Plenary

We move on now to the business statement and announcement, and I call on the Trefnydd, Lesley Griffiths, to make that statement.

Diolch, Llywydd. There are several changes to today's agenda. A motion to suspend Standing Orders has been added to the agenda, to enable the debate on budget flexibilities and the operation of the UK funding framework to proceed on the basis of a revised motion tabled yesterday. This debate, and the debate on the legislative consent motion on the Economic Activity of Public Bodies (Overseas Matters) Bill will take place immediately after the business statement.

Finally, the statements on creating a smoke-free generation and tackling youth vaping and second homes and affordability have been postponed. Draft business for the next three weeks is set out on the business statement and announcement, which can be found amongst the meeting papers available to Members electronically.

Trefnydd, can I call for a statement from the Minister for education on the proposed changes to the school year, please? We know that the proposed changes to the school year by the Welsh Government are opposed by parents, teachers, education unions, tourism operators, and even the Royal Welsh Show. But to add to this opposition, I've recently been contacted by faith community leaders with concerns over plans to ditch the Easter break. As you will be aware—and all Members in this Chamber, I hope, are aware—Easter is the central festival in the Christian faith. So, to suggest that it has little or no significance to schools or young people, or society across Wales, is unacceptable. Now, I appreciate that Good Friday and Easter Monday are still protected in the school year, because these are public holidays, but the wider Easter period is also a very significant period for many people in Wales who observe the Christian faith.

Now, we've heard a lot of discussion in recent weeks and months, quite rightly so, about problems with antisemitism and Islamophobia, and I think that many people regard this decision by the Welsh Government to pursue a discussion on this matter as anti-Christian. So, can we have a statement, as soon as possible, in order to have a wider discussion on this issue, because it is a matter of concern for many tens of thousands of people who observe the Christian faith?

Well, as the Member is aware, the consultation is now closed. I have not seen the consultation responses as yet, but I would imagine it's a much more mixed picture than the one that the Member portrays. Of course the Minister for Education and the Welsh Language will make a statement when those consultation responses have been assessed.

Trefnydd, you'll be aware that there have been protestors outside of the Senedd today from our cultural institutions, obviously opposing the cuts that are being proposed. One of the things that they have highlighted, of course, has been the risks to the national collections, both because of the condition of the buildings, but also from the loss of expertise. I know I've raised this a number of times with you, asking for a statement from the Deputy Minister for Arts, Sports and Tourism on this matter. I still haven't had those reassurances in terms of the national collections, and I wonder, can we please have that statement, because all of us are concerned? They're the nation's national collections—they don't belong to those national institutions—and we have a duty to ensure that they are safeguarded for future generations.

Thank you. I was aware of the protest outside the Senedd today, and I know the Deputy Minister also was, and she has been having conversations with stakeholders around the issue that you raised. I will certainly ask her to bring forward a written statement.

Trefnydd, as we progress plans to meet our net-zero targets, it's important that we give those who will responsible for implementation and delivery as much information and detail as possible, so that they can plan properly and recruit the necessary people needed to deliver them. With this in mind, can we please have a statement from the Government on the timescales they have for implementing a seagrass restoration scheme, and on the funding programme they intend to provide to help introduce this scheme, as committed to in the programme for government and the biodiversity deep-dive exercise?

As you know, the UK has lost around 92 per cent of its seagrass meadows, and the Welsh Government knows all too well how restoring seagrass around Wales can have a tremendous impact, not only on reducing coastal erosion, but on improving marine diversity and storing carbon. Trefnydd, Wales has some of the world's leading seagrass scientists, and through the work of organisations such as the Project Seagrass and WWF Cymru, there are large numbers of dedicated volunteers who are prepared to help in collecting and planting seagrasses. However, I feel that they have been left in a position of limbo, and any clarity from the Welsh Government, in terms of a statement, would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

Thank you. I think the Member raises a really important point. It's not that long ago I had a school down from my constituency, who came and gave a petition to the Minister for Climate Change around the restoration of seagrass, and I was quite surprised to hear how long it does take to restore it. I know the Minister for Climate Change is considering it in the round, following the biodiversity deep-dive.

Trefnydd, next month is Endometriosis Action Month. Last week I had the pleasure of meeting campaigner Georgia Jefferies, who lives on Deeside, and campaigns for better services for women with endometriosis. Georgia rightly identified the need for specialist-trained endometriosis nurses across Wales, and for all services to be readily available for those patients. I'm obviously keen for those improvements to be made, as I'm sure my colleagues on the Petitions Committee are, after the work we've done on this. Please can I ask for a statement from the Welsh Government, updating Members on endometriosis services during the awareness month in March? Diolch.

Thank you. It's really good that you've highlighted that next month will be the month to raise awareness around endometriosis. Obviously, it's a matter for each individual health board to ensure that they provide services for women suffering with endometriosis.

I'd like an urgent statement, please, relating to Ffos-y-fran in Merthyr. The company in charge of the site said that they would stop extracting coal last November, after illegally mining for more than a year. Now, I've been informed that coal mining was still going on as recently as last week, but this morning I was told that the site was quiet—there are no train wagons. Now, is this a temporary hiatus or a permanent end to the insult? I would call on the Welsh Government to issue an immediate stop notice on the removal of any coal from the site, or indeed the sale of any further coal from Ffos-y-fran.

And finally, I've raised concerns on many occasions in the Senedd about what's going to happen once the company leaves. Only £15 million is set aside in an account that could be used for restoration work, and that is vastly below what will be needed. I understand that the local authority will consider a renewed application for that restoration project. I would plead with the Government to call in any application that will do less than what the residents of Merthyr Tydfil were promised in 2007, and it is a plea, Minister. This situation rumbles on month after month, and campaigners and residents need reassurance that someone will finally do what's right here. So, please could a statement address this, and could I have an urgent meeting with the Government to discuss the situation?

Well, if you want a meeting, I suggest that you write directly to the Minister for Climate Change, whose portfolio this sits in, and, again, perhaps write to the local authority regarding the quiet period that you referred to. I know that the Minister is also in discussions with the local authority, to ensure that appropriate remediation takes place.

I call for an oral Welsh Government statement on eating disorders. As we heard at the end of First Minister's questions, 26 February to 3 March is Eating Disorders Awareness Week 2024. This year the focus is on avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder, or ARFID, a condition characterised by the person avoiding certain foods, or types of food, having restricted intake in terms of overall amount eaten, or both.

I took part in the debate on eating disorders here during Eating Disorders Awareness Week 2022. In that debate, there were calls for the Welsh Government to publish a service model or framework, with timescales, for achieving the vision of the 2018 eating disorders service review, so that everyone affected can access effective help quickly. I highlighted the then recently published Beat report, which found that progress towards early intervention, evidence-based treatment and support for families had varied widely across Wales. It's therefore disappointing that, two years on from that debate, we still do not have such a model or framework for Wales. Treating eating disorders is critical in ensuring that patients make a full and sustained recovery and prevent the need for patients requiring in-patient treatment. And therefore, it's concerning also that, two years on from the debate, we still don't have a national plan with timescales to improve local eating disorders services. I call for a Welsh Government statement—oral statement—on this accordingly.

Thank you. Well, we do continue to invest in our eating disorders services, and a new team and clinical lead for eating disorders is helping to ensure that really positive changes are being driven to eating disorders care, with very much a focus on early intervention, and we do continue to provide funding for a range of easy access support, including the Beat helpline.

I'm inspired by Darren Millar to make a contribution, because I hadn't really planned to make a contribution on the business statement. But I just want to provide an alternative view, because I know that Darren Millar is a committed Christian, which I absolutely respect, but I want to share an alternative view as to whether school terms and holidays should avoid or disregard the celebration of Easter. As a school governor in a Church in Wales school, I'm aware that many Christian schools prefer religious events to be collectively celebrated in their school, as far as possible, and many deliberately hold on to their pupils until the day before the public holiday when they are duty-bound to release them. So, I think we have to have a more nuanced approach to celebrations of important religious and cultural events, including, for example, this Friday's Dewi Sant celebrations. So, I think we shouldn't be carving up the school year around one particular religious celebration. I think we have to look at the much wider issues, and I hope that the education Minister will bear this in mind and take it into account.

Thank you. Well, the Minister for Education and the Welsh Language is in his place and will have heard your contribution, and, as I say, when the consultation responses—. I'm not aware how many there have been, for instance, but normally it's a big process to go through all the responses to make sure that everybody's view is taken into account, and the Minister will then update Members.

Trefnydd, I'd like to call for a statement from the Minister for health regarding funding for the all-Wales inherited and metabolic diseases service, including SWAN, the syndromes without a name, team within that. There appears to be some uncertainty over whether they'll be funded in the future, which means they are currently reluctant to begin any treatment pathways for those impacted. And I have a constituent with a child who is affected by paediatric acute-onset neuropsychiatric syndrome—PANS—and paediatric autoimmune neuropsychiatric disorders associated with streptococcal infections—PANDAS—and this uncertainty is hugely stressful for them at this difficult time. In my view, the SWAN team need to be clear about the future of Welsh Government funding to keep up their great work and refer individuals for development treatment. So, a statement or response on this issue from the Minister for health would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

Thank you. Well, as I say, it is a matter for health boards to ensure that any disease or illness—that services are provided within the health board or, if they have an arrangement, that a patient could go to another health board, and that includes the disease to which you refer.

Can I ask for statement on the building of new council houses? I believe in the importance of council house building to meet the serious demand we have for housing. Can the statement include those already built or being built, and the number planned for 2024-25 and 2025-26, and Welsh Government support for the building of new council houses?

I'm asking for a second statement on financial transactions capital. I would like this to include how much has been received by the Welsh Government, how much has been spent, how much has been paid back to the Treasury, how much has been recycled into new projects and an evaluation of the success of those projects the money has gone into.

Well, with regard to your second request around financial transactions capital, you do ask for some very specific points. I think it would be better to write to the Minister for Finance and Local Government with those questions. Around the building of new council housing, you will know that the Welsh Government has a very ambitious target in relation to social housing. We make absolutely no apology for that ambitious target. In the first four years of this Senedd term, we've now allocated a record £1.2 billion to social housing and we've provided local authorities with access to the social housing grant, and that really does support their ambitions as well to deliver more affordable homes in Wales.

Finally, Laura Anne Jones.

Diolch. Business Minister, I, too, would like to reiterate calls for a statement from the education Minister about the proposed changes to school holidays. The prioritisation of these plans by the Government is, quite frankly, an insult to all, considering the myriad of more pressing issues facing education in Wales. Education unions are against change, farming unions are against change, and tourism operators, faith groups. So, I think it's only right that the education Minister comes to the Chamber and addresses these concerns, this serious backlash, by dropping these ludicrous plans at a time when education in Wales is in crisis. And now the consultation is closed, can I reiterate calls for a statement as soon as possible in this Chamber? Thank you.

I don't have anything further to add to my answers to the two previous Members who asked me the same question.

I thank the Trefnydd.

Item 3 has been withdrawn.

So, we need a motion to suspend Standing Orders to allow the debate on budget flexibility and the operation of the UK funding framework. Could I call on the Minister for Finance and Local Government to move the motion formally?

I formally move.

The motion has been moved formally. Does any Member object to the motion to suspend Standing Orders? No. Therefore, that motion is agreed.

That enables us to hold the debate on budget flexibilities and the operation of the UK funding framework. The Minister for Finance and Local Government, therefore, to move the motion—Rebecca Evans.

Today I'm pleased that we've been able to reach consensus across the Senedd to jointly table a motion calling on the UK Government to provide greater fiscal flexibility for the Welsh Government in the interests of effective budget management and delivering better outcomes for the people of Wales. We're living in extraordinary times, with the impacts of the EU exit, the COVID-19 pandemic, the cost-of-living crisis and persistently high inflation having created unprecedented challenges for our public services, our economy and our communities. The Welsh Government has responded swiftly and decisively to these challenges, but we have faced significant constraints and uncertainty in managing our budget due to the lack of adequate fiscal levers at our disposal.

The current UK financial arrangements do not offer the predictability and the funding certainty required to support our budget planning and that of our partner organisations, including local authorities. This includes the timings of UK Government announcements, which fail to recognise the impact on our budgets and the scrutiny provided by the Senedd. Unlike the UK Government, we cannot borrow to fund day-to-day spending. We rely on the Barnett consequentials that flow from UK Government decisions, which often come with little or no notice. We frequently see significant changes to our budget late in the financial year, where funding allocations must be used quickly or cuts absorbed. We also face rigid limits on our ability to carry forward or draw down funds from our reserves, which hamper our ability to plan and respond to changing circumstances.

To illustrate these points, it's worth me setting out for the Senedd our experience this year. With indications from the UK Government to expect very little additional funding, last summer we carried out an extensive reprioritisation of our budgets. We were forced to make some unpalatable decisions with real impacts for public services and jobs, which we now find could have been avoided. Our final figures for the supplementary estimates were confirmed on 7 February, which is already unacceptably late, coming just weeks before the end of the financial year, to only be then informed that these contained material errors, and subsequently we were presented with new figures on 13 February.

The scale of the additional funding, whilst welcome, is not insignificant. At £231 million, it represents around two thirds of our reserve capacity. Had I not already planned to maximise our draw-down from reserves this year, the restrictions on our reserve—we can only hold £350 million in aggregate—would have meant us surrendering some of this additional funding, funding rightly due to Wales, back to HM Treasury. Given the limited time to utilise this funding, and recognising the Chief Secretary to the Treasury has provided some modest flexibility in which to carry forward a small proportion of this funding, £185 million will be carried forward to next year in the Wales reserve.

There is something fundamentally wrong with the UK funding arrangements that this situation can arise. These challenges illustrate the need for improvements to ensure the fiscal structures of the United Kingdom work effectively and support devolved Governments in the efficient economic and effective administration of resources to secure value for public money. To avoid such situations in future, we should seek to establish a principle that funding confirmed after a UK autumn fiscal event can be managed across financial years, in addition to any carry-forward permitted under reserve arrangements. This would ensure the effective deployment of funding given late in the financial year and would, essentially, formalise the ad hoc arrangements that we have with HM Treasury at present.

I have selected the five amendments to the motion. I call on Adam Price to move amendments 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, tabled in the name of Heledd Fychan.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. I move the amendments in the name of Heledd Fychan.

