Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru

I call Members to order.

The first item on our agenda this afternoon is questions to the First Minister, and the first question, Angela Burns.

Our plans are to be found, of course, in the national strategy. We have a strong presence of companies providing pharmaceutical services, and we have a proven track record of supporting clinical trials and pharmaceutical services here in Wales, and that will continue in the future.

Indeed, you do have a proven track record on that, and I really welcome it. I recognise that your Government has attracted considerable investment into the whole life sciences business, which, in our country, employs some 11,000 people. I’m very concerned though about what might happen as a consequence of Brexit, and I wondered what—[Interruption.]

Allow the Member to ask her question, please. Angela Burns.

Thank you. I just wondered what discussion your Government has had with its Westminster counterparts around the future of regulatory frameworks post Brexit, and are you intending to feed into the House of Commons Health Select Committee inquiry, which is looking at post-Brexit arrangements to guarantee the supply of medicines, devices and products, and particularly in relation to our ability for the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence and the All Wales Medicine Strategy Group—. We are exemplars throughout Europe and European Medicines Agency countries, and if we are no longer able to hook into the European exemplars, then we might lose some of that money that’s coming currently into Wales for some of these pilots, and I’d just like to know what you’re going to be able to do about that.

The Member is very much correct to raise that issue. This, amongst many other issues, is not yet worked through in terms of clarity as far as the public are concerned. It makes no sense at all for the UK to have a different regulatory regime to the rest of Europe, and one of the things that we’ve urged on the UK Government is that there is no need for divergence where none is required. Why would we have a separate system that is different from everyone else, in effect? So, I very much agree with her comments. We have made the point on this and in other areas, such as chemicals for example. The registration, evaluation, authorisation and restriction of chemicals directive—what application will that have after we leave the EU? Does that mean that chemicals will be less regulated in the UK? All these issues will form part, and continue to form part, of the discussions we’re having with the UK Government.

First Minister, Andrew Evans, upon his appointment as Wales’s chief pharmaceutical officer, stated, and I quote:

‘Pharmacists in Wales are taking a central role in the Welsh government’s drive to provide patients with high-quality care promptly and closer to home. I look forward to working with pharmacists and other health and care professions, building on the significant improvements we have already made.’

Can the First Minister reconfirm that the pharmaceutical industry in Wales is key to the Welsh Government’s drive for equipping the Welsh national health service to serve its patients in the years ahead, and also update us on how that work is progressing?

Absolutely. We support the pharmaceutical industry, for example, through the life sciences investment fund. That’s made 11 investments into nine companies, including those that serve the pharmaceutical industry. It’s attracted considerable levels of co-investment. A life sciences hub has been delivered to provide a physical focus for the sector in Wales, together with a company to implement and deliver key elements of policy, and that hub is one of the cornerstones of what the sector will need to build on in the future. We’re working on the development of a brand with international reputation. Our trade missions, for example, to Medica, have consistently been the largest single trade event for Wales over the past three years. And, of course, we see the continued growth of BioWales, which is the signature event for the sector, and something that I attended a few years ago. It’s the vehicle for Welsh life sciences companies and academic departments to exhibit their expertise to an international audience. So, the work is being done not just in terms of supporting pharmaceutical companies who are here, but ensuring that they have a pipeline of skills for the future.

The programme seeks to target investment at those schools and colleges in the poorest condition, and to deliver sustainable, cost-effective building. And, of course, we are seeking to take forward the programme over the next few years, building on the success of the programme over the last few years.

First Minister, I’m very proud that my constituency of Cynon Valley has benefited to the tune of over £100 million in new and improved educational facilities under the twenty-first century schools programme, which I understand is more than any other constituency in Wales. I know that you attended the official opening, just the other week, of the new £22 million Coleg y Cymoedd campus in Aberdare. Evidence that we took recently in the economy committee from ColegauCymru suggests, however, that the FE sector isn’t as successful as perhaps it could be in tapping into that funding. So, in terms of the important role further education has in providing choice to learners and in boosting skills, how is the Welsh Government engaging with the sector so that it can maximise the benefits of the programme?

Well, it’s right to say that over £120 million has been allocated for FE projects during the band A programme. We’ve seen the results of that. Over £10.6 million of capital funding has been provided to FE institutions to upgrade their IT and skills equipment. Over the next wave of investment—band B—we’re working with FE colleges to develop their investment plans for this next wave so that we can understand where investment should come. And we encourage FE institutions to come forward with investment projects that will benefit them as institutions.

First Minister, the twenty-first century schools programme has probably been one of the most popular Welsh Government policies over recent years, due in no small part to the role played by progressive, forward-looking local authorities like Conservative-led Monmouthshire. Monmouth Comprehensive School is currently being rebuilt and, when complete, will have state-of-the-art facilities, including modern interactive classrooms and IT. It’s not just for pupils; it’s for the whole town. How is the Welsh Government working with local authorities to help develop new schools like this as community hubs and to help target funding at local projects that will tie in with developments like this?

Well, I admire his craft in turning this into a question to congratulate Monmouthshire local education authority. Of course, we welcome the fact that Monmouthshire and other LEAs—all LEAs in Wales—have been able to benefit from the school improvement programme. I’d remind him, of course, that his party in England has no such programme and, in that case, in Monmouthshire, no new school would be built there or indeed anywhere else in Wales. One point four billion pounds is being committed over the five-year period up to 2019. That means funding has been approved for 151 projects in band A of our programme, exceeding our target. Eighty-three of those projects are complete, 45 under construction. That is a significant investment in the future of Welsh young people and Welsh education, which only a Welsh Labour Government could deliver.

What steps is the Government taking to ensure that the funding available within the twenty-first century schools budget is used to enhance Welsh-medium education? Because we know, for example, that there is a higher rate of support for faith schools—it’s 85 per cent, as I understand it, rather than 50 per cent for schools more generally. Would you be prepared to consider a similar method to that, possibly, to ensure that you reach your target in terms of a million Welsh speakers?

The important point is that local authorities are able, for example, to produce the Welsh in education strategic plans in their areas—they haven’t been doing so consistently up to now, I have to say—and to then use those WESPs to target those areas where we should have more new Welsh schools. The tendency over the years is that the new schools have tended to be English schools, and the Welsh schools have then been established in older buildings, and that is not how it should be in the long run. So, this starts with the WESPs, namely the strategic plans, and we must ensure that every WESP in Wales is robust and ensure that it supports us in the building up to a million Welsh speakers by 2050.

Questions now from the party leaders. The leader of the UKIP group, Neil Hamilton.

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Llywydd. The Welsh Government and, indeed, the Labour Party generally have been very critical of zero-hours contracts, and also firms like Uber, who they say use their terms and conditions to exploit workers. Well, aren’t supply teachers in Wales often in the same situation? There’s a case that was quoted on the BBC website this week of Angela Sandles, who’s a qualified primary school teacher but, for the last six years, has also been a foster parent, and so has been a supply teacher. She says that, after deductions from the agency that she works for, she can be paid around the minimum wage. And some supply teachers are turning to pizza delivery to make ends meet, and supply teachers are voting with their feet and leaving and looking for alternative employment. Does the First Minister think that this is an acceptable situation?

No, but then this isn’t devolved yet. This is something that will come to us next year. We have a supply teaching working group, which is looking at ways to boost the employment prospects and, indeed, income of supply teachers, and that is exactly what we plan to take forward.

As the First Minister will probably know, supply teachers in England on average are paid about £130 a day, but in Cardiff that’s on average £90 to £95 a day, and in west Wales it’s as low as £80 a day. Agencies are charging schools above the rate for teachers on main scale 1-4, and teachers with 20 years’ experience, therefore, can be paid less than a newly qualified teacher who’s permanently employed. The Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Infrastructure said recently in relation to Uber that people should be able to rely on a fair wage regardless of their line of work. I don’t think there’ll be any Member in this place that would disagree with that.

Well, it is a matter for the school, of course, because schools employ the supply teachers. In order to change to a situation where there is complete consistency in that regard then local management of schools would have to be removed from schools. In Northern Ireland, where there is no LMS, there’s far greater consistency in terms of supply teachers’ pay. This is an issue that hasn’t yet been devolved to us. The changing of the system away from LMS would require primary legislation, inevitably, and these are issues that Members will have to consider over the next few months. But, in the meantime, what we intend to do is use the working group that we’ve put together to improve the conditions of supply teachers, while at the same time considering the best outcome in the longer term.

Schools come under the regulation of local authorities—the responsibility of local authorities at any rate—and, of course, the Welsh Government is responsible for funding those schools and has great persuasive authority, even if it doesn’t have the legal authority. Amongst other deficiencies of the current situation for lots of agency teachers is they’ve got no access to the teachers’ pension scheme and, often, their holiday pay arrangements mean that part of the wages that they’re paid for doing their job are held back to them, to be handed back during the holidays as though that were holiday pay on top of their normal pay, which is quite wrong. The effect has been that, for public sector workers in general, who have had a pay cap for the last 10 years, supply teachers have done a good deal worse and many of them have had a pay cut in effect of up to 40 per cent in the last 15 years. Also, many of these supply contracts have a clause in them, which you have to accept or else you don’t get the job, saying, ‘I accept that I will not be paid according to agency worker regulations.’ Is the Welsh Government going to do something specific about these abuses?

These are issues that are being considered in advance of the devolution of pay and conditions. We know that schools—. He said that local authorities are responsible. Schools are responsible for employing their supply teachers and, of course, if schools wish to employ supply teachers in a different way, rather than going through agencies, then that will be open to them. But with this being devolved in the very near future, this now gives us the opportunity to deal with these issues, which I recognise because I’ve had constituents come in to explain this to me as well, in a way that wasn’t possible before in the absence of devolution.

Plaid Cymru leader, Leanne Wood.

Diolch, Llywydd. The First Secretary of State and Minister for the Cabinet Office, Damian Green, said yesterday, in terms of the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill, and I quote,

‘talk of a power-grab is…behind us.’

Do you agree with him?

We are not yet in a position—well, I’m not in the position—where I could recommend to this Assembly that we should support the withdrawal Bill. I did have a meeting with him and with the Secretary of State for Wales. I think it’s fair to say there was a better understanding of our determination not to support the Bill unless the power grab is addressed, and I think it’s fair to say that it was a better meeting than previous meetings. Perhaps the arithmetic in the House of Commons has been realised now by the UK Government, but we’re not in a position yet where we can recommend that the Bill should be supported. We now need to see action by the UK Government to make sure that that power grab is removed.

