitations placed on the Government, reflected in the second Plaid Cymru amendment. As one who’s believed in independence throughout my life, I’m always frustrated in thinking what could be. Laura McAllister was discussing railways over the weekend, when she said,

'It seems obvious that doing things better within the current non-devolved system can surely only lead to marginal improvements'.

Although we are doing our best for the people of Wales in this Senedd, the failure to integrate policy decisions and fiscal decisions at the highest level has prevented real transformational change. In the context of railways, transport may be devolved for Wales, but whilst Westminster still holds the power for rail infrastructure, we will continue to suffer underfunding of billions of pounds, and a lack of investment in any new infrastructure, in any single piece of new track. I couldn’t put it better than what’s contained within the annual report:

'In Wales, we know best what works for Wales.'

But when we get the priorities right, we don’t necessarily have the powers to deliver. We want to safeguard workers. The UK Government wants to revoke the Trade Union (Wales) Act 2017. We are funding support for our friends from Ukraine. We are innovative in welcoming refugees. The UK Government is taking money without asking towards military aid. I'm not making a comment on what that money's being spent on, but the fact that it is being taken without consultation from health budgets, education budgets and climate change budgets, when Welsh taxes have already contributed to the UK's defence spending.

We want to innovate in renewable energy, but Westminster Ministers deny us the ability to use our natural resources to generate revenue by devolving the Crown Estate, something that they have done in Scotland. And despite a clear pledge from the Prime Minister that Wales wouldn't be a penny worse off in leaving the European Union, the UK Government is pocketing £1 billion of funding that should have come to Wales. The more the Westminster Government breaks its promises, the more it destroys the United Kingdom, but likewise, the longer the Welsh Labour Government denies that, the further Wales will be left behind in whatever remnants of the UK remain.

My contribution is going to be more technical in nature, I think. Firstly, First Minister, can I thank you for bringing this annual report forward, the first of this Senedd? An annual report is something we should look forward to. It gives an opportunity to praise success, but it also should give an opportunity to demonstrate where things are wrong. It should demonstrate self-awareness of the Government to know where things are in the scale of things.

Ten well-being objectives are welcome. I was looking forward to reading through the report, and I was looking forward to getting to the evaluation that I am so used to as a past council leader, having to prepare for regulators, for audiences who might be inspecting my annual plans that I presented. But, I was disappointed to find that there was no way of evaluating the story that we're told. Whilst there are many good things in the report, I'm sure there are many areas where the people need to understand a little more about what has gone wrong, what is needed to put things right, and how those things would be measured. Performance management is key in any organisation, and we shouldn't take it as just read when presented with an annual report. We should be able to scrutinise that as a Senedd and challenge, and understand what needs to happen to make things better.

I'm used to looking at RAG tables—I'm sure many of you know those; red, amber, green tables that accompany reports. Llywydd, how does the Senedd truly evaluate these sorts of reports, or how will it moving forward? I know I'm probably being naive in expecting such things, but I think it's good practice that we should be able to look at how things are progressing, and how does the Government itself evaluate progress against its objectives. Are there targets? What targets are aligned to these 10 well-being goals, and how do we evaluate those? Without robust challenge of data, surely the Government is at risk of believing positions that may not always be correct. For example, when you read objective 1,

'Provide effective, high quality and sustainable healthcare',

you could be lulled into a sense that things are not too bad—that things may be amber, erring on green. However, as Andrew R.T. Davies pointed out this morning and again today robustly, and many others report this every day to us—. Indeed, I sat in a meeting last night where we heard of terrible performance in our health board. So, the real position is that, on a RAG rating, this would be a red—a significant red—and I'd be held to account if it was my organisation by the Minister for local government at that time, and have been challenged many times in the past.

There are many areas that deserve recognition, but I appeal to you, First Minister, that in future annual reports we have the full picture, the opportunity to challenge robustly the direction of this Government, and how things are being achieved, because at the moment, I feel at a loss. I have to take it as read that this is what we're doing. How do I know how we're going to do better? Thank you, Llywydd.

The First Minister to reply to the debate.

Llywydd, diolch yn fawr. Can I thank Andrew R.T. Davies for what he said about the ability to work together when the circumstances allow for that? There will be opportunities in the coming year as well to continue to do that where we have some shared agendas. It's the business of opposition parties to oppose, Llywydd, so I understand that when the leader of the opposition grasps a single statistic from somewhere else and tries to build a whole edifice upon it, he's doing the job that he's expected to do. That shouldn't stretch to not giving proper recognition to things where that credit is deserved. The Minister met with housing developers and building developers only yesterday in order to make sure that they live up to their obligations here in Wales, just as they are expected to live up to them elsewhere.