The Minister referred to political consensus and, certainly, we echo many of the remarks that she made and are reflected in the core motion, but I think it is a matter of regret that there was no attempt, certainly until very late in the day, to involve us in discussions in shaping the motion, and, indeed, our suggestions for amendments were not accepted, which is why they are presented as amendments to this text, because we would've like that consensus to have gone much further. Our amendments revisit some familiar territory of areas of deep financial injustice in terms of the current position in relation to the operation of the Barnett formula, which we would like to see revised. We'd like to see those capital borrowing limits, and, indeed, general borrowing limits increased even further, and we'd like to see greater flexibility in terms of our ability to set income tax bands.

The Scottish fiscal agreement, of course, has now been revised, or that revision will be operational from next year, and the revision was completed last year. Among other things, it, for example, indexed to inflation their resource borrowing limit. It did the same for their capital borrowing limit, it abolished their reserve draw-down limits and it also indexed it's overall reserve limit. These are many of the things that, actually, the Minister has referred to now, and, indeed, I think the Minister has already said that many of the revisions that the Scottish Government have achieved through their revised agreement, the Welsh Government would like to see applied in the Welsh case.

Now, the Scottish fiscal agreement had specific provisions about a review mechanism, or review timing, rather, in it, and it explicitly said that there would be a review following the Westminster and the Scottish Parliament elections, respectively, of 2020 and 2021. That's what happened, leading to the review being finalised last year. The Welsh fiscal agreement didn't have an explicit date in terms of those review arrangements. What it said was that the agreement would be subject to periodic review and that the first review would take place before the end of the block grant funding transitional period. My understanding of the block grant transitional funding period—but I'd be grateful if the Minister could provide some illumination on this rather opaque matter—is that there is a transitional period when, if Welsh spending per head is above the floor of 115 per cent, a different Barnett consequential is applied of 105 per cent. I'm looking to the Minister to give me some encouragement here, but my understanding is that, until that comes to an end, until we are, therefore, below 115 per cent and the transitional Barnett consequential doesn't apply, we're still in the transitional period, which means that the periodic review provision doesn't kick in. My understanding is that, in this, you will have assessed, probably, for this new spending review period, whether we're still in that transitional funding period. So, we're not going to get a periodic review for many, many years into the future, but the agreement has provision in it for the Welsh Government to request a review, and so my question, quite simply, to the Minister is have we requested that review, because everything that she has said and everything in this motion suggests to us that we absolutely need this review, and we need it as soon as possible.

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

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. I'd like to say a few words as Chair of the Finance Committee, as this debate relates to a number of points of interest to us, which, hopefully, reflect the broad consensus of opinion around these issues, as expressed in the cross-party motion that is before us today. In my time as Chair, the committee has made several recommendations relating to the matters outlined in the motion, either directly to the Treasury or in support of the Minister in her dealings with Treasury counterparts.

Our concerns are broadly related to the following areas. Firstly, there seems to be a general lack of understanding and awareness within the Treasury of matters affecting devolved institutions. This can be seen by the scant regard given to devolved budgetary processes by the UK Government when setting dates of physical events. In particular, the committee believes that the Treasury could do more to ensure that the dates of its autumn and spring statements take devolved budgetary processes into account. That’s why we included a recommendation to this effect in our recent report on the draft budget for 2024-25, and have written to the Chief Secretary to the Treasury to express similar views.

Secondly, as has already been mentioned, the lack of transparency and flexibility in the way that the Treasury deals with funding decisions relating to devolved matters is concerning. The committee has long called for improvements in the way that information is shared and communicated between Governments on funding calculations. Most recently, we have recommended that the Minister continues to press the Treasury for earlier and better engagement with the Welsh Government regarding significant funding announcements, with the aim of providing greater clarity on the Welsh Government’s funding position earlier in the year. The Minister will be giving evidence to the committee this Thursday on the second supplementary budget, and we’ll be interested in hearing whether these issues persist.

Thirdly, we support the views expressed in this motion to press the UK Government for maximum flexibility within the fiscal framework, enabling discretion for the Welsh Government to manage its budgets and deal with the acute pressures it faces. This includes removing the annual Wales reserve draw-down limit and increasing the size of both borrowing limits and the Wales reserve at least in line with inflation. These are relatively simple steps to take but would make a world of difference to the fiscal levers at the Welsh Government’s disposal.

And finally, I would like to mention the lack of engagement between Whitehall departments and the Senedd on funding matters and the effect that this has in the context of accountability. This is something we have seen with our own eyes since the beginning of the sixth Senedd.

Despite repeated attempts, a string of Chief Secretaries to the Treasury have refused invitations to meet with the committee, both formally and informally. We find this situation regrettable, but we are hopeful that the newest incumbent will be more amenable to our requests. Nor are these issues constrained to the Senedd alone; as Members may be aware already, my committee, along with our counterpart committees in the Scottish Parliament—and now, hopefully, in the Northern Ireland Assembly—has established an inter-parliamentary finance committee forum, with the aim of providing a collective voice on these issues of common concern. As a committee, we've also agreed to delve deeper into this matter, and that's why we are currently conducting an inquiry into fiscal inter-governmental relations. We hope to publish a report by early autumn, and I look forward to sharing our findings and recommendations with Members in the Chamber later this year.

Dirprwy Lywydd, if I may just say a couple of words as the Plaid spokesperson on finance and local government, based on the issues we've listed, I’m particularly heartened that there is cross-party recognition today that the current fiscal framework for Wales is simply not fit for purpose. If we want devolution to come of age and realise its potential, we must come together as one to demand a better and fairer deal for Wales, and I sincerely hope that the UK leaders of both major parties will listen intently to what their representatives here in the Senedd are telling them loud and clear. It's for this reason that we will be supporting the main motion that is before us today, but, in line with our vision for a more ambitious and prosperous Wales, we do believe that we can and should go further, which is reflected in our amendments, as outlined by Adam Price.

Thank you for bringing this debate and this motion today, Minister. I look forward to working with you on these issues over the coming months and years. Diolch.

I welcome the Minister's opening statement and this collaborative approach and, obviously, we will be supporting the motion. I want to begin by recognising the fact that the Welsh Government has limited fiscal levers and that the budgetary flexibility available to the Wales Government is insufficient. In order for the Wales Government to effectively implement fiscal policies, it needs greater flexibility—a fact we can all agree on.

It is important that the Welsh Government has greater predictability and certainty regarding its spending and funding arrangements to support its budget planning. As we all know, the Welsh Government's reserve and borrowing limits, as we've heard, were set in 2016 and haven't changed. Obviously, the global economic outlook has changed drastically since then and, despite record amounts of funding from the UK Conservative Government, the Welsh Government's budgets lack flexibility. I think it's safe to say that the system needs an annual review built into it to ensure that any Welsh Government has the borrowing powers that reflect the economic environment.

The current system needs a reform. There is a need for greater fiscal flexibility for the Government in Wales in the interests of effective budget management, and to abolish the reserve draw-down limits currently in place. It seems peculiar also that local authorities have more flexibility when it comes to borrowing and reserves than the Welsh Government does—a fact I hope that UK Government will look at and amend. The Welsh Government is responsible for far more powers, we know, and far more people, than any individual local authority, so as such ought to have that greater flexibility.

While I disagree with many of Labour and Plaid's fiscal policy directions and the vast amounts of money wasted on various pet projects, this is a matter that transcends political parties and the Welsh Government should have more fiscal flexibilities, regardless of the party in power. Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd.

The Welsh Government is calling for the indexing of the Welsh Government's borrowing and overall reserve limits to inflation. On the use of reserves and adding underspend to reserves, can I follow on from where Peter Fox left off? There's no fiscal reason to limit the movement into and out of Welsh reserves; the money has already gone to the Welsh Government. As far as the Treasury should be concerned, if it is spent or saved should not matter, as it has already been given to the Welsh Government. Every council in Wales, including community councils, can move money into and out of reserves with no external control. The Welsh Government cannot. Does that make sense to anybody? Because it certainly makes no sense to me whatsoever. Why is adding money to reserves a bad thing? Why is taking money out of reserves a bad thing? This is just the way that people—. Going back to some of the Conservatives' view, that's the way people run their own budgets, by putting money into their savings and taking money out of their savings. In terms of future budgetary management, adding money into reserves is a good thing. Hopefully, someone in the Conservatives can explain why movement into and out of reserves must be controlled.

On borrowing limits, again, it does not make sense to me. The Government can use the mutual investment model—a very expensive way of paying for capital expenditure—to pay for capital projects. Previously, the private finance initiative was allowed, which, again, was an extremely expensive way of funding capital projects. The mutual investment model is PFI without the janitorial services.

Councils can borrow prudently, which means that, as long as the section 151 officer approves it, they can borrow. In Wales, there's not been the debt mountain created by gambling on the property market as has happened in England. A total of 192 local authorities in England—I'll repeat that: 192 local authorities in England—have debts exceeding twice their spending power. Forty-five local authorities have debt ratios exceeding 11 times their spending power. So, control is necessary. There should have been control on what local authorities did in England because they've left themselves in a very serious financial position, and, as we've seen in England, a number of them have, effectively, gone bankrupt.

Whilst the Welsh Government asking for it to be indexed would be progress and reduce the amount of very expensive mutual investment model borrowing that Government uses, there's another way of controlling capital expenditure between the gambling of the English local authorities and the straitjacket that the Welsh Government works under. I suggest that any expenditure above the current cap would need the approval of the Office for Budget Responsibility or a similar organisation. Responsible borrowing would then be able to be made.

As demonstrated by the text of this cross-party motion, Wales is not in a position to deal effectively with the challenges facing us—challenges that are unprecedented in the history of devolution. As Adam Price outlined in his contribution, all too often we are the forgotten nation in Westminster, and we do not have the powers and flexibility necessary to manage our budgets.

Last year, the Welsh Government asked permission from Westminster to be allowed to dip into its capital funding for the running of the health service. This simply should not be the case. It's ineffective, it adds layers of bureaucracy, and hinders Welsh Government's ability to respond to events. Mike Hedges is very consistent. He regularly raises this ridiculous situation in which local authorities and indeed community councils can take money out of their reserves in a way Welsh Government cannot. I'm glad today to hear that Peter Fox agrees that this situation is ridiculous. It doesn't make any sense, it's inefficient, and it shows a lack of respect for the Welsh Government, and, indeed, our Senedd.

In contrast to the hindrance on the Welsh Government to dip into its reserves, contrast the lack of delay, that no delay happened, when the Treasury decided to claw back the £155 million of unspent pandemic funds. I have been unable to ascertain where the £155 million ended up, but what is clear is that this Senedd had no say in the matter at all. Yet again, we see these rules impacting Wales disproportionately. Scotland have very similar rules in regard to unspent funds, but the amount they can carry forward is vastly higher than what we have here in Wales. In contrast to us, Scotland didn't have to pay back a single penny to the Treasury for their unspent pandemic funds. The Holtham commission recommended that we receive a 115 per cent needs-based factor for our version of the Barnett formula. This has been rejected by the UK Government, as we haven't reached a relative block grant per head of 115 per cent. As of 2021, our funding per head sits at 120 per cent, which is why it is so bizarre and makes no sense that our needs-based factor has remained at 105 per cent since 2018. These values need to be changed, or Wales will continue to receive an unfair share of funding.

We see clearly here the challenges that we face as a nation. In the first instance, securing adequate funding is proving impossible. As Mike Hedges said, entirely rightly, we need to abolish the Barnett formula. And the Treasury also has the right to claw back any funding that we receive as it wishes.

To ensure fairness for our people and the nation, we need to abolish the restrictions on the use of our capital budgets. We must reform the Barnett formula, which is well past its use-by date. And we must ensure that we in Wales are able to develop flexible fiscal policies that can respond effectively to events. Thank you very much.

I'm grateful to the Minister for introducing this debate. I'm also grateful to both Plaid Cymru and the Welsh Conservative for embracing this consensus. I think there has been a consensus at different times over the past few years on different elements of these matters, but this is the first time that I can remember that all three parties represented here have come together with an agreed position. Whilst welcoming the consensus, I'm also going to ask Peter Fox to move a little further in that consensus and think perhaps a little more radically about the sorts of challenges facing Wales.

One of the things that comes up time and time again, and has come up throughout my time in this place, is the fiscal calendar. Throughout all that time, no matter who has been in Government in the United Kingdom, what we've seen are decisions taken by the Treasury that suit the Treasury. And what we haven't seen are decisions being taken by the Treasury that are relevant to all parts of the United Kingdom. And we do need to agree with the Treasury that there will be a fiscal calendar for all parts of the United Kingdom, and that fiscal calendar is one that all Governments buy into and agree that they will stick to.

But we've also seen significant changes to the way the Treasury manages the finances of the United Kingdom. And this is the crux of my argument today. I think, if we had this debate in the UK House of Commons, you'd find Ministers who'd sat in different departments of state in Whitehall agreeing with our analysis of the Treasury. I don't think the Treasury is uniquely targeting Wales or Scotland or Northern Ireland. I think the Treasury is a bully in London as well, and I think most people recognise that. I think we need to look hard at how the financial structures of the United Kingdom actually function for the whole of the United Kingdom, and not simply for civil servants who happen to be sitting in the Treasury today.

The Northern Irish agreement, which was published last month, I think, demonstrates that there can be a way forward, because hidden within the command paper 'Safeguarding the Union' was a commitment to change the basis of funding for Northern Ireland. Without any discussion, any debate, we will move to a needs-based formula. Now, I'd be interested if the Minister has heard anything about what that actually means in reality or whether the Treasury's made any statement on that. If she could address that in replying to the debate, I'd be grateful. But the fact that the Treasury can make a decision of that nature, that fundamental nature, without any debate and discussion, demonstrates that it has too much power. That's what it demonstrates. And that that power can be used in an arbitrary way.

We have an inter-governmental relations agreement that establishes structures to resolve disputes between the Governments of the United Kingdom, and, as Mike Hedges has very eloquently described, it doesn't work. Because when you do have these disagreements, and we can use HS2 as an example that is on our minds today—. When Labour were in Government, exactly the same thing happened with the Olympics, so let's not pretend that this is simply a Conservative issue. This is an issue of the governance of the United Kingdom; it goes beyond political parties.

I very much welcome this debate and thank the Minister for bringing it to the Senedd today. As the Minister knows, like the Welsh Government, I've long been calling for Wales to be granted further borrowing powers, including full access to prudential borrowing without arbitrary caps. Whether it's fixing the housing crisis, building a health service fit for an ageing population, investing in world-class transport, or, on a global scale, tackling the climate and nature emergencies, Wales faces mounting challenges, but Wales is almost uniquely disadvantaged in its ability to meet these changes because of the severe limitations placed on our ability as a nation to borrow or invest.