Well, it’s encouraging to hear that you had a more positive meeting, but Plaid Cymru still sees that there is a risk of a power grab in this Bill. Clause 11 of the Bill places restrictions on the devolved administrations on competence relating to EU law, although that’s not the only part of the Bill where we’ve got concerns, as you will be aware. The meeting between Theresa May and Jean-Claude Juncker last night was of crucial importance to Wales. Even more than the withdrawal Bill that I’ve mentioned, the terms of EU exit on trade is vital in terms of Welsh jobs. Last night though, there was no breakthrough. The admission that talks need to accelerate is, in my view, a sign of their failure so far. Will you acknowledge that leaving the EU without a deal is a real and, if that does happen, that it would be bad news for Welsh jobs, for Welsh farming and for Welsh trade?

It’s an exceptionally worrying prospect. As I’ve said before, no deal is the worst deal. To leave in chaotic circumstances would be bad for everybody. The concern that I have is that insufficient progress is made by March 2019 so that no deal becomes the default position. That is something that she and I are in exactly the same position in terms of saying that we would oppose that. It’s hugely important that there is a deal on the table that enables Welsh businesses to be able to access the single market on the same terms as now.

If you agree, First Minister, that leaving the EU without a deal is a real prospect and that it would be, indeed, bad news for Wales, then the next obvious question that I have for you is what it is you’re going to do about it. How is the Welsh Government preparing for every possible Brexit scenario? You’ll know that yesterday the Farmers’ Union of Wales indicated its support for staying in the single market and the customs union, and they said that the evidence supporting that position was incontrovertible. It’s only a matter of time now before other sectors follow them. Your Government said in July that businesses were more focused on the short term because there was so much uncertainty around that final deal. You could also not provide data as to how many businesses your Government had been in contact with regarding Brexit support. Can you now outline the concrete steps you are taking to prepare the Welsh economy for all possible Brexit scenarios, and will you accept that it is your duty to ensure that the Welsh economy does not sleepwalk into a dangerous economic crisis?

We have an EU exit working group that is working on different scenarios, but I have to say that no deal—there is no mitigation for no deal. There is nothing literally we can do in the short term if we find there’s no deal. In the longer term, it’s possible to look for new markets, but, in the timescale we’re talking about, it’s impossible. If we look at farming, particularly sheep—. Dairy farming is in a less vulnerable position, but sheep farming particularly—sheep farmers face a triple whammy, in effect, of (a) finding that what they produce is now 40 per cent more expensive in their main target market, (b) seeing a question mark over their subsidies post 2021, and (c) a potential free trade deal with another country with a large sheep meat industry like New Zealand, for example, that is then allowed to come into the UK without any restriction at all. In those circumstances, no matter how much subsidy can be made available for farmers, much of what they produce will not be sellable, and that’s why it’s hugely important that our sheep farmers, our manufacturers, are able to access the single market in the same way as they do now. It’s perfectly possible to leave the EU and yet still have access to the single market. Norway have done it; Norway is a European economic area country. Nigel Farage himself was using Norway as an example of what we could be, and, in that sense, if in little else, he’s right, because the last thing we want to see is no deal, because there’s no amount of preparation that can prepare the Welsh economy for what is bound to be bad news if we cannot access properly the market where we sell nearly two thirds of our goods.

The leader of the opposition, Andrew R.T. Davies.

Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. First Minister, why doesn’t the Welsh Government use economic intelligence, and, importantly, input and output tables, when creating policy and deciding where to support the Welsh economy?

We do.

I have to say you do not use economic intelligence or input or output tables. I haven’t been able to find an academic, a businessman or woman—there is no-one who can support what you’ve just said, First Minister. If you look at the Scottish model, they have a dedicated unit at the University of Strathclyde that they established some years ago that informs Scottish Government policy about the output of the economy, about job creation, and, above all, about the support that the economy in Scotland needs. I am concerned at the flippancy of your answer, in particular when you look at the challenges that the Welsh economy faces. Will you reconsider the answer that you’ve just given? Because I can tell you that what the Welsh economy needs—when developing new policy and support for the Welsh economy, it needs sound data, good information and an understanding of how the economy works. And I point again to your assertion that you say, ‘yes’, when, in fact, compared to what Scotland do, with a dedicated unit at Strathclyde university, you have nothing of a comparable nature.

First of all, the worst thing for the Welsh economy would be a chaotic Brexit; that’s the worst thing of all. We do have a chief economist who advises Government. We consult with businesses through bodies such as the Council for Economic Development, and in that way we have the intelligence that we need to take the Welsh economy forward. But he speaks as if we have nothing in terms of advice. We have a chief economist and a department that provides us with our advice.

First Minister, economic intelligence and input and output tables are well understood in the development of public policy the length and breadth of Governments around the world. It was a relatively straightforward question that I opened this series of questions with. When you look at the challenges that the Welsh economy faces—putting Brexit to one side—on automation, for example, which one of your backbenchers has highlighted time and time again in this Chamber, by 2025, we will lose 15 per cent of the jobs in the workplace as we understand them today. By 2035, we are set to lose 35 per cent of the jobs in the workplace as we understand them today; 2035 is only 18 years away. You have no ability—and I reiterate this—you have no ability to use the tools that other Governments use the length and breadth of the world and, in particular, in devolved contexts, such as Scotland. Will you commission a unit here in Wales to support the development of public policy on input and output policy for economic intelligence, First Minister?

Well, again, as I said, we have the bodies that have been set up to work with industry. Industry Wales is another example of that. We have a chief economist and other economists who can support what we are doing. We also have the Public Policy Institute for Wales, whose job it is to look at issues as they arise and provide us with advice. We do have that academic input into policy making. He seems to give the impression that, somehow, we have no economic data at all or advice that advises on what we need to do. That is not correct and, as we see from the fact that unemployment is at a low level and foreign direct investment is at a very high level, the information we’re getting is clearly right as far as the decisions we’re taking are concerned.

Well, as a result of the UK Government announcement in July that it wouldn’t electrify to Swansea, bidders for our rail services will be unable to provide and operate electric trains between Cardiff and Swansea in any event.

The original business case in 2012 that was the basis for the electrification decision included four electric trains per hour between Swansea and Cardiff, including local services, as I understand. Now, had the Welsh Government inserted a requirement for electric local services in the detailed franchise specification, as per this original business case, the Department for Transport would have found it nigh on impossible to reject electrification. So, hasn’t the Welsh Government missed an opportunity here? What are you going to now do, given the situation that we’re now in, to rectify the fact that Swansea’s not going to have the electrification that it was promised?

The blame for the failure to electrify is at the feet of the UK Government. It was they who made the promise to electrify the line; it was they who withdrew, who reneged, on that promise to electrify that line. We know that the cost is about £500 million to electrify between Cardiff and Swansea. We want to make sure, as our plans have shown, whether it’s via the metro or whether it’s more widely through the franchise—we want to run better trains more frequently on our railway lines. I don’t think it would have made a blind bit of difference, to be honest with you, if we’d specified it in the franchise; they would still have withdrawn their funding.

I would like to stress the importance of the electrification of the main London to Swansea rail line in going through Bridgend, First Minister. I think it’s incredibly important. The message it sends out to potential investors about how important you think an area is when you stop the electrification 40 miles away I think is seriously disadvantageous to those of us who live west of Cardiff. Will the First Minister continue to support electrification of the railway line from Cardiff to Swansea?

‘Yes’ is the simple answer. But, of course, this is not a devolved area. The budget is held by the UK Government; it’s for the UK Government to make good on its promise. I share his concern that, in time, as we see different trains being introduced over the years, the fact there’s no electrification will mean, in time, that the inter-city trains will stop in Cardiff because there is no mode of traction able to take them further west. Yes, we do have bimodal trains now. Yesterday’s launch was perhaps not the most auspicious launch, as the first train broke down. The second one seemed to be cascading water over people because of a fault with the air-conditioning system. But we hope that those issues, clearly, are resolved for the good of the economy of south Wales. But a promise was made to the people of Wales; that promise was broken by the same party. What worth now is any promise from any Conservative Government if they’re breaking a promise that was so publicly made?

Will the First Minister update Members on whether any progress has been made on the UK Tory Government’s devolving of all the powers required to the Welsh Government to ensure a successful tendering process of the new Wales and borders franchise? The people of Wales want to see the First Minister of Wales and the Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Infrastructure fully in charge of this process without any interference from Chris Grayling, Alun Cairns and their officials. And, yesterday, these two boarded a state-of-the-art new train that left 25 minutes late owing to technical issues, and it was further delayed en route, water leaked from air-conditioning units, and commuters were forced to stand with the air-conditioning units turned off. Can the First Minister do all in his powers to keep the calamity Conservatives away from decision making on the Welsh railway networks?

I think that’s best. With regard to the franchise agreement, progress is being made in that regard now. There were some blockages that needed to be cleared; they have been cleared. The sad thing is that the UK Government refuses to allow the people of Wales any kind of control over their own rail network. We don’t even have the power to direct Network Rail—the Scots do; we can’t even direct Network Rail. The reality is that only 1.5 per cent of rail investment comes to Wales. Now, that share should be 6 per cent or 6.2 per cent based on a Barnett share; we get 1.5 per cent. It’s ludicrous. On top of that, of course, we know the Scots are able to look at an arm’s-length, not-for-profit public sector body as an option for running their railways. We were specifically forbidden from doing it, presumably on the basis that we would, in some way, contaminate English stations with strange notions about not-for-profit, well-run railway services. But that is the difference between the treatment of Wales and England and Scotland by this Conservative Government. When it comes to rail, we get no fair play at all; we get broken promises. But we, as a Welsh Government, make up for their deficiencies.

Well, policing is not devolved to the Welsh Government, so we have no involvement in the recruitment of police officers. That is a matter for the Home Office.

Thank you, and that’s why I chose the word ‘supporting’. Three weeks ago, I raised concern with you expressed by the four police and crime commissioners and four chief constables in Wales that their inability to access the £2 million paid to the apprenticeship levy could result in fewer police officers, and potential recruits choosing to sign up for English forces instead. In your response, you confirmed, of course, that you’d received a share of the apprenticeship levy in Welsh Government, but

‘cannot, in good faith, pay towards apprenticeship schemes that sit in non-devolved areas’.