Where children living in temporary accommodation is concerned, it does remain the objective of this Government to eliminate that use, and I look forward to being able to work together on some of the challenging policies that we will need to bring forward in order to make sure that we can achieve that objective.

I thank the leader of the opposition for what he said about the actions taken to support people coming from Ukraine. He will have seen that Scotland has today also had to suspended its supersponsorship platform, and that is simply because the pace at which people are arriving in Wales and in Scotland now means that, in order to be able to go on looking after people in the way we would wish, we have to get the system into balance, where people leaving our welcome centres is broadly in balance with people arriving. I hope we'll be able to do that more quickly, but we also need to make sure we get it right. When we offer people the opportunity to move into those longer term arrangements, we want to do it on the best possible basis and with the least possible risk that those arrangements will break down.

I thank Rhun ap Iorwerth. Of course, we want to co-operate with Plaid Cymru on everything that's in our agreement. As he said, we have started on that work quickly already, and I'm looking forward to December when we will have an opportunity to report on everything that's in the agreement fully. We have been talking today, Llywydd, about a number of things where we have already co-operated—council tax reform; only today, the finance Minister has announced a number of challenging possibilities and radical possibilities. But, if we are going to do things that are radical, we will have to do things that are challenging as well. That's the purpose of co-operation, to press ahead with those kinds of issues. Of course, the devolution journey is not over. But, when you work within Government, you have to focus on the things that we can do today, and not just talk about the things that we can't do. The Government's job, as we've shown in the annual report, is to use the powers and the responsibilities that we already have.

I thank Peter Fox for what he said. I'll think carefully about what he said. I have to say, Llywydd, we are awash with data. We publish a mountain of data as a Government. It's not a problem of having insufficient data, what we don't always do as much as we would wish to do is to focus on the explanation that lies behind that data, the understanding of it. If there's more we can do in future annual reports to reflect that, as I said, I'll give careful thought to what he said.

In the meantime, Llywydd, this is the first annual report of this Senedd term. It shows, I believe, the strong start that has been made on delivering on those well-being objectives, despite the fact that, in any form of government, you spend a great deal of your time dealing with things that were not part of your plan and indeed were well beyond your own scope. So, whether it's Brexit or COVID, or the cost-of-living crisis, or war in Europe, all of those things press on Government every day. And yet, the annual report demonstrates that we have been able to make significant progress, setting out the foundations for the coming years, to deliver on the mandate given by people in Wales to this Government. We will continue to do that.

We will not be able to support the amendment in the name of Darren Millar. We will support the first amendment put forward by Siân Gwenllian. We'll not be able to support the second one. And, then, I hope that Members will be prepared to support the amended motion, if that is what is what is in front of us for determination. Diolch yn fawr.

The proposal is to agree amendment 1. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is objection to amendment 1 and, therefore, we will defer voting on that item until voting time.

That bring us to voting time. So, we'll take a short break in order to prepare for that vote technically.

That brings us to voting time. The first vote this afternoon is on item 6, the Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016 (Housing Association Tenancies: Fundamental Provisions) Regulations 2022. I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Lesley Griffiths. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 39, 15 abstentions and none against. Therefore, the motion under item 6 is agreed.

We now move to a vote on item 8, the Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016 (Amendment of Schedule 12) Regulations 2022. I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Lesley Griffiths. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 39, one abstention, 14 against, and therefore the motion under item 8 is agreed.

We move now to item 9, the Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016 (Amendment) Regulations 2022. I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Lesley Griffiths. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 39, no abstentions, and 15 against. Therefore, the motion is agreed.

We move now to item 11, the Restricted Roads (20 mph Speed Limit) (Wales) Order 2022. I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Lesley Griffiths. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 39, no abstentions, 15 against, and therefore the motion is agreed.

We move now to item 15, Stage 4 of the Welsh Tax Acts etc. (Power to Modify) Bill. I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Rebecca Evans. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 27, one abstention, 26 against, and therefore the motion is agreed.

We move now to item 16, the debate on the first supplementary budget 2022-23. I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Lesley Griffiths. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 39, 15 abstentions, and none against, and therefore the motion under item 16 is agreed.

We move now to item 17, the debate on the Welsh Government annual report on delivering its well-being objectives. I call for a vote on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Darren Millar. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 15, no abstentions, 39 against. Therefore, amendment 1 is not agreed.

I now call for a vote on amendment 2, tabled in the name of Siân Gwenllian. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 39, no abstentions, 15 against, and therefore amendment 2 is agreed.

We move now to amendment 3, tabled in the name of Siân Gwenllian. Open the vote on amendment 3. Close the vote. In favour 11, no abstentions, 43 against, and therefore amendment 3 is not agreed.

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

Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 39, no abstentions, 15 against, and therefore the motion as amended is agreed.

That concludes voting time.