Most national governments have access to a variation of prudential borrowing, whereas here in Wales we're limited to just £1 billion per Senedd term, and such is the extent of the problem that the Welsh Government has been forced to turn to mutual investment models, as Mike said earlier, as an option of last resort, relying on profit-driven private companies to build schools, roads or hospitals, because we aren't allowed to borrow it ourselves. It's absolutely clear that this financial settlement doesn't suit Wales, but it does very much suit the Tory Government in Westminster, as was demonstrated so painfully during the pandemic, where the UK Government funnelled hundreds of millions of pounds of taxpayers' money into the bank accounts of private companies like Serco. The Welsh Government chose instead to invest in our local authorities to carry out testing and tracing, with far better results and far better value for money.

Limiting Welsh borrowing powers locks in long-term reliance on neoliberal economics. It prevents Wales from borrowing to invest in successful state-owned public services and infrastructure. In so doing, too often it prevents the possibility of Wales showing that there is a better way, and like in the pandemic, it does not suit the Westminster Government to be shown up by a progressive and compassionate Government in Wales. The word 'investment' is rightly mentioned in the motion in front of us today. Fundamentally, this is a debate about investment in our nation and its future. Borrowing for long-term infrastructure projects in health, education, public transport and housing is about putting in place the building blocks for a more prosperous society. A resident of north Wales who has access to state-of-the-art education facilities, who can rely on a proactive health service built on prevention before cure, and who can go home from work to a well-insulated and affordable council house is a resident of Wales who lives a longer, healthier and happier life. It's because of this that investments in health, education, public transport and housing often act as economic multipliers, returning more money to the taxpayer in the long term than they initially cost. Not only is it good policy, but it's good economics.

I call on the Minister for Finance and Local Government to reply to the debate. Rebecca Evans.

Thank you very much. Thank you to all colleagues for their contributions in the debate this afternoon. And, as Alun Davies set out, the timing of UK Government fiscal events and spending announcements can have big impacts for the democratic process here in Wales. Just this morning, I published the Welsh Government's final budget for 2024-25, ahead of the vote that we'll have in the Senedd next Tuesday, but within a day of that vote on the Welsh Government's taxation and spending plans for 2024-25, the UK Government will publish its budget, meaning that our settlement is again likely to change and our budget will need to be updated. And that really illustrates the level of uncertainty that we face here in Wales and the reliance of our budgets on those decisions made by the UK Government.

I would like to take this chance to thank the Finance Committee for its ongoing support in raising this particular issue with the UK Government as well. And I would like to thank Plaid Cymru for the amendments they've tabled to the motion today. There's certainly a lot in there that we as Welsh Government would agree with, for example, we agree that there is a strong case for significantly increasing our capital borrowing limits, and we agree that Wales is owed substantial funding as a result of the incorrect classification of HS2. We also agree that the Barnett formula should be replaced. In fact, we set out proposals in 'Reforming our Union' for a new principles-based approach to UK funding and fiscal networks, enshrined within a new fiscal agreement, overseen and operated by a body independent of the UK Government, and where the Barnett formula would be replaced with a new relative needs-based system. The approach to Northern Ireland and the needs-based system there takes account of the Holtham work, which has informed our situation here in Wales. So, it's welcome that they at least accept the validity of that, but, certainly, it doesn't get close to delivering what we would imagine in terms of that kind of relative needs-based system. However, the aim of the debate today, of course, is about being united and sending that shared message to the UK Government, that Wales deserves those reasonable and simple changes to the existing fiscal arrangements that would make a significant positive impact on our ability to plan and budget more effectively.

The motion has been jointly tabled, and I know that, in that spirit, it wouldn't be fair for us to vote in favour of amendments to it. I know that we could've all created different motions, with different emphases or different clauses or different steps for the future. I certainly know that we would support an amendment, such as that that Mike Hedges was describing, in terms of an appeals or arbitration system for the future, and the prudential borrowing idea that Carolyn Thomas was talking about as well. But I think the fact that we've got some common ground here is pretty momentous; it's something that we should welcome, and when we can agree and work together, I really want to be able to do that. So, I'm very grateful to Members for their support for the motion and believing that achieving consensus on this important issue can improve our chances of advancing the cause with the UK Government. Thank you.

The proposal is to agree amendment 1. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There are objections, and I will therefore defer voting under this item until voting time.

Item 5 this afternoon is the legislative consent motion on the Economic Activity of Public Bodies (Overseas Matters) Bill, and I call on the Minister for Finance and Local Government to move the motion. Rebecca Evans.

I move the motion. I'm grateful for the work of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee on this matter, and for the report that they published. I'm pleased that the committee agreed with the position the Government set out in its legislative consent memorandum.

I have a number of concerns regarding the implications of the Economic Activities of Public Bodies (Overseas Matters) Bill, firstly, because it alters the executive competence of the Welsh Ministers by stopping them from making their own judgments and procurement decisions based on the conduct of foreign states, and, secondly, because of the unpredictability of Henry VIII powers, which afford the opportunity for the Secretary of State to make future regulations that could have profound implications for Wales and future legislation passed by this Senedd. Thirdly, the Bill encroaches on article 10 of the European convention on human rights, which sets out the right to freedom of expression.

We cannot consent to a Bill that seeks to lawfully prevent our public bodies and democratic institutions from expressing an opinion on overseas matters. The Welsh Government strongly opposes what is essentially a gagging order, which can only be seen as harmful to democracy. Furthermore, I believe the Bill is completely unnecessary, as we already have protections in place within the World Trade Organization agreement on Government procurement, and enshrined in the 2015 public contracts regulations, which require fair and equal treatment of overseas bidders where a relevant trade agreement applies.

The UK can already set sanctions for trade without the need for this legislation—for example, the sanctions placed on Russia when they declared war on Ukraine. I also think it's important for me to address the reason why the UK Government felt the need for this Bill to ban public bodies from carrying out their own boycotts, divestment and sanctions campaigns against foreign countries. I want to be clear that the Welsh Government, in rejecting this Bill, does so entirely for the reason that we do not agree with the significant impact it would have on the freedom of public bodies and democratic institutions across the whole of Wales—a freedom to decide not to purchase from, or procure from, or invest in, organisations involved in human rights abuse, abuse of workers' rights, the destruction of our planet, or any other harmful and illegal acts.

We must remember that we're here today also to discuss this Bill's implication for devolution, specifically the executive competence of the Welsh Ministers. I call upon all Members of this Senedd to withhold their consent to this encroachment upon the responsibilities of this Senedd and the functions of Welsh Ministers with respect to devolved areas of responsibility. UK Ministers are not democratically accountable for the freedoms our public bodies currently enjoy, or for their economic and political influence. We cannot, and should not, consent to this, not when many of our devolved public services and democratic institutions are captured by this Bill. I call upon all Senedd Members to withhold their consent, and I call upon the UK Government to take note of this debate and the strong feelings expressed, and to act accordingly.

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

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. My thanks, as always, to my committee colleagues for their consideration of this matter, and also our expert and very diligent clerks and advisers.

We laid our report on this, on the Welsh Government’s memorandum in respect of the Economic Activity of Public Bodies (Overseas Matters) Bill, on 22 November 2023. As the Minister has outlined today again, the Bill intends to prevent public bodies, when making decisions about procurement and investments, from considering a country or territory of origin or other territorial considerations in a way that indicates political or moral disapproval of a foreign state.

We came to three conclusions within our report, and the Minister has touched on some of them already. Firstly, we agreed with the Welsh Government’s assessment that all the clauses and Schedules listed in the memorandum fall within a purpose within the legislative competence of the Senedd, as described in Standing Order 29, and, therefore, they do require the consent of the Senedd.

Our second and third conclusions express concern in relation to the Bill’s compatibility with the European convention on human rights, and with international law, and they highlight the potential constitutional implications of this for the Senedd. The Minister has raised the issue that there remain questions regarding the Bill’s compatibility with convention rights and international law. In the memorandum, she has referred to widespread criticism of this Bill amongst the legal and academic community, in relation to the way it has been drafted and how it is intended to operate in practice. Although the Minister did not elaborate on this information in the memorandum specifically, as a committee we are aware of concerns brought to the attention of other sister committees across the UK, including the House of Commons public Bill committee, by those international organisations and public law practitioners that support the Minister’s concerns. We, therefore, as a committee share the concerns of the Minister about the compatibility of this Bill with convention rights and with international law.

Dirprwy Lywydd, as you'll be aware, the devolution settlement requires Welsh Ministers to comply with both international obligations and convention rights. The Welsh Government’s ministerial code also places specific duties on the Welsh Ministers to comply with international law and treaty obligations. In light of the widespread concern regarding the Bill’s compatibility with those convention rights and with international law, our report reiterated the position that we have expressed in relation to previous Bills subject to this legislative consent process, namely that a decision by the Senedd to consent to this Bill could contribute to a breach of international law and would mean the Senedd acting incompatibly with international obligations. As we have previously highlighted, this would be in contrast to the spirit of the devolution settlement. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

The economic activity of public bodies Bill, which obliges public bodies to comply with the foreign policy outlook of the UK Government and imposes legal restrictions on the ability to make ethical investments abroad is an affront to the basic democratic right to freedom of speech. Alongside the new Public Order Bill, which places disproportionate barriers on the right to peaceful protest, this typifies the Tory Party's disturbing lurch towards authoritarianism over recent years. As the former Secretary of State for Wales Peter Hain mentioned, if these powers had been available to the UK Government of the day back in the 1980s, public institutions would have been barred from protesting against the Governments of apartheid South Africa, which, of course, were backed by the Thatcher administration. Moreover, the fact that the motivation for introducing this Bill is purely to clamp down on the activities of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign sets a dangerous precedent of the law being bent to suit a particular ideological agenda.

It is also yet another clear example of Tory cancel culture in action. Instead of focusing on clearing up the colossal mess they've made in Government, they seek to shut down criticism of their abysmal record, both domestically and abroad. It is vital, therefore, that, here in Wales, we stand up for the right to freedom of speech, and oppose this Draconian legislation that does not command the democratic consent of the Welsh people. Regardless of the UK Government's attempt to stifle public debate on this issue, we will continue our solidarity with the innocent population of Gaza, who are being brutalised daily by the actions of the far-right Netanyahu administration. We of course also extend our sympathy to all groups around the world currently facing injustice, discrimination and persecution. Diolch yn fawr.

I call on the Minister to reply.

Thank you to colleagues for speaking in this debate, and particularly to the LJC committee for its diligent work on this particular matter. I did have the opportunity to meet with the relevant UK Government Minister to set out that we don't accept that the executive competence of the Welsh Ministers should be altered in regard to procurement and investment decisions. It's not clear what the UK Government was even intending to do by seeking to make those restrictions.

The particular restrictions on freedom of speech are a huge concern. It's difficult to see how the UK Government could think this is a good thing—not just for public bodies, but also for the individuals who would be found to be personally responsible for any breaches. This also brings the Bill's compliance with international law into question. It does encroach on those human rights, and the Welsh Government and Members of this Chamber have a responsibility to protect and defend these rights. The devolution settlement requires Welsh Ministers to comply with both international obligations and the rights contained in the European convention on human rights. Also, as we've heard, the Welsh Government's own ministerial code places specific duties on Welsh Ministers to comply with international law and treaty obligations.

Our partners in the trade union movement are also very strongly opposed to the Bill, and there are particular concerns over the Bill's impact on international law obligations expressed by the Trades Union Congress. Unison is also opposed to the Bill, believing it to be unnecessary, undermining ethical procurement and placing huge limitations on freedom of expression. We do share those concerns, and those of other unions that have expressed a view on this as well.

Our contracting authorities are rightly very focused on local issues and local residents. However, we should also remember that issues happening abroad also have repercussions for us here in Wales. The freedom to choose how and where a Welsh public contracting authority engages in procurement is positive, and ensures that we are being globally responsible, which is a key goal set out in the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015.

To conclude, we can't consent to this Bill. It's ill-conceived, with no evidence for its necessity. It does present a threat to freedom of expression and the ability of public bodies and democratic institutions to spend, invest and trade ethically, in line with international law and human rights. I ask Members to withhold consent to the Bill.

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

Item 6 is next.

It appears the Minister is not here at the moment, so I'm going to have to suspend the session for five minutes to make sure the Minister is in the Chamber to give his statement.

We'll continue with our business this afternoon.

Item 6 is a statement by the Minister for Economy: a policy statement on apprenticeships. I call on the Minister for Economy, Vaughan Gething.

Diolch yn fawr, Dirprwy Lywydd. The world of work is changing. Even in the last five years, the economic and social environment has changed significantly. Over the next two decades, there will be further change and the core competencies of a wide range of jobs will need to be more directly relevant to the requirements of a low-carbon economy. The majority of the workforce in 2050 is already in work. Our task is to help invest in their skills to make sure that they align with the needs of the economy of the future. We will invest to provide opportunities for people to build a career throughout their lives, particularly young people supported by our young person’s guarantee. We need to ensure that our system is fit for the future, able to drive recovery and growth and support communities.

Dirprwy Lywydd, in our policy statement on apprenticeships, we have developed a strategic framework for the future of the apprenticeship programme. There is a focus on addressing the challenges that both individuals and employers face due to the impact of the pandemic, the cost-of-living crisis and economic changes. Those economic changes, of course, include the UK going into recession recently, but also newer opportunities for the economy that are yet to come. We will be working closely with the Commission for Tertiary Education and Research to deliver against this statement, ensuring that we maximise opportunities for the people of Wales.

The statement sets out three objectives and related actions, all of which align with our refreshed economic mission and support our employability and skills plan. We know that cross-Government action across a range of policy areas is critical to ensure that we strengthen our economy in a way that builds upon the principles of well-being and makes Wales a great place to live and work.

Under the first objective, we want to strengthen the apprenticeship offer in strategically important sectors, such as transport, health and housing, so that we can build resilience to the changing economic environment. Increasingly, there is a need for a different mix of skills and qualifications. As employers adapt their businesses to meet the opportunities of digitalisation, artificial intelligence and sustainability, our apprenticeship frameworks and pathways need to change as well.