In reality, in the 2017-18 Welsh Government budget, you said you would give £0.5 million to police and crime commissioners to ensure that they are not disadvantaged as a result of the apprenticeship levy. You actually received £128 million, which covers the £90 million removed from the Barnett block, it covers the £30 million paid into the levy by Welsh public sector employers, and left an £8 million top-up above that level. What engagement are you therefore having as a Government with the police and crime commissioners and chief constables over this very serious matter to ensure that you give the maximum support you can, where you’re able to, in this area?

We meet regularly with the—. There are regular ministerial meetings, in fact, to discuss finance and other matters. Bear in mind, of course, that, as a Government, we support and continue to support 500 police community support officers across Wales—an issue that is not devolved, but is an issue of community safety that we wanted to take seriously, and has had a positive impact on so many communities. But I have to say to the Member: he cannot stand there and say that policing shouldn’t be devolved and then say we should spend money on a service that isn’t devolved. If policing had been devolved, this would be a matter for us. We argue it should be devolved, like every other emergency service. It is a matter for the UK Government to fund the training of police officers. Otherwise, give us the budget, give us devolution, and we’ll do it.

First Minister, whilst the recruitment of police officers must remain a high priority, we cannot overlook the hugely important factor of retention. Ninety one per cent of Gwent officers say there is not enough manpower, 80 per cent say that they have unachievable deadlines, and 76 per cent say that they cannot meet demands. All of this, of course, leads to low morale and disillusionment with the job. Can the First Minister outline the Welsh Government’s strategy to combat these stresses and thus make retention more sustainable?

Again, I have to remind the Member that these are not matters for the Welsh Government; they are matters for the UK Government. I don’t disagree with what he said, actually. It’s a sign of austerity that the police service is under so much pressure, but that is the responsibility of the UK Government. We’ve made it very clear that we would wish to see the devolution of policing with the appropriate budget transfer, and we would do a better job for our police officers.

First Minister, the Tory UK Government recently made a derisory deviation from their ideological obsession with austerity when they announced police officers would get a 1 per cent bonus funded from existing budgets. Steve White, chairman of the Police Federation of England and Wales said that this announcement would leave many officers angry and deflated.

‘We were not greedy in what we asked for’,

Mr White added. Officers have been taking home about 15 per cent less than they were seven years ago. The federation has asked for a mere 2.8 per cent increase to basic pay. Would the First Minister call on the Tory UK Government and their supporters in this very Chamber to pay police officers a decent salary so as to ensure new recruits are not turned off serving their communities as police officers?

I thank the Member for the question. We’ve heard evidence on these benches, and indeed on the benches opposite, of the way in which police officers are treated, not properly supported, the police service not properly funded, all as a result of the UK Government’s austerity programme. It shows that, when it comes to policing, the Tories will sell our police officers short.

Public bodies give safeguarding of children the highest priority, and of course that is key to the Act, which is the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014.

Thank you for that response, First Minister.

You’ll be aware that, under that law, the Minister today had to issue a statutory warning following a social services inspection of the children’s services in Powys. That report, published at midday today, makes very disturbing reading. If I can just quote a key paragraph for me:

‘There was a lack of assessment in child protection cases, a lack of a sexual exploitation risk assessment framework (SERAF) assessment and review contrary to statutory guidance, an absence of care and wellbeing assessment and a lack of management oversight of these cases.’

It then concludes:

‘The lack of assessment…is placing children at considerable risk.’

Considerable risk. Your Minister has given Powys local authority 20 days to come up with an intervention and improvement plan, and external people are in place, I understand, to help them to do that. But what assurances can you give to me and the people I represent that, in those 20 days, this considerable risk will be removed and that children and young people in Powys will be properly looked after? And what are you doing as a Government to ensure something else that’s in this report that is extremely disturbing to me, which is the lack of political commitment to children’s services in Powys?

Well, these are matters primarily for Powys council. There is a role for Ministers of course, which I’ll come to, but it does show that there has been a lack of leadership in Powys, and it shows—. I don’t disagree with what the report has said in terms of there not being enough political commitment to children’s services. What then is the role of Government? We’ve issued the warning notice. It is an unprecedented step. It provides the rigour and impetus to ensure that Powys delivers the improvements that are needed to its services. Care and Social Services Inspectorate Wales will be monitoring, as will we, very, very closely, but let me be clear: if we don’t see prompt and sustained improvements, we will be minded to consider increased intervention, which may well include taking over the authority’s social services functions.

I too am appalled to read this report today, and it all really does come down to lack of leadership in management, and it’s clear that it’s political leadership that’s been lacking. We all know that children are very often the most vulnerable within our society, and they do deserve at least a minimum commitment to them in the delivery of the services, as do the staff. There are staff working in this field in Powys today who are trying their very, very best to do a good job, and yet they’re being completely undermined, according to this report, by the lack of investment in them and in those services they’re trying to deliver. So, my question to you, First Minister, is whether you will support the call for Powys councillors to finally get their act together, to stop talking and to act collectively for the well-being of the children. Also, the next question, following through: if it is the case that the council cannot prove that they are taking the appropriate action in the given timescale that has been put to them by the Minister, will it be the case that the Government will move in and direct those services to deliver for the most vulnerable within Powys?

Ultimately, of course, it is open to us as a Government to take over the authority’s social services functions. That is, of course, an option if the authority fails to deliver under the terms of the warning notice, and that is something, certainly, that we will be monitoring closely over the next few days. I can give Members the assurance that this will receive the fullest attention of both Welsh Government and CSSIW, and no option is ruled out if compliance is not achieved.

First Minister, you will be aware of the sad case of Seren Bernard in my constituency, who committed suicide in 2012 whilst under the care of Pembrokeshire County Council social services. I saw her mother some weeks ago to discuss the report of Pembrokeshire council into this case, and this report isn’t to be published for legal reasons. It is important that issues such as this are dealt with in an open and transparent manner, so that lessons can be learnt by local authorities. So, following on from Simon Thomas’s questions, what specific guidance will you, as Government, publish to local authorities in cases such as this to ensure that lessons are learnt in order to safeguard more children in the future?

I would encourage the authority to consider publishing the report, possibly by redacting some parts of the report. We do this as a Government, because we always start from a position of wishing to publish. I understand that, due to legal reasons, it’s not possible to publish everything, but it’s important that the authority doesn’t say, ‘We will not publish anything for legal reasons.’ It’s important that they reconsider to see what they can publish, and then of course to retract whatever’s problematic legally.

The ministerial code.

First Minister, you claimed in this Chamber last year that lobbyists don’t have access to Government Ministers. You had to go back on that when it turned out that they do. You claimed this year that Plaid Cymru Ministers were somehow implicated in the Lisvane land deal scandal when £39 million was lost. The sale was decided after Plaid had left Government. Lastly, you gave an interview to the ‘South Wales Echo’ about local development plans, then you claimed that you never make comments on LDPs or planning applications and the reason why the story appeared in the paper in that way was because I put it there, and phrased it that way. That’s a really serious allegation, to question a journalist’s integrity like that, and I have no influence whatsoever over the ‘South Wales Echo’. You need to be held to account and be properly investigated. So, since you won’t answer me in any other way, I’m asking you now, in front of the people of Wales: will you voluntarily refer yourself to be investigated under the ministerial code of conduct like Alex Salmond did in 2012? Do you have the courage to do that?

Let me see. Let’s just examine his position as a politician. He’s not done well in making allegations—wild allegations—in the past in the courts. He has found himself in a position where he’s disciplined by the ombudsman, if I remember rightly, in terms of his conduct as a councillor, and he’s been expelled from his own party group. Can I suggest he has long hard look at himself first before criticising anyone else?

Yes. We’ve provided funding to Plaid Cymru for many years—Pride Cymru, I should say—including this year, despite—[Interruption.] Despite budget pressures. Pride events provide opportunities for LGBT people and others to have safe, accessible spaces to celebrate.

Thank you, First Minister. I welcome Welsh Government support for Pride Cymru. Hopefully we’ll see this event going from strength to strength, and, one day in the not too distant future, host Europride here in the capital. Pride events across Wales, of course, offer an opportunity for the LGBT community, our friends and allies to come together in celebration in a space that is safe for us to be ourselves. But, while we must not be complacent, Pride enables us to have an opportunity to demonstrate support and solidarity for LGBT people, and particularly young LGBT people. That’s why I’m pleased, this year, that, in my own constituency, we hosted the first ever Flintshire Pride. I am incredibly proud now to say that Flintshire Pride has recently gained charitable status. I am very proud that they’ve asked me to be a patron, alongside Andy Bell of Erasure fame, so I hope that Pride make sure they don’t mix up who is speaking and who is meant to be singing. First Minister, will you join me in congratulating Flintshire Pride on achieving this charitable status? Of course, it would be fantastic if you were able to come and join us on 9 June next year, as we celebrate diversity and send a message of hope in our communities.

Can I thank the Member for the invitation, which of course I will consider? I can say that the Government hosted a stall at Flintshire Pride in May. It was encouraging to see such a positive, well attended and successful event. People travelled from far and wide, actually, to go there, I understand. Of course, we want to make sure that we continue to support Pride events in order to celebrate, and fight those who encourage division in our society.

First Minister, I was delighted to take part in the first Pride march in Cardiff a couple of years ago. I wasn’t coming out, by the way; I was representing my party. It was a great event, as is the Pride movement itself. Following on from what Hannah Blythyn said, these events—and I welcome Flintshire Pride—do tend to be associated, or have been in the past, with cities and urban areas, which is great as far as it goes. Will the Welsh Government look at ways of increasing the diversity and relevance of Pride across all parts of Wales, particularly rural areas, so that people from all across the country can benefit from the spirit of Pride and the freedom that it brings?

The Member is right. It has tended to be urban based, and the Minister, I’m sure, will want to work with organisations such as Pride Cymru to see how it’s possible to increase the number of events, particularly in rural areas. That, I’m sure, working with the organisation, can be achieved in time.

Over the past few days, the Iris Prize film festival has been staged here in Cardiff. It represents the largest gay film prize in the world, and the largest short film prize awarded anywhere. So, may I ask the First Minister to congratulate those people who arranged that event and the volunteers for their success? I declare an interest because I was there for most of the festival and it is being staged by a friend of mine. But can I ask you what more we can do to help the Iris festival to extend its message of pride across Wales, as we heard earlier, and particularly thinking of Welsh speakers, where there is some work to be done, I think, in bringing together this question of pride in one’s sexuality and pride in one’s language and culture?

Well, it was a pleasure to hear of that success, and we wish to ensure that we work with the organisers to see how we can enhance the event itself and the influence of that festival and how it can grow. And so I would be very happy to receive any kind of correspondence to see how we can help to build on the ideas contained in that correspondence.

The taskforce published ‘Our Valleys, Our Future’ in July, identifying three themes: good-quality jobs and the skills to do them, better public services, and my community. Following further discussions with communities, local authorities, businesses and delivery partners, a detailed delivery plan will be published on 7 November.

May I congratulate the Minister for Lifelong Learning and Welsh Language, Alun Davies AM, for the enthusiastic and energetic way in which he has launched his ministerial Valleys taskforce? The taskforce has stated that it will also explore the concept of a Valleys landscape park to help local communities build on many natural assets, including the potential for community energy generation and tourism. Will the First Minister outline the potential the Welsh Government sees in assisting the communities of Islwyn in ensuring that the Cwmcarn forest scenic drive is enjoyed by as many people as possible? Can I also personally invite the First Minister to accompany me to visit the Cwmcarn forest drive and enjoy one of the many wonders of Wales?

I have been, actually, to the forest drive, in my previous guise as a Minister some years ago now. Of course, there was a long period of closure, as we know, which was very difficult for the local community. It’s a wonderful asset for her constituency, and one that attracts many, many visitors. The Minister and I have discussed the landscape park, and we’re looking at ways as to how we might be able to take that forward. It’s a good idea. It’s a question now of seeing how we can flesh out that idea to provide benefit, not just for her constituency, but for all the communities that sit along the northern Valleys.

One of the changes that I’ve been most proud of over the past 20 years is that the standard of public housing now is as good, if not better, than some private houses—there was a time, of course, when council houses could be distinguished by the fact that they were often built to a lower standard than anywhere else—and that is something that we can be proud of. The Welsh housing quality standard is hugely important in terms of securing improvements to existing homes and, of course, together with the building regulations, they help us to deliver better affordable homes for people for the future.

Can I thank the First Minister for that response? Of course, council houses were built to a very high standard until the Conservatives did away with the Parker Morris standards.

Can I say that some of the more enlightened tenants and councils in Wales supported council housing stock staying in council hands? What support will the Welsh Government give councils such as the City and County of Swansea that are starting to build council houses once again?

Well, he and I have been on site, of course, at sites in Swansea where council homes are being built. Local housing authorities were invited to submit bids for funding support under the new innovative housing programme, which promotes innovation in housing construction techniques, design, delivery, and, of course, money is being made available through the affordable housing grant. But I very much congratulate Swansea council on the leadership that they have shown in building council houses once again.

Finally, question 10, Sian Gwenllian.

Betsi Cadwaladr University Local Health Board has approved plans to create a specialist vascular unit for north Wales at Ysbyty Glan Clwyd. There are no plans to close any other vascular departments. The health board will continue to treat patients with non-complex needs at all three north Wales hospitals.

Given that the health board is in special measures, the final word on one of the crucial services of Ysbyty Gwynedd sits with your Government. The intention is to move the emergency vascular service away from Bangor, so if there were to be an accident in Aberdaron and someone needed urgent attention because of serious bleeding, then that person would have to travel 72 miles—an hour and three quarters—in order to be treated. The health board intends to spend over £2 million on a new theatre in order to create a single new vascular unit. Is that good value for money when we already have two vascular units that are among the best in Britain, in Bangor and Wrexham? Will your Government intervene and ensure that common sense prevails, so that there is a top-quality service available to people in all parts of north Wales?

There was a review of this, if I remember rightly, and one of the things that that came up with was that we needed one specialist unit. We’ve argued about these issues previously in the Assembly, where people have opposed moving a specialist service from one hospital to another, but the outcome is that the results are better. We saw that with colorectal surgery, when that moved from Bronglais to Cardiff. The outcomes were improved because of that move. I know it’s something that won’t receive the support of everybody, but we have to ensure that the people of north Wales have the same access to a specialist unit as everybody else. Eighty per cent of patients will still receive their treatment in Ysbyty Gwynedd, but with the more complex cases—perhaps six cases a week is the estimate currently—they will receive the treatment in a specialist hospital in order to get better outcomes.

Thank you, First Minister.

The next item is the business statement and announcement, and I call on the leader of the house, Jane Hutt, to make that statement. Jane Hutt.

Diolch, Llywydd. I’ve no changes to make to this week’s business, and business for the next three weeks is shown in the business statement and announcement found among meeting papers and available to Members electronically.

Leader of the house, could I have two statements if possible, please? One in relation to the Welsh Government’s proposals about extending the eastern bay link, which is the missing part of the road network around Rover Way and joining on to the old A48 and M4. I’d be grateful if the Minister for transport or Cabinet Secretary for transport would consider issuing a statement to indicate what progress has been made to work up the proposals, and in particular who was involved in those proposals, and whether there is a Government timeline for delivery of this important part of the transport infrastructure to fill in the missing link that exists around the city of Cardiff.

The second statement I’d request, if possible, please, leader of the house, is from the Cabinet Secretary for the environment in relation to the incinerator in Barry. I know this is an issue that you as a constituency Member are very familiar with, but I’d be very grateful if the Cabinet Secretary could issue a statement to outline precisely the role that Natural Resources Wales will be playing in determining the permit in relation to the incinerator down in Barry docks. Importantly, are NRW able to insist on an environmental impact assessment, which wasn’t requested at the start of the planning process? If that is the case, can the application be put on hold until that environmental impact assessment has been undertaken by the applicant? But what is more important is that clear timeline and understanding of the guidance that NRW work to on this important application, which obviously has considerable interest in the locality.

Thank you, Andrew R.T. Davies. Of course, in terms of the extending the eastern bay link road, I think we should welcome the connection now we have got with the eastern bay link. It’s having a huge impact, as we knew it would, in terms of that investment. Of course, all transport plans are subject to the national transport plan, and, of course, also to the availability of funding—the all-important funding—which, of course, as I’m sure you would recognise, requires support. Will you be making this request to Philip Hammond, I wonder, in terms of his forthcoming statement? Because we certainly need more money for transport infrastructure here in Wales. It’s your chance, Andrew R.T. Davies, as leader of the opposition.

On your second point, obviously it is a matter for the Cabinet Secretary for Environment and Rural Affairs to consider whether a statement is appropriate. I am very involved, as Assembly Member, with the incinerator action group, and in fact I’m chairing a meeting this week with the South Wales Fire and Rescue Service, with members of the incinerator action group, and we have a number of forthcoming meetings. Indeed, I chaired a meeting with Natural Resources Wales and the action group in September, and I think that’s probably as much as I’m allowed to give as an Assembly Member and as leader of the house. But it is clear that it’s Natural Resources Wales that is currently determining an application for environmental permit.

I’m sure you’re aware, leader of the house, that many of us who represent Pembrokeshire have been enthusiastic supporters of Elly’s ward 10 flag appeal. This is a wonderful fundraising effort led by a seven-year-old girl, possibly eight-year-old now, who’s raised over £120,000 for ward 10 and cancer patients in Withybush hospital. It’s a magnificent community effort as well supporting her. I understand now that the formal business case for the use of these funds and other capital funds from the Welsh Government has been agreed by Hywel Dda university health board, and then passed on to the Welsh Government for formal approval. I’m not expecting an announcement today on that, but I would like a commitment from the Government either to a written statement or to write to Members who represent Pembrokeshire and who have an interest in Withybush hospital, telling us the outcome of this process, and certainly to urge the Government to fully consider this business case now and, I very much hope, give their approval so that this fundraising effort locally, led by this wonderful young school pupil, is really rewarded, and we see that progress in Withybush.

Well, I think we would all join you, Simon Thomas, in congratulating this wonderful example of a young person taking this campaign forward—Elly’s flag appeal for ward 10 at Withybush hospital. It is obviously making progress in terms of the business case, and I think the Cabinet Secretary for health, who’s here, has heard your request for an update, and I’m sure that will be forthcoming.

I’m asking for a statement by the Welsh Government on transport within the Swansea bay city region. This statement should include bus-rail interchanges, which we desperately need; the reopening of closed railway stations such as Landore station and the opening of new railway stations such as Cockett; improved road links, especially the dualling of the A40; and improved cycleways, so that some of the gaps in the cycleway network can be made up.

Mike Hedges raises important points about transport connectivity. I’ve just mentioned the national transport finance plan. In fact, any measure for improving our transport infrastructure across the whole of Wales—. Clearly, Swansea city region are in that national transport finance plan. And, of course, the fact that already funding has been made available via the local transport fund to the City and County of Swansea is important for the Morfa distributor road, the A483 Fabian Way corridor, and £115,000 for this financial year to develop the outlying concept for a south-west Wales metro, and indeed funding for the Kingsbridge link scheme. And we’ve recently launched our new local transport network fund, which includes £1 million for strategic bus corridors and public transport hubs in Swansea.

Leader of the house, I’d like to ask for two statements, if possible. I’d like to ask for a statement to be brought forward by the Cabinet Secretary for Health, Well-being and Sport on reports that Wales’s biggest health board, Betsi Cadwaladr, which is in Government special measures, is set to overspend by some £50 million this year. I think this is a matter of great concern and has an enormous impact on the rest of the Welsh NHS. If we were to add up all of the deficits that are forecast, we’re going to have a shortfall in the Welsh NHS of £137 million, give or take £1 million here or there. The possible impact it could have on the public could be devastating. We are coming up into winter with winter pressures, and I think that this is an area that would be of great benefit to us, if we could just have some discourse on this, to find out what the Welsh Government intends to do, both from their angle and what they would like to see happen from the health boards, and how we can mitigate the devastating impact that this funding crisis would have.

The second statement that I would like to ask for is a statement from the Minister for Social Services and Public Health on the report into children’s services at Powys County Council. I know we are all shocked by that report and I am very grateful to the Minister for her briefing on it today. Again, I believe it’s in the public interest for there to be a statement so that some of the questions that some of the other Assembly Members here have raised so pertinently this morning can be properly explored. I would like to point out to you, leader of the house, that there is a precedent for bringing forward statements when a local council is put into some kind of distress by the Welsh Government. There was a precedent set when Gwenda Thomas, the then Minister, put Swansea into special measures. This is the first warning under the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014 and it would be timely for us to be able to see how that Act is being able to work, and, again, I think it would aid public discourse on yet another very, very sensitive matter that is in the public interest.