Together we can work towards our climate goals and drive net-zero growth for sectors including manufacturing, digital, transport, energy and the circular economy. There are opportunities for an even greater join-up between education and training systems, where apprenticeships can work alongside other skills and education programmes to provide improved access and progression. Further education, higher education and independent training providers will also need to explore opportunities for collaboration to support vertical progression across apprenticeships.

Under our second objective, our aim is to plug skills gaps and boost productivity. Changes in technology and the ability to automate some work tasks will place an increasing requirement for the retraining and upskilling of the workforce. Automation and artificial intelligence will impact all occupations. Demand for re-skilling is likely to be complex and affect all skill levels. To meet these challenges, we need to continue to align our delivery model to economic needs. That includes facilitating collaboration between providers and removing duplication and wasteful competition. For example, we are already co-ordinating our skills programmes to deliver our net-zero skills action plan, both meeting industry demand and securing better apprenticeship outcomes. The role of the Coleg Cymraeg Cenedlaethol has been expanded to provide targeted support for the further education and apprenticeship sectors. The coleg will continue to identify sectors where new frameworks or additional capacity for Welsh-medium and bilingual apprenticeships should be developed.

Now, three weeks ago, the Minister promised lots of positivity in today's statement, but in reality this statement is straight out of the Alastair Campbell school of spin. Of course, I'm pleased that further funding has been made available to the sector, but the reality is that the sector will still receive a significant cut to its budget. Indeed, rather than a cut of £17.5 million, the sector is now facing a cut of £12.25 million, and he goes on to say in his statement that there will still be an impact on contract size. That's hardly positive, is it? And before the Minister asks me where I would find this extra funding, I say to him: give me direct access to his department's books, and I'll find the funding he's looking for. Now, it's vital that apprenticeships can be delivered sustainably over the coming years, and it's clear that this funding won't even provide a short-term fix. And so perhaps the Minister can tell us how providers can be expected to deliver their programmes over the medium and longer term.

As Members are all aware, labour and skills shortages continue to hold back economic growth in Wales, and as today's statement states, the system needs to be fit for the future and be able to drive recovery and growth as well as supporting communities. I'm concerned that the Minister's policy statement on apprenticeships—all three bullet points—is meaningless if the sector doesn't have sufficient funding through the medium and longer term.

In terms of the policy objectives, the Minister's first bullet point is to strengthen the apprenticeship offer in strategically important sectors, such as transport, health and housing. I agree that strategically important sectors need to be better supported, and I've long called for the Minister to do more to promote the value of apprenticeships in areas like renewable energy, where there will be significant opportunities coming our way. The Minister's policy statement tells us the Government will be defining labour market-relevant skills for the green transition. Perhaps he can tell us how that work is taking place, and how that definition is to be incorporated into apprenticeship frameworks. The policy statement refers to the role of regional skills partnerships in this area, and perhaps the Minister can tell us more about the role that they will play in providing intelligence and driving change at a regional level, so that provision is better aligned to economic growth areas.

Now, today’s statement states that under the second objective, the Welsh Government’s aim is to plug skills gaps and boost productivity. There of course needs to be improved collaboration between the further education and higher education sectors, and more work to consolidate degree apprenticeships by expanding into new sectors. In last year’s evaluation of the degree apprenticeships programme, two thirds of employers reported that participation in the programme was increasing rates of productivity amongst degree apprentices, and there have understandably been calls for an increase in the range of degree apprenticeships available, and an expansion in the level of degree apprenticeships. And so I hope the Minister can tell whether this is something that is likely to take place, and if so, what new actions can we expect to see in relation to degree apprenticeships in the next few years? Perhaps he can also tell us how the Welsh Government is facilitating more collaboration between the further education and higher education sectors too.

I thank the Member for his comments and questions. When it comes to the budget envelope that we have, it's an undeniable reality: we have £1.3 billion less in our standard budget in real-terms spending power, which is more than the entire budget of Cwm Taf Morgannwg health board last year. Now, that's a fact, not an opinion, and it's fine for the Conservative Member to claim that this has got nothing to do with his party, whilst our budgets have gone down in real terms, and then to demand at the end, as he did, that more money is found in this area and virtually every other. If you remember the draft budget debate we had—[Interruption.]

Hold on, Minister, for a second. From both sides, I would like to hear the Minister's response to the questions raised by the Conservative spokesperson.

If you remember the draft budget debate we had, virtually every Conservative speaker demanded extra spending in every area across the Welsh Government's budget line: in the third sector, in museums, in apprenticeships, in health, in education and local government. And as the Member knows—and I know Paul Davies can do basic arithmetic—if you increase the spend in all those areas, you don't have a balanced budget. The idea that there is £1.3 billion of waste and inefficiency simply to squeeze out is something the Member knows very well simply isn't true. And when the Member is saying that, actually, we should simply be able to make up the money that has been lost in EU funds, which have been thieved from us by his Tory mates in Whitehall, I think he should go and have a word with the Chair of the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee, because he would tell Paul Davies that actually there are very real challenges in the loss of that money and the deliberate redesign of programmes to exclude programmes like apprenticeships from the way that those funds have been designed. I can happily send him the report that the Chair has authored and introduced in this Chamber, if he would prefer. His contribution was a pretty depressing failure yet again to stand up for Wales and the basics of what our budget should look like, rather than demanding that all of the problems created by Conservative management of public finances be visited upon this Government.

I'm very proud to say that we are proud to promote apprenticeships and we'll continue to do so in every area, including when it comes to renewable power. And actually, the county that the Member currently represents at least a part of has a bright future in this, as the Member has regularly pointed out in this Chamber. I've enjoyed going to see people in Pembrokeshire, in the college and beyond; I look forward to more. If we get the right investment choices made in ports, we can unlock even more investment in that sector and many more—that should be something that it shouldn't be too hard to agree. In fact, I met more apprentices today when I visited William Hare in the Islwyn constituency, and I was very proud to meet them, alongside their GMB steward, in understanding how that business works with the union and the local college to bring more apprentices in, and its journey to growing its company—more examples that we need and, actually, a good example of an employer that is already meeting and surpassing the 5 per cent challenge of making sure there's a consistent and constant renewal of their new intake of apprentices.

I look forward to regional skills partnerships looking again at what they need to do, both to engage with businesses and, indeed, providers, in understanding the current needs of their local and regional economy, and how we make sure that fits into what we're doing, not just with the regions, but also nationally as well. There'll be more work to do to make sure that our current mix of all the intelligence and information actually meets what businesses are then telling us they need. I think there's more work we can do—and the statement sets this out—between skills partnerships and others. Some of that information is ultra local; some of it, I think, comes back to the national picture as well.

I'll start with the big news: I welcome the reversal of cuts; it's a step in the right direction. But, though it is a step in the right direction, there's no denying that the future of apprenticeships is still in a precarious place, and we shouldn't lose sight of that.

One thing that has been clear during this budget process has been the lack of clear communication between the Government and the sector and a lot of anxiety this caused. This goes back to 2022. At the start of 2022, the Government committed to replace European funding from reserves. What happened there? Before this budget the sector was told to expect a 3 per cent cut, then it turned out to be a 24 per cent cut, and now this reversal—as welcome as it is, the uncertainty hasn't been good for the sector and its long-term planning.

Now, what I'm keen to see is work across Government and the Senedd, to which, of course, the Minister referred in his statement, to be fair, along with, of course, the sector, to map out our approach and strategy to apprenticeships. What are we going to do with apprenticeship pathways? How are we going to deal with the levy? Where do we go post structural funds? In essence, what will be the priority for the apprenticeship budget going forward?

You have, of course, set out your three objectives. There's nothing to disagree with in terms of their principles, but that's what they are at the moment, supplemented with a lot of management speak, if we're going to be honest—no clear actions. What we wanted and needed to see here was some meat on the bones.

Now, the Government commissioned a report by Hefin David, and I will say that this does look like a bit of a rehash of his work, but Hefin's report had clear actions set out, a lot of positive and constructive stuff—section 4 being of significance, I think, actually, to this debate. For example, the pathway to degree apprenticeships: how do we structure that? How do we look at those higher apprenticeships and develop those? How do we expand the offer? We, of course, mentioned the rail centre of excellence, but we do need to expand further on our offer. So what is, actually, now happening with Hefin's report?

Dirprwy Lywydd, we need to get this right. Let's remember that a loss of apprenticeship places, which will still, of course, happen, can't be reversed in the next financial year. It will take years to recover. So, we really need to be on our A-game from here on in, so I would welcome further detail from the Minister of where we go from here.

I thank the Member for his questions. As ever, I think he's not as positive as I would be about the future. And I think it's unnecessarily so as well. There is a positive future for apprenticeships here in Wales. We're investing £143 million of the Welsh Government's budget directly in the apprenticeship programme. It means we'll move from 10,000 extra starts next year to about 13,000 extra starts. We will still expect—. Over the life of this Senedd, rather. Ten thousand extra starts before the £5.25 million, up to 113,000 extra starts over the whole of the term. That's a 13 per cent increase on the last Senedd term. That hardly speaks to a Government that is not investing in the future of apprenticeships; exactly the opposite.

We will, of course, want to do more. And if we had more resources and the certainty over the resources that the Member is demanding from me—if we had that certainty—we could do more, of course. The best way to do that, of course, is to make sure that there are Labour representatives in 10 and 11 Downing Street to give us the certainty and the size and the scale of the resource that we want, to deliver on the pledge to see the return of former EU funds, where the control was taken back and rested with Tory Ministers in Whitehall. I want to see the pledge delivered that I've secured to make sure those funds and the powers return here to Wales for this Government to exercise, and for this Senedd to scrutinise the choices that we then make.

And when it comes to the opportunities we've set out, I'm delighted to see Hefin David's influence recognised in this report in the second contribution. It's about the fact that, when you ask for someone to undertake a piece of work to give you challenge, criticism and opportunity, it then is supposed to actually have an influence on what you're doing, and not simply sit on a shelf. So, actually, it's a positive that we've asked for the work and now you can see it coming through the statement. And our challenge is—. In the statement, what we're doing is we're setting out our high-level objectives for that delivery, so that the commission can actually go ahead with the work we have set them, and the fact that this Senedd has passed the Bill to create the commission, to actually make sure that goes into delivering. All of the stakeholders need to work around this statement to make sure it's real. That's the providers, it's the businesses and it's people who we want to help reskill in the future as well.

And there have been a range of people who have been engaged in the conversation about this statement, who welcome the fact that we've made this progress today. And so, those business stakeholders, the providers—they recognise why we're doing this and I do think, as we go through, looking at our net-zero opportunities and the range of skills opportunities we have, you'll see apprenticeships that really are designed and fit for purpose. The policy statement is exactly that: it's a policy statement with priorities, and you'll see the delivery that comes alongside it. Today was never going to be about having a specific delivery plan across a range of individual sectors around them, but the money that we're able to put back into the apprenticeship budget will make a difference. It will mean more starts next year still. It'll still be part of what we do to contribute to the future. I remain convinced that apprenticeships and wider workplace learning are essential to our economic future, in making sure that we have the right skills to meet the economy that is being created around us and by us as well.

Minister, can I thank you for today's statement? As you know, I'm passionate about the apprenticeship opportunities in Wales because of the apprenticeship opportunities I had when I served my apprenticeship some years ago. Businesses in north-east Wales rely on quality apprenticeship programmes to keep on growing and to keep playing the vital role that they do in terms of building more homes, retrofitting existing homes, and achieving net zero in a range of sectors in Wales.

Can I ask the Minister what assurances he can give to companies like M.A. Cooper Projects Ltd, an electrical and mechanical contracting business in Deeside, which I will be visiting in the coming weeks? In the correspondence that I have had from them, it's clear to me that they want to see that support for their current and future apprentices is in place and that the long-term prospects for a career for thousands of young people are protected across Cymru. Diolch.

Thank you very much for the question. I hadn't appreciated that the Member had been an apprentice in a former life; I've learned something. [Laughter.] But it is important, and I think that it's part of the diversity that we get in the Senedd, with different experiences. I had a particular working life before coming here, and I think that it's a real strength that you've got someone who is a time-served apprentice and has been an engineer in real life before coming here. That sort of different sense of perspective is really welcome and important.

When you do visit your constituency business in Deeside, I think that it is important to point out that this statement sets out that apprentices are a key part of the future in growing the economy in virtually every sector. Whether you're an electrical or mechanical constructor, or whether, indeed, in the construction sector, which I know you take a deep interest in as well, we're only going to get there, to have the outcomes that we want in terms of the quality of products that we want, the quality of build that we want, and actually the jobs that we want people to have here, if we're going to carry on investing in the workforce. That's a partnership between the Government and what we're prepared to do, between providers who deliver, and, of course, business themselves, who need to carry on investing in their workforce. Overall, businesses need to do more to invest in the future of their workforce. This funding is about unlocking some of that and seeing the longer term advantages in improving the skills of your workforce, and it almost always leads to a more productive and profitable business as a result.

And actually that's the right thing to do for workers as well, to have greater security in their workplace, to make sure that work doesn't disappear to another part of the world. We'll only be able to do that by competing on skills, rather than on lowering wages as well. So, I wish the Member well in his visit, and no doubt we'll carry on talking about what the future can bring.

Minister, thank you for your statement. Although, obviously, it's welcome that you've now had a rethink, and, of course, we're pleased to see that some of the cuts have been reversed, overall, Minister, however you dress it up—and you do attempt to dress it up very well—you have broken your manifesto commitment, and the apprenticeship funding cut is still happening. This has naturally led to the outcry of the education sector, and will only serve to harm the future prospects of the people of Wales.

Improving skills is meant to be at the heart of the Welsh Government's economic strategy, and you have just rehearsed the arguments why it's vital to do so. Yet, as a result of this funding cut, the sector is forecast thousands fewer apprenticeships starting next year, even with today's announcement. These brutal cuts are on top of the £17.5 million already cut from apprenticeships by this Labour Government, all whilst England are expanding their offer, far ahead of us in variety and choice, truly adapting to the modern world and its new asks. The rest of the UK have found the money, they have prioritised apprenticeships, and with more money going into apprenticeships across the border and the rest of the UK, and them prioritising it more than here, how are we going to attract more people to Wales and keep people in Wales, when we are clearly the poor relation in the UK in terms of apprenticeships? Are you really happy, Minister, with Wales's apprenticeship offer under your watch and the breaking of your Government's manifesto commitment?