I thank Angela Burns for both those questions. Perhaps in response to the first one I could take the opportunity to clarify that Betsi Cadwaladr is not set to overspend by £50 million this year, but the board have identified a significant risk that they may not achieve their planned £26 million deficit. But they are properly using their bond governance to address this. The health board has recognised the risk and are finalising a financial recovery plan to ensure that they achieve the £26 million deficit, which represents a control total. These actions will materially improve their forecast. Also, if I could add to this point, in response to your question, as part of the special measures arrangements, officials, since August, raised concerns on the financial performance to date and the potential impact on the forecast deficit. They’ve had additional escalation meetings with health board executives on performance and finance and an independent financial governance review has been commissioned, and that will cover the development, adoption and performance of the 2017-18 financial plan, and the Cabinet Secretary, along with the NHS Wales chief executive, has met with the chair and chief executive of Betsi Cadwaladr. So, I hope that gives you a robust response to your question.

On your second question, which Simon Thomas also raised with the First Minister, it is important that we share and air what the Government is doing in response to the Care and Social Services Inspectorate Wales’s report on safeguarding children in Powys. You know that the Minister has issued a written statement. I think it’s probably gone out by now, and that statement has outlined the action being taken by the Welsh Government in relation to part A of the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014, which has resulted in a warning notice being issued to Powys County Council today. That sets out what the Welsh Government expects from Powys County Council, in terms of addressing the serious concerns raised in the CSSIW inspection report. The note has been laid before the National Assembly for Wales today. Powys must submit an improvement plan within 20 days, and the Minister will report back to the National Assembly for Wales in 90 days.

I’m also going to ask for two statements. And the first one, leader of the house, that I would like is a statement from the Cabinet Secretary for Environment and Rural Affairs on whether or not she will consider looking at increasing the maximum jail term for animal abuse from six months to five years. The UK Government have recently announced their intention to increase the maximum prison sentence available to magistrates to five years, and it’s thought that the Animal Welfare Act 2006 will be used as a mandate for change for increasing sentences.

In the last year, there have been two successful prosecutions in my constituency, where puppy farm breeders have been found guilty of cruelty and neglect. Those animals were kept in the most horrific conditions without being given even the most basic care, and they did suffer terribly. But what struck me was that despite the horrendous suffering that was caused, the longest sentence that was given was only five months. The only other sentence that was given was a nine-week sentence suspended for two years. I believe those sentences to be far too lenient, and I think that we need to urgently address this issue if we are going to be serious about becoming a country that protects animals.

The second statement that I would ask for is a statement on human trafficking or anti-human slavery. I’m chair of the cross-party group on human trafficking in the Assembly, and we did convene the very first meeting of the term this morning, which was hugely well attended by experts from across Wales. They are providing both the expertise to try and end the heinous crime of modern-day slavery or trafficking, and they also actually provide victim support, which helps to support those victims, but also to help those victims tell their stories, so that we end up with the perpetrators of this heinous crime actually being prosecuted.

We were, and we still are—. We were the first, and we are still the only country in the UK that has a national anti-slavery co-ordinator, and I don’t think that people realise that that is still the case. And, in the meeting this morning, the Wales anti-slavery co-ordinator made clear that Wales is now seeing more reporting of modern slavery than ever before, and it has the most successful number of prosecutions. We think that that was due to the increase in reporting of those as a consequence of the greater awareness that this issue has across Wales, alongside the comprehensive training sessions being delivered to first responders and non-government organisations on what they need to look at, and what they need to consider in first identifying a potential victim of slavery, or how to respond to them. And, again, it was the case that those victims are more likely to share their stories with the non-government organisations, and not the authorities, when they come forward, since they definitely do not trust the authorities from whence they came.

But the other issue, and the other crossover that was clearly identified this morning, is the need to cross-reference where we have refugees seeking refuge, particularly if they’re unaccompanied minors, with the likelihood of them falling prey—if they haven’t already fallen prey before they arrive—to the slave traders. And we all know that we supported the Dubs agreement here in Wales, and yet it is the case that we have brought through very few children safely to the UK, and yet Wales remains open to that request.

Thank you, Joyce Watson. And can I just say, in terms of responding to your first question, that animal welfare is a priority for the Welsh Government, and the Wales animal health and welfare framework group, obviously, indicates that commitment? We have noted the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs announcement in terms of the increased maximum sentence for animal cruelty in England from six months to five years. We’re aware of the Scottish Government as well, in terms of their commitment.

But, again, back to our commitment as a Welsh Government, the way we treat animals is an important reflection of the values of our society. Animals should be protected from pain, injury, fear and distress, and those who commit the worst acts of animal cruelty should face tough punishment. So, the Cabinet Secretary for Environment and Rural Affairs is giving consideration to all options for Wales, to ensure clarity for enforcement agencies, the courts, and the people of Wales.

I’m very glad also that you’ve brought a question for business statement about the fact that tomorrow is Anti-slavery Day. I think we are wearing the badges today, those of us who perhaps have engaged. I think we should pay tribute to Joyce Watson for her role, back in 2010, as she produced a report on trafficking, which actually did lead directly to the Welsh Government becoming the first, and sadly only country in the UK to appoint an anti-slavery co-ordinator. And it’s good to hear there was such an excellent turnout at your meeting this morning, receiving yet another updated report, which I referred to on Friday, at the Bawso annual lecture, which was on human trafficking and human rights issues, which of course was well attended. Our anti-slavery co-ordinator attended that meeting and answered questions. We have a Wales anti-slavery leadership group, providing strategic leadership and guidance on how we tackle slavery in Wales, also to provide the best possible support for survivors. The role of the third sector was very clear there, in terms of Bawso’s leadership role, and Women’s Aid, and the other organisations that were there.

But also we are sharing and learning with other partners, including UK Government departments, the UK independent anti-slavery commissioner, and looking at—. We provide training as well—three-day joint training provision for law enforcement senior investigating officers, and Crown prosecutors and Crown advocates. And also you mentioned refugees. We’re working with partners to provide support for refugees coming to Wales, which will help mitigate the risk of exploitation. So, this is about us leading to an increase in the number of reported cases, which you’ve reflected on. And it is through improved reporting that we can help ensure that victims receive the support they need, and that perpetrators can be brought to justice.

Thank you, leader of the house.

And the next item is the statement by the Cabinet Secretary for Communities and Children on the Regulation of Registered Social Landlords (Wales) Bill. I call on the Cabinet Secretary to make his statement. Carl Sargeant.

Thank you, Llywydd, for the opportunity to make this statement on the Regulation of Registered Social Landlords (Wales) Bill, which I introduced yesterday.

This Bill addresses issues as a result of a classification decision by the Office for National Statistics. The decision to reclassify registered social landlords as public non-financial corporations effectively brings RSL private borrowing into the public accounts. The Bill sets out provisions that will allow this decision to be reviewed by ONS in order to maintain the current funding arrangements for RSLs here in Wales. RSLs in Wales provide around 141,000 affordable social rented homes in total and played a vital role in meeting the previous Welsh Government’s target of 10,000 new affordable homes. A significant proportion of their development programme is funded through borrowing from the private sector to supplement funding received from Welsh Government. The Welsh Government has committed to providing 20,000 much needed, new, affordable homes during the current Assembly term. RSLs have committed to deliver at least 12,500 of these new homes.

Llywydd, in September 2016, the Office for National Statistics reclassified RSLs in the national accounts as public non-financial corporations. What, at first, might be thought of as a technical, accounting decision, could, in fact, have serious and far-reaching consequences. It means that RSL private borrowing, currently on average £200 million per year or £1 billion over the period, will be classified as public sector net borrowing and score as a charge against Welsh Government budgets. The impact of the ONS decision is significant, and if we don’t bring forward legislation and RSLs remain classified as public sector organisations, funding for them to build homes would have to compete with other Welsh Government priorities. We would need to either increase Welsh Government spend on social housing by around £1 billion during this Assembly term, with serious effects on our existing spending commitments, or to accept that RSLs would be able to provide significantly fewer new affordable homes and not be able to borrow to invest in existing stock. RSL borrowing also supports the positive contributions they make to the communities in which they work, including significant local training, employment, social and economic benefits. There will also be uncertainty for funders who have made long-term commitments to funding an independent RSL sector.

The alternative is to take action to enable ONS to reverse their classification decision, which will maintain the current funding arrangements and this is why I have introduced the Regulation of Registered Social Landlords (Wales) Bill. ONS has made similar decisions in respect of social landlords in other parts of the UK. The Scottish Government has already introduced compatible legislation, on a timetable similar to our own, while the UK Parliament has already passed legislation with a similar purpose to cover England, with associated UK Government regulations currently going through the parliamentary process. I’ve worked with the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government to secure a derogation from HM Treasury whilst we deliver the necessary legislative changes or the ONS reclassifies RSLs to outside the public sector accounting boundaries. The derogation is in place for 2017-18, ensuring there is no budgetary impact in this financial year. HM Treasury have confirmed that Wales will be treated no less favourably than England while the legislation is fully enacted, as it is in Scotland and Northern Ireland. HM Treasury does, however, expect to see progress in bringing forward legislation to enable the ONS to reverse its decision.

The reason for the ONS decision is that RSLs are subject to central and local government control, through provisions that are mainly set out in the Housing Act 1996. Therefore, the scope of the Bill is restricted to dealing only with the controls identified by ONS and to changing them only enough to meet the ONS requirements, while ensuring that the aim of the Bill, allowing ONS to reclassify RSLs and maintain current funding arrangements, is achieved. The Bill makes provisions covering disposal of land by RSLs as well as certain constitutional changes and changes to the structures of RSLs, local authority influence in RSLs, and when the Welsh Ministers can use powers in respect of inquiries, enforcement and intervention in relation to RSLs. I want to be clear: the Bill will not result in an unregulated social housing sector. There will still be robust and effective regulation after the changes it proposes have been made. The Welsh Ministers will still be able to take action when appropriate. We will still retain continuing intervention and enforcement powers and the Bill clarifies the circumstances in which these could be used.

In December 2016, partly in anticipation of the implications of the ONS reclassification, I launched a new regulatory judgment framework and performance standards. Judgments on RSLs’ governance, including landlord services and financial viability, will be published at least annually, and RSL boards are required to submit an annual compliance statement confirming they are meeting the performance standards. Therefore, the regulatory framework remains extremely robust.

The policy proposals and a draft version of the Bill have been discussed with ONS, and ONS has determined that, if the Bill receives Royal Assent in its current form, the totality of public sector influence exercised through central Government, local authorities and the existence of nomination agreements would not constitute public sector control. So, if the legislation is enacted as introduced, ONS will be able to reconsider its reclassification of RSLs here in Wales.

We have been engaging with stakeholders, including tenants, funders, RSLs and their respective representative bodies, since before the ONS announcement last year. We also conducted a public consultation on the proposals. Key stakeholders understand the need for the Bill and have generally given it their support. More importantly, Llywydd, perhaps, stakeholders understand the likely impact of not enacting the legislation that we are proposing with this Bill.

Assembly Members across the political spectrum have been clear about the need to find a solution that enables ONS to reclassify RSLs in Wales back to the private sector as soon as possible. I look forward to working with the committees and Assembly Members as we consider the Bill and make the necessary changes required to safeguard the supply of good, quality, affordable homes here in Wales. Diolch.

Can I thank the Cabinet Secretary for his statement? Indeed, in the light of the Office for National Statistics’ reclassification of registered social landlords into the public sector, the Welsh Conservative Party does believe the general principles of this Bill should be supported. Obviously, we’ll pay close attention to the details in committee, but I think there is a general political consensus that this matter must be resolved. Indeed, I’ve called for an increase in house building and an increase in ambition in house building, especially for the affordable sector, and have made that clear over the past few years, and I welcome this Bill, therefore, as a way to simplify the current process and remove a barrier that has now been brought to our attention, however unexpectedly. Any limit placed on the borrowing of housing associations in Wales would risk the Government’s ability to deliver on its 20,000 affordable homes target, and that would have an adverse effect on the housing situation. So, there is a real requirement to move here.

I do hope that the Government will work closely with ONS throughout the Bill at its different stages. Indeed, we will, at some point this autumn or early winter, hear what the ONS review for England has decided and, of course, the Minister did read out a statement from ONS, but obviously until we know that what we’re doing is sufficient, I think we’re all going to be slightly nervous. So, I’m sure it’s going to be important for him and his department to closely monitor the progress of this Bill.

I think the Bill, obviously, needs to meet the concerns of ONS, so that reclassification is possible, while protecting the interests of stakeholders, especially tenants. I know the Minister has made reference to that in his statement, and I just want to follow up with a few more details that I hope he can respond to now, or when we debate the general principles. The first is the removal of requirement for disposal consent. I note that, when this requirement was actually sought in the purpose of the General Consent (Wales) Order 2009, the Government then said an application to the Welsh Ministers for disposal may be seen as a method of protecting tenants. So, I think it’s logical to ask you how they are now going to be protected if that requirement for the disposal consent is removed.

Then, if I could turn to regulatory powers and enforcement, a change in regulation needs to ensure that there is sufficient confidence, I think, for lenders and investors to provide the funding essential for the delivery of new social housing where central Government is unable to provide the funding itself. This factor was highlighted by the Council of Mortgage Lenders in the consultation, and they expressed concerns that an RSL would have had to have failed before any action was taken against it, which has the potential to damage the wider Welsh RSL sector by increasing perceptions of high risk amongst potential lenders. I’m sure the Minister’s already considered that consultation response carefully, and I think it would be useful if we could hear some of his views and his response to it.

And then, finally, the power introduce a new power to reduce local authority influence over RSLs in Wales. I do note that there’s overwhelming support for this; I think only one local authority said that they couldn’t support this measure. But again, this has been something of a protection for tenants—you know, perhaps the local authority members of housing association boards, and that. So, how is the balance going to be kept to protect the tenants’ interests? But in general, I’m sure none of these issues is insurmountable. We will pay careful attention to the practicalities, but we will offer every assistance for this legislation, if fit for purpose, to proceed.

I thank David Melding for his comments, and I thank him also for indicating that the principles of the Bill will be supported. First of all, on the couple of questions that the Member raised around tenants and tenants’ rights and disposal, the legislation technically does not affect the fundamental commitments made to tenants through our large-scale voluntary transfers, and will still have to deliver and maintain the Welsh housing quality standard, for example. I will give him more details as we move through the process of the scrutiny.

In terms of the leverage of associations, I mentioned earlier the regulatory judgment framework and the performance standards of this, and this is a very powerful tool particularly of interest to the lenders. One is the Welsh Government as a primary lender, and also the private sector. This is something that RSLs are very keen to ensure that there is a balanced approach to, and we are very keen to pursue that on the basis that it is done properly and that scrutiny of these associations is done properly. This will result in the ability to lend long term, which is something that I’m sure RSLs will keep a very good eye on as a business risk to their association.

Finally, regarding local authority representation, there was certainly local authority representation on there. This is, as we move forward, a discussion that we’ll have in terms of how we make sure that the balance is right around scrutiny, tenants’ representation and understanding their ability to influence housing associations. It’s an important point the Member raises, and I look forward to working with him as we take the Bill forward.

As a Plaid Cymru group, we are minded to support at the moment, but, as with the caveats proposed by David Melding, I think it’s important that we see what happens at committee stage and to—[Interruption.] Everybody’s phone is going off today. Gosh.

I just wanted to say that we’d have to look at what happens in committee in relation to the amendments potentially that will be put forward.

I’d want to probe further on whether you are content that there are still sufficient controls in place for Welsh Government under these proposed changes. You mention the regulatory framework for housing associations registered in Wales document, but, for example, performance indicator 2 in relation to tenants is quite—. Well, it’s just one tiny paragraph, and it doesn’t say how you’d demonstrate tenants are effectively engaged. It doesn’t go into detail about what appropriate ways there are for tenants to be engaged, so I’m wondering how you’re proposing to enhance the role of tenants if that is the vehicle for doing so and if it’s not through this particular piece of legislation.

Picking up on the point with regard to councillors, I believe that’s because the councillors who’ll be on any given board won’t have the deciding vote on that particular board. I was wondering whether you could look into the possibility of whether tenants groups or tenants could have that particular role, so then, potentially, you wouldn’t have to reduce it because tenants wouldn’t be deemed to be political. The reason why I think you have to decrease the amount of councillors is because it is deemed as Government control or political control. If you had tenants performing that higher level role on housing association boards, could you do it that way? Could it be a different way of looking at things? I’m not sure whether you’ve done that research. I’m getting my way through the explanatory memorandum, but, obviously, we had it yesterday and we’ve got 134 pages to read, so I haven’t got through it all yet. So, perhaps we can discuss that further.

As we know, the issue with regard to it being in the public domain at the moment would be the borrowing issue. So, this is a wider point about whether you’ve discussed with the UK Government increasing or altering the cap on local authorities’ borrowing, considering the fact that, if it did remain in the public domain, you’d be borrowing off the public purse, and you’ve already got plans in train. So, would you be able to appeal to the UK Government to change their long-standing opposition in this regard? And, if you can, then I will congratulate you.

Can you comment on the removal of disposal consents? In what ways do you plan to make sure that the Tenant Participation Advisory Service will be fully involved in consultation on that particular issue?

When this goes to committee, can we ask the ONS to comment on any potential recommendations so that any potential amendments either by the Government or by individual Members are considered in relation to what the ONS deems to be acceptable? I.e. at the moment, the ONS have said that, as the Bill stands, it would be acceptable, but, in politics, people have different ideas; amendments will probably come forward. How are we going to know throughout that process that the ONS are happy with that, because, of course, you’ve presented a Bill, but you’ve only had a reaction to it as it stands? When we’ve discussed this before on the education committee in the previous Assembly, where we had reclassification of further education and higher education, we did have a private briefing from the ONS, but we didn’t have something on the record. But really, I think, we need to be as open and accountable as possible—so whether the ONS could give the committee dealing with this that type of flexibility and that openness to discuss whether possible amendments would be futile or whether they would be able to consider them appropriately.

At the end of the day, we want to be able to build more social housing, and if changing this means that that happens, then, of course, we think we will be able to support it. But I think it’s about the detail of what is proposed and how we ensure that tenants’ rights are at the heart of all of this.

Before I call the Cabinet Secretary to respond, can I ask people to check their phones?

Thank you, Llywydd. Again, I’m grateful for the Member’s indication of in-principle support for the passage of the Bill, subject to the details. I think the Member’s final point was one of the important ones that she raises, about the fact that the consequences of not doing this have dramatic effects on the ability for RSLs or Government to deliver on social housing. The other details are important, but the principle of the Bill going through is with agreement of the ONS and is with agreement of the Treasury for a certain time period. Otherwise, the risks to our sector are huge.

On some of the details that the Member raises, something that I will give further consideration to as the passage of the Bill moves forward is about making sure that there is proper representation. We did hold a public consultation on the Bill, and responses, as the Member says, were broadly supportive.

The scope of the Bill has been strictly limited, as with what has been delivered in England and Scotland with regard to this. It’s purely for a technical purpose, and that’s what the explanatory memorandum—. I apologise for the Member only receiving that yesterday. That’s the parliamentary process, but I’m sure the Member will get through that. The fact is that, actually, it being a very small Bill we should be thankful for because the explanatory memorandum would be much longer. So, what I’m hoping to do with the technical nature of this Bill is work with parties to make sure that we can get this through as quickly as possible, enabling us, as we and you have said, to deliver more homes for social, affordable landlords in and across Wales.

I welcome this legislation as it will undoubtedly make it easier for social landlords—registered social landlords, such as United Welsh, which is based in my constituency—to deliver on the Welsh Government’s affordable housing target. If there’s one thing we need in Wales and in my constituency and in the northern Valleys and in appropriate places, its affordable housing. I also, it’s worth noting, met recently with the Caerphilly private landlords forum, and they too are keen to see small-scale private dwellings being available and affordable. They found that the UK Government’s policy on tax relief and universal credit has both damaged the availability of them to provide affordable housing, and has actually harmed the affordable housing stock to the detriment of Valleys communities.

Other issues addressed in that meeting were the need for smaller affordable home units of one or two bedrooms. These are the houses that are needed in the communities that I represent, and I’ve raised, in this Chamber in particular, the difference between housing need, where there are people who may not be able to get onto the housing ladder or even afford homes, and housing demand. Those in need often don’t even reach recognition on the demand curve. The focus of planning policy on the latter as opposed to the former has, in my view, resulted in the unsustainable growth of executive housing estates in the Caerphilly basin, built on lucrative greenfield sites, and unaffordable to, dare I say, the majority of my constituents. And what the Cabinet Secretary is trying to do with this policy, with this legislation, is redress that balance, and make available more affordable housing to the people who live in the north of my constituency and need it most. Would the Cabinet Secretary therefore agree that it’s only when we address this real issue of housing need that we can be closer to creating a more sustainable and equitable system that provides affordable homes to those who need them most, particularly those in the north of my constituency?