Well, thank you for the comment. I'm glad the Member thinks I'm well dressed. But actually, when it comes to what we're looking to do in this area, it is undeniably the case that we have seen cuts to apprenticeship funding here in Wales as a direct result of choices made by the Government she supports. When the apprenticeship levy was introduced, there was an £8 million to £9 million cut in the funding available to Wales to fund apprenticeships. And when you look at—[Interruption.]

The Member must allow the Minister to respond to the questions she has put to him without actually trying to put other questions to him.

When you look at comparative funding, actually, we still do much better than England across the border. I'm confused about why the Member can think that black is really white on this issue. The truth is that taking money out in the apprenticeship levy and re-giving it back to companies in England, as they do, does not amount to increased money being spent on apprenticeships in England. Our record in terms of the number of apprentices we have, in terms of the completion rates and the value is still considerably and objectively better than across the border, and it does not matter how much doublespeak the Member comes up with.

I do agree, though, that it is always difficult when manifesto promises are broken. I agree with her, there are brutal budget cuts: £1.3 billion of budget cuts that this Senedd is now having to contend with in passing a budget. [Interruption.] Well over £1 billion of cuts from former EU funds that have been kept in England for Whitehall to decide, rather than money that could and should have been spent here. And if you think again about manifesto pledges that have been broken, there have been two successive Conservative manifestos that promised that every single penny that was coming out from the European Union would be replaced here in Wales and every other part of the UK that had previously had access to those funds. [Interruption.] It is simply not the case that that manifesto pledge has even come close to being kept. So, when the Member talks about manifesto promises not being kept, when she talks about brutal budget cuts, when she wants to see who is responsible for those, all she needs to do is invest in a mirror and she'll see who exactly is responsible.

I would say, on the apprenticeship levy, it is a UK Government tax on businesses in Wales that just doesn't return to businesses in Wales in the same way that it returns in England. That is an undisputable fact.

The other thing I'd say is that I'm really grateful to both the Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Luke Fletcher, and the Minister for mentioning my report. I'd be far too modest to do so myself, but now that they have—[Laughter.] But now that they have—[Laughter.] I noticed in the report that it says that the Commission for Tertiary Education and Research will be the key body that will offer the opportunity to join up between education and training systems, where apprenticeships can work together with other education programmes to provide smooth access. I mean, that was a key plank of what I was suggesting in my report and I'm glad to see it repeated, but, as Luke Fletcher says, how are we going to do that?

One of the things that I highlighted in my report was the work of the NPTC Group of Colleges and Llanidloes High School, who, although Llanidloes High School has a sixth form, are still working very effectively together to ensure that process through to further education, where pupils want to do it. Therefore, there are some really good examples of best practice in Wales. Can we please see some pilot programmes that take that good practice and apply it elsewhere in Wales, such as in my constituency of Caerphilly? I think there are some real opportunities to expand that good practice across Wales.

Thank you for the two broad points. To start with, it's a matter of fact, not opinion, that the apprenticeship levy is a UK tax on apprenticeships; it takes money out of public services in Wales, where the money can't go back and it looks to redistribute that. It's a wheeze that doesn't actually deliver extra funds into apprenticeships at all, and we don't have access to it properly in Wales, either.

When it comes to your point around CTER and the practical relationships they need to have, and then, actually, the relationships to build on the good practice that already exists, I agree with him. To be fair, it is something that he will not be surprised to hear that the education Minister and myself actually broadly agree on, about how we look at what already works, because some of that is about the breadth of the programme that is available for people post 16, if there is a sixth form established or not, to understand how you still get access to the right support and guidance. What is the right thing for that student? What do they have the ability to do and what are their best prospects for making choices that align with what they want to do and what they're capable of doing, in a really positive way?

There are examples across Cardiff, where there's a mixed system, as well, for example. So, some schools have sixth forms, some don't. The engagement with the local FE college is really important to make sure they get the breadth of opportunity that exists. Some of that is also pre 16, as well, because, for some people, a broader curriculum that an FE college might be able to deliver could be the right thing to do for them as well.

So, I'm keen to take forward one of the central messages from his report, which is how you make sure that the learner is at the centre of the choices, and the system, as far as possible, works to enable that person to make their choices. That must mean thinking about how further education, as well as sixth form, is part of what could happen. So, I am interested in looking at not just what already works, but to see how you can progressively look to roll that out in different parts of the country, because I think that would be good for the individual, it would be good for their community and, actually, good for the country as well, if we want to see genuinely productive workers making choices, who are able to make their own choices through life and, indeed, earn a good living.

Finally, Huw Irranca-Davies.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I welcome the Government statement today, and, indeed, the apprenticeships policy statement that accompanies it as well. Like my colleague Luke Fletcher, as we're co-chairing the cross-party group on apprenticeships that was set up recently, I do welcome the restoration of £5.2 million to the apprenticeship budget, taking it now to £143 million next year. It's still going to be immensely stretching, without any doubt at all, but it is a welcome restoration of that funding.

But can I turn to a part of the actual policy statement, where it says,

'Covid-19 and the cost of living crisis has impacted on programme success rates where there has been fall in people completing'?

This comes on the back, actually, of a Welsh Government analysis late last autumn, I think it was, that looked at apprenticeship outcomes by earnings, which said that learners who earned less were less likely to successfully complete their apprenticeships; the largest drop in success rate was for those who earned less than £15,000; and that low-earning apprentices living in deprived neighbourhoods had lower success rates than low-earning apprentices living in less deprived neighbourhoods. How do we turn this round? And on behalf of Luke, myself and the other members of the cross-party group, would you come to that cross-party group and discuss the policy statement and how we can work together to build that ambitious future for apprenticeships that the Minister has laid out?

I think it's important to recognise the £5.25 million is only possible since we've published the draft budget, and I'm very pleased we're able to restore that money, but there is an overall challenge, because of the cliff edge in European funds. I've never tried to soft-soap that and pretend that isn't happening, but it is still about what we do to maintain the wider system that we have in terms of providers and the breadth of choice that I think Hefin David was pointing to as well, but also how we make sure that their outcomes and completion rates—. We've been very proud of what we've done.

The pandemic's given us particular challenges, but it's only highlighted the reality that, even in previous times, completion rates would differ by socioeconomic group. It's about the support we can practically provide. So, that's not just about travel and subsistence, it is actually about how much people can earn, and that's a conversation with the providers about what they can do in their part of it. For some apprentices, of course, they can only be in college a day a week, so the college part of it may not be the biggest part of their course, so it's actually about what we do with the businesses themselves and the recognition that the more they can do to sustain that person, the more likely they are to have someone who will stay until the end of it, to complete and not to see potentially half of an apprenticeship that is not then completed.

So, I am optimistic about the conversation we have with a number of businesses, but it is, actually, fundamentally, about how we can support businesses to do more to support their learners. Because as the Member will know from scouring the budget lines, there isn't a lot of fat that's been left. In fact, we're still having to make terrible choices in other parts of the budget to make sure there's a budget that balances, and that's very uncomfortable. So, it makes it even more important that our stakeholders understand that what they can do will make a difference to the outcome they want too, which is a highly qualified and skilled workforce who will be loyal to that business.

When it comes to the very kind offer to attend the cross-party group—

It depends what position you're holding then.

Indeed. I may be able to secure the attendance of a different member of the Government depending on the circumstances in coming weeks. But I'll be very happy to make sure we continue to engage properly with the cross-party group, because I actually think a more informed conversation about apprenticeships for decision makers here in the Senedd is actually a good thing, as well as the engagement with a much wider community of businesses as well.

I thank the Minister.

Item 7 has been postponed.

Therefore, we move on to item 8, which is the statement by the Deputy Minister for Social Partnership on LGBTQ+ History Month, and I call on the Deputy Minister, Hannah Blythyn.

LGBTQ+ History Month offers us an opportunity to reflect on how far we’ve come in the struggle for LGBTQ+ rights and celebrate the lives of LGBTQ+ people.

We’re here today talking openly about LGBTQ+ rights because of all the people who came before us and the pioneers who have paved the way as part of our all-too-recent history. Just a few months ago, we marked the twentieth anniversary of the repeal of section 28. Until 2003, publishing material and teaching about homosexuality was illegal. The lasting legacy of this is still raw for many, and its effects felt today.

The start of March marks the fortieth anniversary of the miners' strike, a defining moment in our collective history here in Wales and one that politicised many of us. It also brought together two politically polarised communities in common cause in a Welsh mining community, as LGSM—Lesbians and Gays Support the Miners—rallied and raised money in support of miners in Onllwyn in the Dulais valley.

More recently, we have celebrated landmark moments such as the successful campaign for marriage equality—something that I am proud to have played a small personal part in—as well as an equal age of consent, an end to discrimination in goods and services, and gender recognition in law. However, there is still much more to be done. Progress is never inevitable, and we must still work to make the change we want to see and be.

A year ago, I presented our 'LGBTQ+ Action Plan for Wales' to the Senedd. This plan remains a powerful statement of our determination to secure the inclusive and equal Wales that we all want to see. But we know that words without action are not enough, and since we launched the action plan, we have continued to press ahead with progress.

We know the value of Pride events and the difference they can make to LGBTQ+ communities, so we have expanded our grass-roots Pride fund to support Pride events across Wales, so that more communities can come together. We’ve offered support to many Pride events across the country, including Pride in the Port in Newport, Swansea Pride, North Wales Pride, Glitter Pride by Glitter Cymru, Abergavenny Pride, Hay Pride, Colwyn Bay Pride, Cowbridge Pride, and more.

In addition, Welsh Government supported Mas ar y Maes at the Eisteddfod in August last year, where I joined the designated Member to launch Camp Cymru and, as a committed learner, I delivered my first speech entirely in Welsh.

Working with Plaid Cymru as part of the co-operation agreement, we have also taken steps towards our commitment to see an end to conversion practices. We are expanding support services for survivors of conversion practices across Wales and a working group of experts has provided us with advice and expertise to inform our efforts to consign these practices to history. We are about to complete our research into the experiences of survivors of conversion practices in Wales, which started in May 2023, alongside a campaign to raise awareness around these harmful practices. And our work also continues to embed inclusion in education, from our inclusive curriculum and relationships and sexuality education, to the work we are undertaking on transgender guidance for schools, which will be published for consultation over the next few months.

In June 2023, we published our innovative LGBTQ+ action plan tracker, so that everyone can see how we are progressing with our ambitious and wide-ranging plan. It also provides information on specialist services to support Wales’s LGBTQ+ communities. And whilst we continue rightly to hold ourselves accountable, we are proud of the recognition our work in support of LGBTQ+ equality has received. In April last year, the United Nations independent expert on sexual orientation and gender identity recognised the 'LGBTQ+ Action Plan for Wales' in their end-of-mission statement as

‘an example of good practice in human rights policymaking’.

And in November 2023, the Welsh Government was presented with the Trans in the City CEO award for outstanding achievements in supporting trans and non-binary communities.

As we move forward in putting the actions in our LGBTQ+ action plan into practice, we continue to be clear that here in Wales, we stand for unity over division, inclusion rather than exclusion, and hope not hate. The Welsh Government stands together with and within our LGBTQ+ community in Wales. We recommit ourselves to supporting trans and non-binary people and our position remains clear: we believe that trans men are men, trans women are women and non-binary identities are valid.

Dirprwy Lywydd, too often and too many times, we see attempts to deliberately divide, to seek to erase LGBTQ+ identities, normalise discrimination and stir up hatred against us. Sadly, this harmful narrative continues to be pervasive within public and media discourse. The rights of one group should not be pitted against the rights of others and there can be no hierarchy of hate. That's why we're clear that the Welsh Government's commitment to creating a more equal Wales must include everyone—a Wales where everyone is valued, everyone's safety is protected and everyone is free to live as their authentic selves.

Thank you for your statement, Deputy Minister. As LGBT+ History Month draws to a close, I would like to thank Schools OUT for establishing this celebration of diversity and creating a dedicated opportunity to share this rich and diverse history of LGBT communities so everyone could learn about the contributions the community makes to society. I use the term 'LGBT community' to respect the wishes of the creator of LGBT+ History Month, who chose not to add a Q for 'queer' as some communities still associate it with a time when 'queer' was used in a negative way.

We celebrate LGBT+ History Month in February to mark this repeal of section 28. I was proud when David Cameron apologised for section 28. This hateful piece of legislation should never have been introduced by my party. But in the 20 years since its repeal, the Conservatives have made huge strides in protecting the rights of the LGBTQ+ community. It was a Conservative Government that implemented the equal marriage Act, we removed the ban on donating blood for gay and bisexual men, and, furthermore, we campaigned for and delivered a royal pardon for Alan Turing for his conviction for homosexuality.

Being lesbian, gay, bisexual or trans is not a crime. It is not a thing to be ashamed of, nor is it a reason for people to physically or verbally abuse you. Homophobia and transphobia have no place in our nation. We can be very proud of the fact that Britain is a global leader in LGBT equality, but we still have much more to do. Deputy Minister, I welcome the support you are giving to Pride events across Wales, particularly Swansea Pride. I hope to see many more events across my region and across the nation.

I note the ongoing work with Plaid Cymru to end conversion practices in Wales. Deputy Minister, what discussions have you had with the UK Government about the steps we can take to ban conversion therapy, whilst, at the same time, allowing the very important work undertaken by the Gender Identity Development Service? Regarding the GID service, there are ongoing issues with the replacement of the services at Tavistock following the Cass review. Perhaps, Deputy Minister, you could provide an update on progress.

I also note your statement that you are hoping to consult on the transgender guidance for schools within the next few months. The Department for Education in England recently released their revised guidance. Deputy Minister, what discussions have you had with UK Government Ministers about their guidance, and has that guidance had any influence on your Government's proposals?

Finally, Deputy Minister, thank you again for your statement, and I look forward to working with you to ensure that Wales becomes the most LGBTQ+ friendly nation in the world. I will continue to fight for the rights of everyone to be who they want to be, to love who they want to love. Diolch yn fawr.

Can I thank Altaf Hussain for that considered contribution to this statement today here in the Senedd? I want to start by thanking you for what you said with regard to the repeal of section 28 and that it should never have happened. It's not always easy, as politicians, to recognise when things haven't been done in the right way, and I think you doing that today is very well received and very welcome. I really thank you for putting that on the record today. And also, thank you for everything that you're doing to try and work with us in this place to take forward LGBTQ+ equality.

As you rightly say, LGBT+ History Month is an opportunity to recognise and celebrate a history that, for far too long, has been hidden. You can't underestimate that to young people, or people of all ages, in Wales today who may not have known about people that played a part in our communities and in our country over the years. To have the opportunity to learn more about that and to see themselves reflected back at them as well is incredibly important. I think that's why the work we're doing around supporting grass-roots Prides in communities right across the country is really, really important. I've said before in this place that over the years I've probably attended more Pride events than I care to remember. They could be the major ones in London, Manchester or Cardiff—even Doncaster I once attended a Pride event at—but the ones I think that make the significant difference are those smaller ones, like in the community that I now represent, where I grew up, which brings not only a safe space for the LGBTQ+ community to come together, but actually encourages and promotes community cohesion as well.

If ever I want reassurance about some of the work they are doing, I was last year on a school visit to look at what they were doing with their young people to create that inclusive space for them in school where they feel safe and supported, and I remember asking one of the young people there, 'What one thing do you think makes a big difference right now, or would you want me to go back and tell my colleagues is important to you and you'd like to see in the future?' And one of them did say, actually, about the importance of those small, localised, supported Pride events, because for them, having that space and seeing that in practice gave them the courage and the confidence to have a conversation with their family about how they felt about who they are as well. So, I'm really pleased that it's something that we're able to continue to support as a Government as we move forward, and I'd like to see those events evolve and spread right across the country.

Thank you for the statement, Deputy Minister.

Plaid Cymru is proud of the work that has been done through the co-operation agreement and the LGBTQ+ action plan in endeavouring to ensure that all members of Wales's LGBTQ+ community are supported and their contribution to this nation celebrated as we stand together against prejudice and discrimination.

We must speak with one voice in standing for hope and against hatred.

I'm glad to be able to say that my home town of Pontardawe will be having its first ever Pride this June, and I look forward to taking part in that. The theme of this year's LGBTQ+ History Month is 'Under the scope', and as well as paying tribute to the work of LGBTQ+ staff across the NHS, it also highlights the health inequalities faced by the LGBTQ+ community. Our shared aim is that Wales becomes, as you said, the most LGBTQ+ friendly nation in Europe. One of the action points within the LGBTQ+ action plan is to seek the devolution of powers in relation to gender recognition and to ensure we are supporting gender recognition certificate applicants in Wales. We really haven't seen much progress on this, but what we have seen, all too often, is transgender people's lives being used as a political football and their rights denied, and a Westminster Government intent on amplifying hateful narratives pertaining to culture wars that foster and embolden prejudice.

We don't need to look too far away from our shores to see what can be achieved, and in a relatively short space of time. I'm sure the hundreds of Welsh people who travelled to Dublin to watch the rugby last weekend had a great time in spite of the result. I've been reading about Ireland’s long journey towards ensuring LGBTQ+ rights since homosexuality was decriminalised there 30 years ago. Around 79 per cent of people in Ireland said they view their local area as a good place for LGBTQ+ people, and according to polls conducted last year, and an Ipsos study, around 80 per cent of Irish citizens support discrimination protections for trans people. As you know, Ireland has ensured that trans people can declare their own gender under their Gender Recognition Act 2015. There's no need for a medical diagnosis or doctor’s reports. Ruadhán Ó Críodáin is a trans man who lives in Dublin. In an article by Patrick Kelleher in Pink News, Ruadhán described the way he was able to get a gender recognition certificate as straightforward and compassionate, as compared to the 'brutally paternalistic and unfair' process for getting a GRC in the UK. He said:

'Why should a panel of strangers decide if you deserve a GRC or not? Why make someone go through two years of social transition before being eligible? Why is a diagnosis of gender dysphoria or proof of surgery needed? Trans people are the authorities in our own gender. We know who we are. Transition is already difficult enough without adding further barriers. And crucially, being trans isn't an illness.'

As the article points out, self-ID has been a quiet, everyday reality for trans people in Ireland for more than eight years. As Ruadhán puts it, 'the sky hasn't fallen in'. So, do you feel inspired by the progress made in Ireland, Deputy Minister, and could the Welsh Government provide an update on the work that's being done to devolve the powers in relation to gender recognition to Wales, as outlined in the action plan? What assurances has the Welsh Government had from Labour colleagues in Westminster that a Labour-led Government in Westminster would not follow the steps of the Tory Government and block attempts by devolved nations to ensure compassion and equality for their trans citizens in relation to gender recognition? Diolch.

Diolch, Sioned Williams for that impassioned contribution. I don't know whether you've worn the green because you were talking about Ireland and Dublin. I haven't read the article that you refer to, but I certainly will go and look it up. In terms of the line you said, that the sky hasn't fallen in, there are examples right around the globe where self-ID has been brought in and the world has carried on, and actually what it has done is made a huge, huge difference to the lives of the trans community and trans people, who face far too many barriers and far too much discrimination. Life can be difficult as it is, without placing those extra hurdles in front of people.

The Welsh Government absolutely remains committed to seek the devolution of powers as regards the gender recognition Act, to support trans communities. It absolutely remains our position around self-identification as well, and we're committed to taking that forward through our partnership through the co-operation agreement. I'm proud too of the work we've done, and I was proud to join, as I said in my statement, the designated Member at Mas ar y Maes back in August, even if I was terrified after giving my first full speech in Welsh, being thrust in front of Radio Cymru to do an interview. But I'm grateful for Siân Gwenllian's support and stepping in after I did my first contribution—she came in with a bit more of the detail, which my vocab hasn't quite got to yet. That's real partnership working in action too. But in all seriousness, I think it demonstrates the work we can do to together and the work we can do as a Government to reach out and support communities right across Wales, building on the grass-roots Pride work, but the broader work as well.

Given you mentioned the first Pride in Pontardawe is happening this year, I think I might take this opportunity to mention too that, on 22 June this year, Flint will have its first ever Pride. It's where I went to school and it's being led by the deputy mayor of Flint, Councillor Melly Buckley, who will be mayor of the town when the Pride takes place, and actually is the first out mayor of Flint too. So, I look forward to doing something that I never thought I would have done when I was at school in Flint—marching and taking part in that first ever Pride event.

I'd like to follow up on those comments by thanking the Deputy Minister for the work that she has done with my young trans man constituent, Sean Donovan, who has a story to tell and will continue to tell his story about his experiences. The support the Minister has given, including meeting with us in Tŷ Hywel, was very welcome, and perhaps I'll raise more detail about that at a later date. But I also want to raise the work that trade unions have done to support LGBTQ+ people, particularly Unison. We're both members of Unison, we both spoke at their Labour Link conference a couple of weeks ago, and we recognise that they are now launching their Unison Cymru Wales Year of the LGBTQ+ Worker, and I think we should welcome that. I'd just like to ask the Minister what are her plans to celebrate that particular launch.

Diolch. I thank Hefin David, actually, for not just the work you do as chair of the Unison group, but actually in terms of the work you've done with Sean in supporting him. And I agree with you that Sean is an absolute inspiration, and I'm really pleased we were able to take that time to meet, and I absolutely commit to continuing to work with you and following that up as we move forward as well.

But on the broader point you make about the role that the trade unions have in advancing equality, it was actually at that same event where I happened to bump into you in passing as you finished your slot and I took up mine—. In an age when, sadly, it often can feel that LGBTQ+ rights are under particular attack and at risk of being rolled back, I think I'd really have to recognise the work of the trade union movement in advancing that LGBTQ+ equality, not just in the workplace, whether that's through their equality reps or committees or the campaigns they do, but actually more widely in Wales as well. One of the things I said when I was with the Unison members is, actually, it's all part of that same struggle, isn't it—that same struggle for social justice within the workplace but for that broader equality within Wales as well. And we only achieve that when we work together and come together to not just defend equality and rights but work to extend them as well.

So, you mentioned Unison Year of the LGBTQ+ Worker, which, actually, I believe has been launched today in Wales from Unison Cymru, and I do hope, depending on what time we manage to vote this evening, that I may get to join them for part of that, but I'm very much looking, actually, to work with Unison and other unions and other organisations about how we can create those more inclusive workplaces as part of our ambition to be in that most LGBTQ+ friendly nation in Europe.

I thank the Deputy Minister.

Item 9 has been postponed until 12 March.

Therefore, we move on to item 10, and this is the statement by the Deputy Minister for Climate Change on the Welsh Government's response to the north Wales transport commission. I call on the Deputy Minister to make his statement—Lee Waters.

Diolch, Llywydd. I asked Lord Terry Burns to chair this commission on transport in north Wales to bring the same rigour and challenge that he showed in his study of transport in south-east Wales, and I thank him and his commissioners for their very thorough work and for their rigorous report. Thanks to them, we now have a comprehensive analysis of the transport system in the north of our country, and we have 60 recommendations to improve it.

The origins of the commission stem from a recommendation set out by Lord Peter Hendy in his union connectivity review for the UK Government for a multimodal study of north Wales transport. We accepted that recommendation, and I now hope that the UK Government will join us in accepting the recommendations of this independent commission and will work together with us and the local authorities through the corporate joint committee to develop and deliver a pipeline of schemes.

The starting point of the report is that we need to reduce carbon emissions from transport if we are to hit our overall net-zero legal targets. Transport accounts for 17 per cent of carbon emissions in Wales, and even with greater take-up of electric vehicles, reducing emissions still requires changes in the way we travel. The analysis by the commission shows how this can be done. While the debate familiar to politicians and business groups focuses on longer distance routes and car journeys, the independent analysis by the commission demonstrates that the majority of journeys made in the region are short in length and to the same or neighbouring area. Most people travel short, local journeys, and these are trips that are suited to public transport, walking and cycling, when we put safe and attractive alternatives in place.

Llywydd, this is an excellent report, and while it looks at north Wales in detail, its analysis and conclusions are relevant right across Wales, and I'd commend it in particular to Members representing south-west and mid Wales. We don't need any more commissions. Instead, we should look now to this report as regional transport plans are developed across Wales.

It makes a number of recommendations on rail improvements, including increased service frequency and reduced journey times on the Borderlands line and, indeed, electrification of the north Wales main line. Of course, improvements are the responsibility of the UK Government, but the recommendations are entirely consistent with our own priorities, which we are seeking to agree with the joint Welsh and UK Government Wales rail board, which has been a constructive development. We've long campaigned for the electrification of the north Wales main line, and we welcome the UK Government announcing funding, but the UK Government made this decision unilaterally, and the commission makes it clear that other schemes in north Wales would deliver benefits sooner. This includes addressing infrastructure constraints to enable five trains per hour, including one express service, to operate on it. If there are billions of pounds available for Wales, then Wales should decide how best to spend it.

The Welsh Government has made an £800 million investment in new rolling stock for the whole of the Wales and borders network, which is already improving the experience of people who travel by train in north Wales. As more of these new trains are introduced, TfW will be able to operate longer trains, providing a more comfortable journey for customers, as well as a wealth of modern, accessible features. We’ve restored direct services to Liverpool, increased the frequency on the Borderlands line using new trains, and made the service more reliable. But, obviously, there is more to be done and there is a vast amount of untapped potential on the current rail network in north Wales, and it needs proper investment from the UK Government that has responsibility for rail infrastructure under our devolution settlement.

On bus, I agree with the commission that the deregulated bus network does not work well in the region, and I welcome their support of our bus reform plans, including legislation that we hope to introduce in September. We are proposing a new model for bus services in Wales, which will allow us to work with local authorities to design the bus networks their communities need, and put in place contracts to deliver them. And we're already seeing really good examples of joint working between TfW and local authorities, such as Ynys Môn and Gwynedd, which are guiding the way for our wider bus reform plans across Wales.

The report has important things to say too on active travel. Its analysis shows level of walking and cycling are currently low and that active travel is often seen as, quote,

'unattractive, not convenient, and perceived as not being safe.'

But, it says, the potential for change is considerable, and it confirmed that our existing proposals for extending the active travel network in north Wales would create over 1,100 km of routes for people to use. But to realise this, we must see active travel as a mode of transport on par with others and bolster our ability to implement cycling and walking infrastructure, and that is a key point. Capacity and capability amongst the delivery authorities are currently lacking. Now, we've started to improve this by strengthening the active travel expertise in Transport for Wales and put it to the service of local authorities to encourage them to have modal shift in their areas. And I welcome the recommendation in the report for a north Wales active travel unit to be established to work with councils, the corporate joint committee and the trunk road agency.

Deputy Minister, thanks for this afternoon's statement. It's no secret that urgent improvements are indeed needed to our transport network after more than two decades of neglect and mismanagement from the Labour Party here in Cardiff Bay. Now, time and time again, north Wales is forgotten about by Ministers in this place, and it's time that that sincerely changed. I do sincerely welcome some of the commission's recommendations, particularly around rail and buses, but I also have a lot of reservations about others.

Deputy Minister, we often hear about how cash-strapped this Government is, and only last week you told me that there wasn't enough to incentivise bus travel. Given your comments, and in light of this Government's alleged lack of money, how confident can we be that any of these recommendations will actually be acted upon? In the commission's final report, it says that cars will continue to be the main way to make journeys, and that, I quote,

'electric cars will have an ongoing role to play.'

Given the Deputy Minister has a deep-rooted hatred for motorists, as seen through the anti-driver agenda, I can't imagine those remarks went down too well. Only recently, the Deputy Minister said the Welsh Government wants to reduce demand for private cars, including electric vehicles. I, and clearly the commission, believe that EVs can play a pivotal role in reducing emissions. So, will the Deputy Minister stop listening to his Lycra-clad lobbyist pals and start recognising the importance of electric vehicles by investing more in charging points?

Yet again we hear bus franchising being tagged as a potential silver bullet for all of our problems, but again it boils down to money. Not too long ago, you told the Senedd that bus reform would, and I quote, 'depend upon the funding that is available.' End quote. And you also said the Welsh Government was struggling to deliver its public transport ambitions due to budget cuts. So, again, I ask: how will this be delivered and when will the Welsh Government be tightening its purse strings? It remains a mystery to me, which I’m hoping you’ll be able to clarify today.

The Welsh Government hopes Transport for Wales will oversee the franchising of our bus services. Given Transport for Wales’s ongoing failures with our trains, is the Deputy Minister confident that in fact they are going to be up to the job? And let’s not forget that the UK Conservative Government is once again stepping up and delivering for north Wales by investing £1 billion in electrifying the main line. Deputy Minister, you say that, if there are billions of pounds for Wales, then Wales should decide how it is spent; when you are given crucial funding you simply don’t spend it. Just look at the £155.5 million sent back to Westminster due to the Welsh Government’s financial mismanagement. Given this Government’s track record, how can we have any faith this Government could spend this money wisely?