I thank the Member for his comments and support. The Member is a long-standing member of having views on the planning policy in terms of developments in his own constituency. I agree with the Member that universal credit and other actions of the UK Government have damaged housing and are putting housing at risk and confidence within sectors. This Bill will go some way to redressing the issue of RSLs having the ability to continue to make significant investments into the types of properties that the Member raises in regard to affordability or access to appropriate accommodation the length and breadth of Wales, including his own constituency of Caerphilly.

Thanks to the Cabinet Secretary for his statement today. Of course, we all want to facilitate the building of more affordable homes, as Bethan Jenkins stated earlier. Some of the detail in this proposed Bill does seem slightly potentially confusing. Of course, I haven’t read all of the explanatory memorandum either. In fact, to be honest, I haven’t actually started it. So, I take on board that the devil is in the detail.

Now, the Minister states that RSLs fund a significant amount of their building activity by private sector borrowing. This is somewhat vague, as it doesn’t tell us what percentage of the RSLs’ funding does come from the private sector and hence what percentage comes from the public sector. So, I would ask if it’s possible that he can clarify this. My understanding is that, regardless of the technicalities of the terminology, if a housing association in Wales got into financial difficulties, then it would be the Welsh Government, effectively, underwriting the debt. So, could the Minister clarify this point and whether this actually changes in any material sense under the provisions of his proposed legislation?

Regarding the actual interaction between housing associations and the private sector, we have had recent news, a couple of days ago, about the Principality Building Society making a significant investment, so we know that housing associations are having considerable interaction with the private sector. When Trivallis, which largely operates in the Rhondda Cynon Taf area, undertook their last large-scale development, which was in Aberdare, it was done in partnership with Bellerophon, a private developer. Bellerophon developed private apartments in Cardiff Bay, which then funded the Aberdare social housing development. So, I would ask the Minister: is this the kind of funding model that he thinks the housing associations should be following in future?

Returning to the specifics of the legislation, the disposal of land—this was tackled by David Melding and by Bethan, so we have gone into this. We seem to be moving from a situation where, if housing associations wanted to sell off land, it would require the express consent of the Welsh Minister, to a situation where they only need to notify the Minister. So, given that there is a major housing shortage in Wales and we need to encourage housing associations to develop the land that they have, in what way does it improve the situation for the Welsh Government to make it easier for them to sell off the land, and is there an issue of accountability?

We have touched on the accountability issue, and the issue of councillor representation on the housing associations’ boards. Now, it does seem potentially problematic if you are going to reduce the ability of the councillors to influence the housing associations on their boards. Now, I take on board that you’ve said—was it you or was it David Melding? Somebody said that most of the councils themselves were actually in favour of this, so I’ve noted that. But, again, there is going to be an issue of accountability. So, you yourself mentioned that there will be strong scrutiny of the housing associations, so I would ask how that would actually operate in practice. And I think Bethan Jenkins made the very good point that the tenants’ rights are going to be of paramount importance. And, if you do reduce the influence of the councils themselves, again is it possible to increase the influence of the tenants? I know you’ve said that you’re going to look at that, so, if you’ve got anything else you could add, I’d be grateful.

I thank the Member for his contribution. He started saying that the Act was confusing, and then he said he hadn’t read it, which was even more confusing, on the basis to make an assumption like that—. First of all, the whole purpose of the Bill is to take this off the public borrowing sector because of the amount of money that is borrowed by housing associations. We would top our borrowing commitment in Government, and therefore we’d have to take that money from somewhere else. We’d have to make a decision to invest in social housing and remove that money from health or another organisation. So, this is a really important process, and the consequences of doing that are therefore deregulating a sector. However, I did say earlier on that our framework powers that we have in place give us a very strong position of influencing the RSLs in the way that they operate.

I think the Member, alongside Bethan Jenkins and others, has said about the influence of the boards is an important one, and particularly tenants’ representation. I’ll work with you to make sure that we get maximum support for that as we take the Bill forward. The Member raised also about particular funding models, about Trivallis in particular and the Bellerophon model. I don’t have any views on which financial models RSLs should use, but what I do know is that their current relationship with the private sector is a good one, and we must maintain that longer term, otherwise for the fact, as I said earlier, we will not be building 20,000 more new homes in Wales.

I will give the Member and Members some more detail as we move forward, but, in particular, I don’t have the detail in terms of the division of Welsh Government funding versus private sector funding, but I will let the Member know that in my response as we move forward. But I hope that the Member can bring himself and his party to support the process of this very important Bill as we move forward.

I’m delighted that the Cabinet Secretary is taking prompt action to get round the really unhelpful ruling by the ONS, and, as we’ve seen, legislation’s already been passed in England to ensure that housing associations can go on being able to contribute really important housing for people who cannot afford to buy their own. And certainly in my own constituency, housing associations like Cadwyn, Wales and West and United Welsh have all delivered on new housing and refurbished housing for people in desperate need. So, for example, United Welsh: 40 one- and two-bedroomed units opposite Cardiff prison, which is essential for those who are affected by the bedroom tax. Cadwyn has redesigned an elderly building that was in desperate need of refurbishment for people who need supported living—beautifully done; the architecture really fantastic—and they built, on an old garage site that had been empty for some 20 years, 26 new homes and one commercial unit, all done with really good architectural standards, and high standards of environmental sustainability—much higher than the private sector, I’m sad to say, which is delivering some new homes in the constituency. I just wondered if you, when you’ve got time, having got through this Bill, could raise the building regulations so that the private sector was, at the very least, meeting the standards that our housing associations are meeting because they know that this is the right thing to do.

I think—again, thanking the Member for her support in the process of the Bill—the First Minister, in questions earlier on, alluded to the quality of social housing now compared to 10 or 15 years ago. We are well advanced in this procedure. It is about building for the future, and this is something that this will enable us to do with the clever solutions provided by RSLs and now some local authorities in the building sector of social housing. It’s something that I wish to pursue, alongside my colleague Lesley Griffiths, so that we have the best type of property for the right situations in the right places for people across Wales.

We move on now to a statement by the Cabinet Secretary for Education on the update on GCSE early entry, and I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Education to make the statement. Kirsty Williams.

Thank you very much, acting Presiding Officer. The independent regulator, Qualifications Wales, yesterday presented us with clear recommendations on the issue of early entry for GCSEs. They engaged widely with teaching professionals in the course of their work and have come to firm conclusions. I’d like to take this opportunity to thank them for their report and considerations. I would also like to thank the many teaching professionals who supported this work, and the many teachers, parents and pupils who have contacted me on this issue. I have taken time over recent months to consider that input and available options in advance of sight of Qualifications Wales’s report so that I may respond swiftly today.

As Cabinet Secretary, I see raising standards, reducing the attainment gap and ensuring a system in which the public can have confidence as at the heart of our national mission. The best interests of learners have been at the forefront of my thinking on this specific issue of early and multiple entries for GCSEs. I stated in the summer that the trend towards increased use of early entry is unsustainable, including for year 10, when most learners will only have covered half the course. My views on this have not changed. Last summer we saw 43,000 year 10 learners entered for English and Welsh language GCSEs and the two maths GCSEs, with some applying the approach across the entire cohort of learners.

It is clear that far too many pupils in Wales are not being allowed to reach their full potential. Nearly 9,500 pupils took maths numeracy GCSE early in November 2016 and got a grade A or less but were not then re-entered for the examination last summer. Of those pupils, 30 per cent achieved a grade C. This is simply settling, rather than challenging, and it is holding some of our young people back. Qualifications Wales have also calculated the cost at over £3.3 million for early entry last year, and that is unsustainable, particularly at a time when school budgets are so pressured.

Members will recall my statement on 24 May on assessment for learning, which focused on increasing teacher skills on formative assessment. Qualifications Wales highlights the inappropriate use of GCSE assessments for formative purposes. Put simply, the GCSEs are not designed for this. Schools should have the means to assess learner progress and shape ongoing teaching and learning without the reliance on high-stakes, high-cost, external GCSEs.

Qualifications Wales’s report highlights the complexity and the diversity of opinion on the issue of early entry. There is no single approach that is suitable for all, and I have always accepted that early entry could benefit some learners in certain circumstances, such as those ready to demonstrate fuller understanding and who wish to engage in further learning in the subject, and it must be used within the context of a broad and balanced curriculum.

Motivation impacts at the individual learner level, with the report showing a diversity of views from teachers. There are real issues on teaching time being taken out to prepare for high-stakes GCSEs. There is evidence of increased teacher and learner workloads, and an increased assessment burden, and increased potential for learner examination fatigue. Qualifications Wales’s findings are clear: they consider that the widespread use of early entry poses a significant risk to learners and to our examination system. That is not outweighed by potential benefits. So, we need to act to discourage inappropriate GCSE entry patterns.

I have accepted Qualifications Wales’s clear recommendation to change key stage 4 performance measures to a ‘first entry only counts’ approach. This will encourage schools to enter learners when they are confident that they are ready to gain the best possible results. It will not prevent schools from entering early, or entering again should they, or a learner, wish to improve results, but the resit results will not count towards the school’s performance measure, even when the result is higher. Let me be absolutely clear, acting Presiding Officer: our young people will be able to use their best result when accessing further learning or the world of work. The change only relates to how we will consider school performance. This will form part of the wider assessment and evaluation framework that will be published next year.

I have also accepted Qualifications Wales’s views that schools should be able to enter learners in November for the first time in English and Welsh language—something currently only available to them for the two mathematics GCSEs. This will provide schools with appropriate and flexible earlier entry options, should they feel it of benefit, particularly for those students who are at risk of disengagement or are ready to progress to further learning. I have listened to the schools’ concerns with regard to making changes half way through the academic year. I recognise that schools need time to plan their teaching, learning, and their approaches to GCSEs. Therefore, the changes to performance measures will take effect for the summer 2019 reporting. The freeing up of November first entry for English and Welsh language is a matter for the regulator, but I expect this to be available to schools in the next academic year. We will also publish revised guidance for schools on when early entry can benefit certain types of learners, and when it does not, to support their decision making going forward.