Thank you for that contribution, and for welcoming elements of the recommendations. I do think this can be taken forward on a cross-party basis. I don’t think there’s anything especially controversial in here. These are all sensible, practical suggestions for improving choice for people so they can choose to travel in different ways, and making their lives easier and improving the economy of the north of our country.

North Wales is not forgotten about at all, hence we’ve commissioned this detailed piece of work and we’re now going to follow it through. Many of the themes in here, as I said, apply to other areas, and the north, of course, has its own particular geography, not least the cross-border element as well, and a part of this report is focusing on that. So, I think there are lots of very sensible consensual things that we can follow, and I agree with her—electric cars have a significant role to play. Indeed, far from hating the motorist, I am indeed a motorist, and I drive an electric car, as well as an electric bike. So her characterisations are puerile and I won’t dwell on them. Electric cars are critical. However, they are necessary but not sufficient. Simply shifting our current fleet to electric will not address the cuts in carbon emissions that the UK Climate Change Committee says we must achieve if we are to hit the targets that she says she’s committed to. I’d be interested if she has alternative ways of hitting those targets in transport, but I’m not aware that any transport expert has put forward any, and she has proved time and time again that she’s not that.

In terms of the ongoing failure, so-called, of Transport for Wales, again I think that’s a completely false claim. The progress in rolling out brand-new rolling stock for 95 per cent of Welsh passengers speaks for itself. The transformation of the Victorian railway in the south-east Valleys into a modern metro is happening before our eyes, and they've done that from a standing start and are now developing their expertise on buses. I met again yesterday with the chief exec of Transport for Wales and the leader of the Welsh Local Government Association. We meet six-weekly to make sure we have a strong and close relationship, working on the practicalities of delivering these plans, and the plans for bus franchising, for operationalising that, are proceeding with great success. We'll be publishing, in the coming weeks, the plans, the detailed plans, for how we go towards franchising, and I hope there will be cross-party support for those; I see no reason why there shouldn't be.

In terms of the freight strategy, I can confirm we are absolutely working on that. I've hosted some round-tables with hauliers and freight companies myself, and I also welcome the elements of the report that will feed into that. I can confirm to her, to finish, that we have no plans for road charging. It is obviously part of a package of measures in the longer term. They're useful to have, to draw on, as they have in London, as they have elsewhere, but they're not part of our current plans, and that, I hope, is as clear as it can be.

I'm pleased that we're discussing the most recent Burns report on transport in Wales. I hope that we will soon have an opportunity to discuss his report on transport in south Wales too. But I do welcome a number of things raised in this report.

The report on north Wales echoes a number of the calls that we as a party have been making. The question now, of course, is how the Government will respond. If the Government is to have any hope of convincing people to use alternative modes of transport to the car, transport systems in the north must improve. So, this is a development to be welcomed, I think.

We heard yesterday that the Westminster Government will redirect funding earmarked for HS2 to regions in the midlands and northern England, but Rishi Sunak didn't say a word about the £4 billion that Wales is owed as a consequence of the sections of HS2 that haven't been cancelled. For shame, Llywydd, although to be expected, I'm sure that you would agree, Deputy Minister. Their slogan in Llandudno was 'get Wales moving', but these will be empty words without investment in our infrastructure.

We welcome the acknowledgement in the report of the work ongoing in Eryri national park, but, despite this, I am concerned that parts of the report are overly reliant on tourism, instead of focusing on residents living in these areas. The word 'tourist' is mentioned 17 times, 'tourists' three times, 'tourism' 10 times. No mention is made of 'commuter', the word 'resident' is used only 10 times, 'commuting' appears six times, and 'commute' twice.

In 2019, over 80,000 people in north Wales were employed in public services, and a further 80,000 in retail, hospitality and the leisure industry, and over 40,000 in manufacturing. We need a focus on improving their working lives and enabling them to get to work, and so I'd ask what the Government would say in terms of consistency between those two things.

Of course, some people will have to travel by car in north Wales. The Federation of Small Businesses estimates that 95 per cent of small and medium-sized enterprises in rural areas are dependent on cars. We must make it easier for them to transition towards electric vehicles, as has already been mentioned. So, I'd like to have more information in terms of how the Government will respond to that important challenge. What work will you be doing to improve the charging infrastructure and to work with the national grid to deliver that improvement? But I recognise that this has already been mentioned in your responses.

I would also like to raise again my concerns regarding funding for the bus industry. The Minister will be aware that the T19 service from Blaenau Ffestiniog to Llandudno Junction is no longer in operation. Entire communities in Gwynedd and Conwy have lost connections as a result. I would like to congratulate Councillor Elfed Wyn ap Elwyn for his work in drawing attention to this issue. He walked the whole length of the route earlier this month to demonstrate how serious the impact of this will be. But this is just one example of this; there are examples across north Wales and across Wales, indeed. So, I'd like to ask what the Government is doing not just to develop a sustainable funding model for bus services, but in responding to the concerns being expressed in the report about the franchise funding model. That's a challenge, I think, that we will need to respond to. I would like to hear more on that.

Diolch, and thank you very much for the comments and the constructive way in which you made them, I think underlining the fact that there's a great deal of commonality here between us on this agenda. I'll try and touch on some of the points that you raised.

In terms of HS2, you are correct. It was very poor that, despite all the evidence, the UK Prime Minister again this last week insisted that north Wales would get a benefit from the upgrading of lines in England, which now go nowhere near north Wales. It is self-evidently an absurd argument to make, but they make it anyway. It's always disappointing as well that our so-called Secretary of State for Wales simply defends this without making any attempt to recognise that this clearly is not right, and that does need to be addressed. And, as I said, the idea that this is somehow compensated for by an announcement of electrifying the north Wales railway line, again does not withstand scrutiny, because there is no development work behind this announcement. It's simply a PR initiative in the run-up to an election, and they must think that we are stupid, because they've previously promised us electrification of the south Wales main line and that never happened. At least there was work behind that. This hasn't even got any work behind it. So, we have no idea what the budget would be or how, indeed, it would be implemented. So, that does not deserve to be taken seriously and it's very poor again to hear Members of the Welsh Conservatives simply parroting this central office line, which has nothing behind it.

In terms of your point on Eryri, I don't think too much should be read into the emphasis on tourists, because clearly there is a need to give tourists an alternative to using the car for entering the national park, and the Sherpa scheme has proven to be extremely effective and successful and we're looking to build on that. But the purpose of the recommendations in the Burns report, and indeed our bus franchising, is for everyday journeys, all year round, and not simply for visitors, but for allowing people to swap their normal car trips for alternatives if that's what they choose to do, giving them a genuine choice so that they're able to do that. And the TrawsCymru network is an important part of that. Again we've seen, where that's been introduced successfully, an increase in patronage, we've been able to reduce fares, and it is proving to be a very successful model.

I think the way that some of the changes have been introduced by Transport for Wales recently have been poor in terms of a lack of consultation, and that's a conversation I've had with the chief executive, and they've acknowledged that they need to do better on that. But the principle of it, which is about express corridors, rather than calling at every village, and calling at key stations, not every station, does give people a real alternative for those journeys by a bus rather than by a car. And then, obviously, that needs to be supplemented by demand-responsive Fflecsi services that then feed into that main corridor, spine approach.

I thank the Minister for bringing forward this statement this afternoon. Minister, residents in Alyn and Deeside see the problems presented by congestion on Aston Hill every single day. The congestion means longer journey times and poorer air quality. I supported the red route because it would improve the air quality for these residents, as I understood it. If this route isn't happening, people have to be offered usable alternatives.

I welcome the Minister, in his opening statement, saying that these are not just words, but action. For me, the action is about investing, and about investing in those alternatives in north-east Wales. Given the publication of the transport commission and the statement today, can you set out how you envisage investment in north-east Wales happening, and how I can update my residents in that regard?

Thank you. Yes, I think that this report is an important follow-on to the roads review that made that conclusion on the red route, because it sets out what a public transport alternative looks like in practice, and the concrete steps that we need to take to get there. So, I hope that he will look at the detailed recommendations for his part of north-east Wales and see that, were these all to be implemented, they would create a viable alternative for people.

I recognise his points on Aston Hill. He's aware that the evidence is very clear: you can't build your way out of congestion. We have always recognised that there are going to be elements of the old red route that will need a road-based intervention to solve them, and Aston Hill is likely to be one of those. Work is ongoing to design and develop that. Obviously, we didn't have the money to build the red route, regardless of whether or not we thought it was a good idea, and there simply aren't several hundreds of millions of pounds waiting to be spent on alternative schemes. So, we need to get that developed, alongside alternatives, through a coherent regional transport plan, and implement that.

Also, one of the key recommendations is the new station at Deeside for the industrial estate. It has costings next to it, and, again, that's another thing where we need to get rail investment to put in place for all those thousands of people who work every day in Deeside—where you currently have no option but to go by car—to give them a real alternative. I think that there are lots of examples like that through this report that can give people hope that we are not just stopping things, we are providing alternatives.

Thank you, Deputy Minister, for the statement this afternoon. As you responded to one of my colleagues earlier, I was pleased that the report recognises the importance of travelling connections between north Wales and England, and that the improved transport links will, and I quote

'bring more job opportunities within people's reach, both for those in north Wales and in the north-west of England'.

And as colleagues across the Chamber will know, it's really important to people in north Wales to have those strong links with our friends in England, which will strengthen the economic base and job prospects for both areas.

To this end, the involvement of UK Government, of course, is very important. I must say, I was a little disappointed perhaps in the way you were referring to them in your earlier comments, but it was pleasing to see that the report recognises the importance of the new investment zone for Wrexham and Flintshire as well, which is, I think, a very welcome initiative. The report says that

'An investment zone will benefit people in north Wales in terms of employment, skills and training benefits by helping to deliver a well-functioning public transport and active travel network.'

So, Deputy Minister, could you expand on how the Welsh Government will harness the benefits of the investment zone for proposed transport schemes through the new skills and training that people will receive? Thank you.

Thank you. As you know, one of the recommendations of the roads review was to look at Wrexham and to judge it against both our 'Future Wales' planning policy and the Wales transport strategy, and we are trying to do the work with the local authority there. The fact that they have chosen to torpedo their own local development plan doesn't help, because we need to take transport and planning together simultaneously, because they are so integral to each other. So, we are keen to keep working with them as they develop the regional transport plan as part of the north Wales corporate joint committee, and to do that, as I say, in tandem with its housing plans, so we make sure that developments are not simply creating an extra congestion pressure in one point, which then creates further congestion for the rest of the area.

Part of the roads review as well was looking at sites that have been identified as primarily for economic development—and there were a number of those—and not to, in a sense, create bypasses by stealth, by creating an out-of-town development without any thought as to how people would get to it other than by car. And we are now working through—. We've set up a group, led by Councillor Llinos Medi, the leader of Ynys Môn council, and Councillor Anthony Hunt, the leader of Torfaen, to look, through an economic development lens, at how we can make sure that we do facilitate economic development projects and development, but do it in a way that doesn't add to our congestion problem and, indeed, helps with our modal shift agenda. I met with that group, I think it was last week, and they are making good progress.

As I say, the key, now, has got to be those regional transport plans. This is for the north to decide its priorities. I know there have been calls for us to devolve budgets and transport entirely to the north and that is the opportunity for the corporate joint committee to prove its worth, to take forward these plans, based on this, I hope, the Burns report, this pipeline of schemes, which will make the Wrexham investment zone tie in with the town of Wrexham and where the people who are living there need to get to, and tie them up to public transport, so that they don't have to have a car. People will always want to have a car, people will need to have a car, but we shouldn't force people into only having the car as a viable option, which, too often, we do. And this report is about providing practical alternatives.

Thank you, Deputy Minister, for the statement and to the commission for their work. I want to focus my few questions on Anglesey and the Menai crossings. The Deputy Minister, of course, will know of my frustration about the decision taken to cancel the plans for a new crossing, or the dualling of the Britannia crossing. I am still convinced that that will be the necessary investment, ultimately, in order to ensure long-term resilience. The Menai bridge is 200 years old in two years' time, and I think we will need to strengthen the crossings for the future. Perhaps the Minister can confirm that he is at least willing to keep that plan alive, so that a successor of his could look at it anew in the future perhaps.

I'm happy to see a series of recommendations accepted—the first six recommendations made by the commission. I would appreciate, however, a timetable for their implementation. Some of them are things that were mentioned when the Menai bridge was closed, as temporary measures, and nothing was done about them at that time. Another question on a timetable. There are more than just those six recommendations. There are important recommendations on looking at how the three-lane system could work, and looking at introducing an active travel programme—that would have been a huge benefit of having the third crossing, of course. So, when can we expect the Government to take the step to at least start the work to consider those issues? Or we are talking about plans that will be pushed years into the future, I'm afraid.

Thank you. Unfortunately, I didn't bring the annex with me, but the annex does set out in quite some detail the next steps and the plans, and there are timelines for some of them, including putting up measures to mitigate wind to reduce the number of times the bridge is closed and to look, in particular, at that three-lane option. So, I think it's all there. I think it's a very thorough piece of work that gives us something tangible to work with, and I'd be happy to follow up with a letter to the Member to identify some dates where we can. But a lot of this now is about the joint working with the trunk road agency, the local authority, TfW and the Welsh Government to progress that.

On the third crossing, I think the report does give him a chink of light, because it does say in the future it wouldn't rule out the need for a third crossing if, indeed, there was nuclear development on the island. But the costs of that would need to be borne in mind as part of the power supply delivery, the national grid connector, as well as the cost of building the station. If, in the future, that becomes a justifiable intervention, there's no ideological or dogmatic opposition to a third crossing. It's just that, as things stand, the two studies we've now commissioned, the roads review and the Burns commission, did not find a strong enough case to justify funding in the order of £400 million for a crossing when more could be done in the short to medium term to improve the resilience of the existing crossings. But if the facts change, as Maynard Keynes famously said, we change our mind, and if that picture does change on Ynys Môn, then we'll need to look at that and look for funding for it. But I think what we need to focus on in the here and now is how we can make most use of what we have.

You mentioned earlier that you're looking at setting up a north Wales active travel unit as well. So, are you looking to expand the Active Travel (Wales) Act 2013 from just walking and cycling to include bus transport as well? When I met with the north Wales transport commission, they agreed that there aren't many areas for designated cycle routes and that many people would have to use the existing highway infrastructure across north Wales. I know that councils in north Wales were really concerned about the resilience of the local highway network, but also concerned about the railway infrastructure in north Wales as well. So, what consideration have you given to climate change and the resilience going forward? I couldn't see that in the commission's report, there.

Regarding delivery, as well, you said that now it's time to deliver, which is really important. So, will the north Wales regional group be the delivery body, working with CJCs? CJCs still haven't really been formed properly yet, so I just want to know that.

And then, the funding. Franchising is going to be expensive for buses, and I agree it's the right way to go, but we heard the announcement of the electrification of the north Wales line. I know that there's no development funding and that Network Rail are trying to develop it in-house, so there's no funding to back it up and there's been no development funding either for the investment zone for Flintshire and Wrexham. So, it feels to me as if it's just words, there's no funding to back it up, yet the free port has had £200,000 of development funding, which they're able to use. So, just your view on that, please, as well—your comments on that. Thank you.

Again, as I say, we support the electrification of the north Wales line, that's been long in our plans, but there are things that can be done far sooner that'll have far greater impact that do have plans behind them, that do have support behind them, that we think are a greater priority. Sadly, based on what I've seen of the Department for Transport's thinking on the north Wales main line, the fact that Network Rail didn't even know about it, that there is no development work, that freedom of information requests have confirmed there are no costings behind it, I'm afraid it is a superficial pre-election gimmick, which I regret, because this is the sort of thing that breeds cynicism about politics, when people make promises and they have no intention of following through. I fear that's exactly what's likely to happen with the north Wales so-called electrification. You'll remember they promised us electrification of the south Wales main line and reneged on that promise too, so there is reason to be cynical, sadly.

In terms of your point on the active travel unit, well, active travel is just that, it's walking and cycling, and wheeling, so it's not about public transport, but the two clearly need to be complementary. The whole point of the regional transport plan is that they dovetail together, and the delivery of that is the responsibility of the corporate joint committee. We've made clear to them that we are iterating Transport for Wales into what I call 'TfW 2.0'. I gave a speech to the staff at TfW recently, for those who are real nerds who want to understand the plumbing of this, but it's all set out there what that means for TfW. But essentially, it means it being a mode-agnostic transport delivery agency, where it looks at what people's needs are and how to help people move from A to B, and fit the modes around that. So, it may be it's best for them by car, maybe it's best for them by other modes. They don't start with an assumption that there is a rail solution or a bus solution or an active travel solution.

I think that's a very exciting agenda, and they certainly are embracing it. So, they'll be there to help CJCs. I don't want CJCs taking our money and spending it on expensive consultants to produce acres of paper that mean very little. We've said to them very clearly that TfW is there for them to use. It is their in-house consultant. They are there to help, they are not there to try and take over; they are there to give them the capacity and the capability and the analysis and the data for them to build those regional transport plans together with them. The structure we're creating around the bus delivery will be a tripartite one, as you know, with local authorities, TfW and the Welsh Government sitting as equal partners being that guiding mind.

Minister, you know, representing Aberconwy, that I've often raised here with you issues around the A470, and we do have some dangerous bends and difficulties between Glan Conwy, Maenan and Llanrwst. I wrote to you in April, and you wrote back to me stating that the section of the A470 between Glan Conwy and Betws-y-coed will fall under this commission. In seeking more information, I wrote to the North Wales Transport Commission, who responded telling me the commission is not considering specific road schemes across the region as a rule. I understand from reading the report now that there's been no actual reference to the A470. So, would you look at that again for me, please? The report states, 'We recognise that the private car will continue to be the main way many journeys are made by many people'. There is no recommendation in relation to improving the A470, so will you clarify what work will be undertaken to improve the numerous dangerous sections I've highlighted to you on several occasions?

I've been very pleased to see a recommendation that there should be increased service frequencies and train capacity enhancement on the Conwy valley line. I've asked for those many times, so can you give me more details on that? And finally, the report does highlight the central role that the Conwy valley line has to play in bringing tourists to this area. Again, I've long campaigned about Blaenau Ffestiniog to Manchester Airport, and all sorts. So, how are you going to further the words used in this report to see more visitors to Eryri using the Conwy valley line? Diolch.

Thank you. The report says in quite some detail what its suggestions are for the Conwy valley line and integrating it with the Sherpa bus service, and there has been significant improvement there. I visited it not so long ago and saw it for myself. It's very impressive and clearly highly valued locally, and that's been a real step forward. I think it's a model for other areas to follow, so I think we need more of that. The delivery of that is then up to the corporate joint committee, through their regional transport plan, as it is on the A470 improvements. So, I think that's the answer to that question. This is about a set of recommendations; the delivery of them is the next stage. The regional transport plans will have to set up a list of prioritised schemes, which will then apply for funding, and we'll do that closely with them through Transport for Wales. That's absolutely the next step.

In terms of dangerous bends on the A470, the roads review and the Lugg review, which we published on maintenance, made it very clear that the approach that we are going to take is that, where there are road safety issues on the trunk road network, we should first be looking to small changes and reducing speed limits, rather than large, expensive infrastructure upgrades, which are carbon intensive and simply act to increase road capacity. I'm happy to continue our correspondence—it's something I will dearly miss when my time in this role comes to an end—but the general approach that we're going to be taking is looking to other measures first, rather than just get the concrete lorries out.

Finally, Darren Millar.

Diolch, Llywydd. Can I say that I do welcome a lot of what's in the report by the commission? I do have some concerns that it doesn't reflect the reality on the ground when it comes to some of the way that our transport system works in north Wales, but nevertheless, there's some good work that has gone in.

One of the issues that I don't think was investigated sufficiently was an opportunity to have some more modal shift along the north Wales coast by transferring more car users onto the rail network by the introduction of an opportunity to use concessionary travel cards on the north Wales railway line at off-peak periods. It is something that I have suggested in this Chamber on a number of occasions. We know that there are times of the day when there's plenty of capacity on the north Wales line. That could shift people from their cars onto the north Wales line if they want to travel from places such as Chester to Bangor, or wherever they might want to get to. I think that is a missed opportunity. I wonder, Minister, whether this is something that you will ask your officials to look at the feasibility of, because I think it's a huge opportunity that we should seize.

I agree. Concessionaries shouldn't just be for older people; this should be available to all people, to encourage, as you say, empty trains to be filled with passengers. In my speech to TfW setting out their next steps, I asked them to look at a different model for pricing of rail, because we are stuck with a really problematic economic model for rail. In other countries, it's accepted that the cost of rail is embraced by the taxpayer, and in our country we have a model where we assume that passengers will pay for a large contribution of the cost of rail. As a result, we have very expensive rail tickets, which makes it often unaffordable for families, and it is often cheaper to travel by car than it is for several people to travel by train. That clearly goes against the objectives we have on modal shift.

A lot of that is driven by the rail privatisation legislation and the way we treat regulated fares and unregulated fares; it's a real nerdfest. But we need to get around that. So, what I've asked TfW to do is to look at a Ryanair-style or a Megabus-style approach to pricing. My family members seem to be quite happy to travel at antisocial times for cut-price travel on Megabus, and people would be willing to do the same. Why is the 06:30 train empty when we could be offering tickets for a very small amount of money to get people onto those railways? It sounds easier than it is in practice to do, because the rail industry is so complex, but that is something TfW are actively looking at and modelling to see whether or not we can have very cheap travel on the less popular services.

But, of course, all of this comes down to funding, doesn't it, and how much money we're willing to put into public transport and the balance between rail and bus. Because we can deliver far more value from bus than we can from train in terms of number of passengers and those areas that are not connected by a railway line. That's an ongoing debate we need to have about how we do those things. And that's, I think, what the promise of the TfW bus reform package is: to allow us, for the first time, to strategically plan how bus and rail can properly integrate. Because at the moment we are effectively subsidising a railway line to run in parallel with a bus service. They're competing against each other while other parts of an area have no service at all. What we'll be able to do with bus franchising in place is to move away from that and say, 'We will serve that route by rail, and we will serve that route by bus, and we won't have them competing'. That way, we can have a genuinely joined-up, integrated transport system.

So, there is lots of detail to get right, and the consortia have a key role to play in applying that in their local area, and TfW has a key role to play in giving them the information and the expertise to join that together. The legislation I hope that we're going to pass later this year will provide a legal framework to make that happen. I think there is huge change that's been taking place in transport under the bonnet, if you don't mind me using the phrase, over the last three to four years. It will take time to manifest itself and work through. But on bus, rail, active travel and road, this Government has put in place radical and far-reaching reforms, which will make a significant difference in the years to come.

I thank the Deputy Minister.

Item 11 is next, the statutory instrument consent memorandum on the Social Housing (Regulation) Act 2023 (Consequential and Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations 2024. I call on the Deputy Minister, once again, to move the motion. Lee Waters.

Diolch, Llywydd. Me again. Thank you for this opportunity to explain the background to the Social Housing (Regulation) Act 2023 (Consequential and Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations 2024. I'm afraid I don't know what that is in Welsh. The memorandum laid before the Senedd—

I just said it in my introduction.

I didn't retain the information, I'm afraid, but I shall go back and look at the record and learn it off by heart.

The memorandum laid before the Senedd on 19 January, together with the written statement on the same day, summarises the provisions of the regulations and sets out the changes to primary legislation for which consent is sought. I'd like to thank the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee for its work scrutinising the statutory instrument consent memorandum and its report published on 20 February. The committee welcomed the Welsh Government's intention to seek the Senedd's agreement to the inclusion of the relevant provision in the Social Housing (Regulation) Act 2023 (Consequential and Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations 2024, and are content with the memorandum. I have laid the motion in accordance with the requirements under Standing Order 30A. I consider the regulations to be a relevant statutory instrument because they make provision in relation to Wales amending primary legislation within the legislative competence of the Senedd that is not incidental, consequential, transitional, transitory, supplementary or savings provision relating to matters that are not within the legislative competence of the Senedd. Thank you very much.

Members may remember the debates we had during the passage of the Social Housing (Regulation) Act 2023. The aim of the Act was to improve the regulation of registered providers of social housing based in England and therefore regulated by the regulator for social housing for England. It required and was granted the consent of the Senedd. My view is that the proper functioning of that Act, as supported by this instrument, will have a generally positive impact on the experiences of the tenants of the approximately 500 units of social housing in Wales that are owned or managed by registered providers subject to the regulatory regime for social housing in England. The statutory instrument now makes amendments to other primary legislation as a consequence of those changes. I believe it is sensible and suitable for these amendments to be made in order for the 2023 Act to be implemented. The changes are purely technical, and there is no change in policy. It is therefore appropriate to deal with these provisions in this instrument. It's on this basis that the statutory instrument consent motion is placed before you for approval, and I move the motion.

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

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd, and thank you, Minister, too.

We laid our report on the Welsh Government's memorandum in respect of the Social Housing (Regulation) Act 2023 (Consequential and Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations 2024 on 20 February. My thanks to committee colleagues and to our clerking team, as always. As the Minister has said, these regulations make relatively minor changes to various pieces of legislation, namely the Housing and Regeneration Act 2008. The amendments are needed to reflect changes made by the Social Housing (Regulation) Act 2023, which makes provisions to improve the regulation of social housing landlords.

As a committee, we are content with the memorandum and the Welsh Government's assessment that, to the extent the amendments to the Housing and Regeneration 2008 Act apply to England-based registered providers that own or manage social housing stock in Wales—and that's what we're looking at—the regulations amend primary legislation within the legislative competence of this Senedd.

We also note the Welsh Government's view that it is appropriate for the regulations to make these provisions, as they will have a generally positive impact on the experiences of the tenants of the units of social housing in Wales that are owned or managed by registered providers subject to the regulatory regime for social housing in England. It's very important we note that that's the focus of this.

I would like to take this opportunity to state that we are very grateful that the Minister tabled the motion to seek the Senedd's agreement to the inclusion of a relevant provision in the regulation. That act in itself is very welcome. Llywydd, you'll be aware that we've previously called on the Welsh Government to table motions to seek this Senedd's consent for the use of UK secondary legislation to amend primary legislation in devolved areas, as a matter of principle. It's up to this Senedd what conclusion it comes to, but at least we then have the opportunity to actually debate it. So, the tabling and passing of such a motion is important, as it is the only way the Senedd's consent can be sought and given in relation to a relevant provision in a statutory instrument.

So, therefore, Minister, can we just welcome the tabling of this motion in respect of these regulations, and also our hope that Welsh Government will continue to table motions in respect of provisions subject to statutory instrument consent memoranda in the future? It's a really good example, and it's bringing it here for us to debate. Diolch yn fawr.

Janet Finch-Saunders.

I haven't got anything.

Okay. We have no further speakers on this debate if you want to close, Minister.

Thank you, and I thank Huw Irranca-Davies for his comments, and I agree this is both of constitutional significance, but also, in terms of improving people's everyday lives in Wales, this is a significant step. This is a purely technical motion, and there's no change in policy, as I mentioned, and the purpose is to implement a measure that has previously received the consent of the Senedd, and I hope the Senedd will agree to pass this today. Diolch.

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? There are no objections, and therefore the motion is agreed.

That brings us to voting time, and unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, we will proceed directly to the votes. The first votes today are on the debate on budgetary flexibilities and the operation of the UK's funding framework. And the first vote is on amendment 1. So, I call for a vote on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Heledd Fychan. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 13, no abstentions, 37 against. And therefore the amendment is not agreed.

Amendment 2 is next. Open the vote on amendment 2, tabled in the name of Heledd Fychan. In favour 12, no abstentions, 38 against. Therefore, the amendment is not agreed.

The next vote is on amendment 3, tabled in the name of Heledd Fychan. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 12, no abstentions, 38 against. Therefore, amendment 3 is not agreed.

Amendment 4 is next, again tabled in the name of Heledd Fychan. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 12, no abstentions, 38 against. Amendment 4 is therefore not agreed.

We move now to amendment 5, in the name of Heledd Fychan. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 12, no abstentions, 39 against. Therefore, the amendment is not agreed.

I now call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Lesley Griffiths. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 51, no abstentions, and none against. Therefore, the motion is agreed.

That concludes voting, and concludes our work for today.

We will take the vote now on the legislative consent motion on the Economic Activity of Public Bodies (Overseas Matters) Bill. I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Rebecca Evans. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 14, no abstentions, 33 against. The LCM is therefore not agreed. Thank you for your patience. Apologies from me for concluding voting time prematurely. Good afternoon.