The changes I have announced form part of our transitional accountability arrangements and will help schools act in the best interests of the pupil and not perceived institutional self-interest. If we are always committed to putting the interests of the learner first, and ensuring they can reach their full potential, then we can be confident that we will raise standards and reduce the attainment gap.

Can I thank the Cabinet Secretary for her statement today and put on record my thanks for the work of Qualifications Wales in producing an excellent report? The report’s two simple but important recommendations—namely to count only the first grade awarded toward performance measures and lift the restriction on English and Welsh language resits in November—are ones that the Welsh Conservatives fully support. Whilst I welcome the statement today, I think that what we also need to be asking is why it’s taken so long to get to this point. I know that in other parts of the UK, this matter has been addressed for a number of years, and I would be grateful if the Cabinet Secretary can tell us why it’s taken so long to address this issue of inappropriate early entry when the problems have been apparent for some years. Perhaps the Cabinet Secretary can explain why this issue hasn’t been addressed before now. I appreciate that she has only been in post for 18 months, but maybe there has been a specific reason why this matter has not been addressed before now.

We are not talking about small numbers when it comes to pupils sitting GCSEs early. In 2016-17, nearly 19 per cent of all summer GCSE entries in Wales came from year 10s or younger. Of course, that number of early entries, combined with repeating the exam multiple times, generates significant extra costs for the taxpayer. One of the reports estimated it to be more than £3 million during the 2016-17 academic year. Had there been appropriate early-entry options, then that cash could have been spent on more teachers, teaching assistants, textbooks and other parts of the education system. In addition, the report points to an inconsistency in school budgets to fund for early entry, which has led in some cases to schools asking parents to fund resits of exams, which is clearly unfair. Given this, will the Cabinet Secretary tell us what she estimates the savings of more appropriate levels of early entry to be once the changes she’s announced today are implemented? And will she also look at the issue of parents being charged for resits by some schools, so that parents don’t find themselves in that situation in the future?

Entering pupils early for GCSEs has, arguably, been more for the benefit of the schools than for students in the majority of cases in Wales. As the Qualifications Wales report found, school performance measures are often seen as the driving force behind early entry. Schools use GCSE results for their secondary school performance regime, and that’s put enormous pressure on teachers to maintain or increase students achieving results between that A* to C threshold. Of course, what’s inevitably resulted from this practice is that schools are aiming for the lowest hanging fruit—C grades—rather than reaching for A*s, As and Bs. As a result, more able and talented pupils are missing out on the top grades that they would have achieved had they been entered at the appropriate time, having benefited from sufficient classroom time to develop their learning. I appreciate the Cabinet Secretary will be publishing revised guidance on early entry, but could she tell us how the Welsh Government will ensure that schools are only putting forward students for GCSEs who are properly prepared and have studied the whole curriculum? And can she also tell us when she will be in a position to publish this revised guidance?

Now, I accept from today’s statement that, in future, the resit result will not count towards the school’s performance. However, whilst schools will only take one result into account from early entry, my understanding is that pupils are required to disclose all their GCSE results on their UCAS application forms, not just their best results. Universities are more likely to take a student who took the exam once and achieved a C than the one who took the exam three times before managing to achieve a C, and that could result in fewer Welsh students attending more competitive Russell Group universities in the future. Therefore, will the Cabinet Secretary confirm that she will monitor university entry amongst early entrants and multiple entrants to measure the impact of this specific issue?

I think a concern that we have to note from this report too is the effect that preparing for early entry has had on teaching time. The worry is the impact on current lower year groups, who are finding their teachers have less time to prepare for lessons or to mark homework. This means that even before it comes to GCSEs, students in some cases aren’t being adequately prepared to move on to this next stage. Will the Cabinet Secretary confirm that she will review the impact of early entry on lower year groups? And perhaps she could tell us whether this impact will actually be reflected in the revised guidance she intends to issue in due course.

In her statement today, she also makes clear that the performance measures will take effect for summer 2019 reporting. But will the Cabinet Secretary agree to provide the Chamber with regular updates on their impact on early entry?

Therefore, in closing, acting Deputy Presiding Officer, can I thank the Cabinet Secretary once again for her statement this afternoon and once again put on record the Welsh Conservatives’ support for the recommendations made by Qualifications Wales?

Acting Presiding Officer, could I thank Paul Davies, who is double-jobbing once again as the Conservative education spokesperson? He really should be asking for a slice of the wages of his counterpart. But I genuinely thank him for his thoughtful analysis of the report that is before us.

The Member’s first question was: why have we decided to act now? Well, Paul, I can’t account for the decisions that others have made before me. This summer’s results were the first set of early entry results under my watch. You’ll be aware that I’ve been expressing concern since I became aware of the high levels of early entry. But, to be fair to my predecessors, if you look at the data in the report, this is a relatively new phenomenon over the last two years, and a lot of that, as is accounted for in the report, is driven by a nervousness around the new specification of GCSEs. Now, whatever the rights or wrongs of that, we can debate, but that’s been a driving factor behind some of the scores. So, although there has been a rising trend, over the last two years it has been particularly acute. But we’re acting now. I’m acting as quickly after the publication of the report as I can, but we do also have to give schools the time and opportunity to plan appropriately. It simply would not be fair to say that we’re going to use this new measure for reporting next year for the students who have already done exams. It simply wouldn’t be fair to the sector. So, this gives people the time to plan accordingly.

Paul is right that individual schools have used this practice to different effect, but there has undoubtedly been, in some schools, the pressure to do early entry because others are doing it, and they have felt that maybe their school would be put at a disadvantage if they don’t follow suit. I am also aware of some schools who do not do early entry because of the financial pressures rather than any other reason, and by having this rule across the board, it creates a parity for all schools in that regard, about how they will be assessed.

Can I make it absolutely clear? If there is a school in Wales that is thinking about asking parents to pay for resits, they need to think again. It is not acceptable, and I am aware that this is happening. Only yesterday, I had an e-mail from a grandfather whose granddaughter sat English this summer. She got a C at the end of Year 10. She and her family are very anxious that she should have another opportunity to do that English examination, and the school have asked for them to pay for the resit. Now, in that particular case, the grandfather says that he is in a position to help, but how many other children’s parents and grandparents will not be in that position? That is not a reflection of the values of the Welsh education system, where we are striving for excellence and equity.

The Member will be aware that a lot of this behaviour has been driven around accountability measures, and as I announced in my statement, and in the written statement I made two weeks ago with regard to school categorisation, we’re in a process of transitioning to a different set of accountability measures. But again, let me be clear: accountability is here to stay, and to be fair to the headteachers and teachers I meet, they know that, they understand that, and they want to be held accountable for their practice. We need to work with the profession to find a fair way in which we can create an accountability system that drives the kind of behaviours in schools that we want to see and, crucially, measures the impact that that school has on individual pupils, and not an accountability set of measures that perhaps narrows the focus onto a very small number of children in the cohort, which you have quite rightly identified as those on the C/D borderline, to the expense of other people within the system, whether that be lower attainers or the more able and talented.

I want to be in a position to have that new set of accountability measures in place by next year. The revised guidance to schools will be released later this year, but we will be communicating this change to all stakeholders—schools, challenge advisers, regional consortia and LEAs—and I would expect challenge advisers in regional consortia to have to be monitoring their individual schools’ performance and patterns around early entry. Let me be clear: we’re not stopping early entry, but it does have to be taken in the best interests of individual children, for them to be sitting their exams at a time that is right for them and gives them the best opportunity to achieve the very highest grades that they are capable of.

May I thank the Cabinet Secretary for her statement this afternoon? May I also endorse the thanks to Qualifications Wales for their research, and for sharing the information with us beforehand?

It’s important that we don’t forget, in this debate, why this is happening, and we have to remind ourselves that this is happening because what the teachers want is the best for the pupils and the best for their schools, and there’s a risk that that is lost in this debate. That is why this situation has arisen, to all intents and purposes, but we shouldn’t doubt, and I’m sure we don’t doubt, the motives of teachers in insisting on the best for their pupils and the best for their schools. It’s also important, as the Cabinet Secretary has reminded us in her statement, that we recognise that there is value and importance in allowing the use of early entry GCSEs, and I welcome the fact that the Government is to provide specific guidance on that, because I do think that that will be of assistance—of great assistance, in fact.

As I said, I welcome the statement and I also welcome what the Government intends to do in light of the content of the statement. There is one question at the back of my mind, however, on the limited element of the research carried out by Qualifications Wales: 59 professionals in the education sector—heads of departments, headteachers and teachers and so on; no school governors, no parents, and most importantly, no consultation with the pupils and students themselves—the very people who are impacted most by this decision. Where is the voice of young people in this debate, and where is the voice of young people in this decision? I do think that it’s a weakness in the process if we haven’t been having discussions with the very people most affected by this. And Qualifications Wales themselves have said that, because of the limitations of this research, they have failed to undertake further research, which would provide them with additional sources of evidence in order to evaluate the statements made by teachers.

My first question to you, Cabinet Secretary, is: are you confident that you have all of the evidence necessary to make this decision? And how can we be certain that all voices impacted by this have been heard and have had an opportunity to express their views in the debate that has led to this decision? Because views are quite clearly polarised, in terms of the evidence gathered by Qualifications Wales. Some feel that they are strongly in favour of what’s happening, and others feel that it’s the wrong approach and this polarisation, to me, would insist that the evidence that we have is as robust as it possibly can be before we come to a decision.

Hoffwn ofyn ichi hefyd, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet: beth fyddech chi'n ei ddweud wrth y bobl hynny a fyddai o’r farn, yn ôl yr ymchwil eto gan Cymwysterau Cymru, na fyddai caniatáu dim ond y canlyniad cyntaf i gyfrif tuag at fesur perfformiad ysgol yn ei hanfod yn wahanol i dynnu'r dewis o gael cofrestru’n gynnar yn gyfan gwbl oherwydd y pwysau sydd wedi bod yn flaenorol, y byddai'r un pwysau'n digwydd eto, o ran dim ond cofrestru’r disgyblion ar ddiwedd y broses, pan fyddant yn cael y canlyniad gorau posibl? Mae hwnnw’n bryder sy’n cael ei fynegi yn yr ymchwil, a meddwl ydw i sut y byddech chi'n tawelu’r meddyliau hynny.

Yr amserlen y gwnaethoch ymhelaethu arni. Rydych yn dweud eich bod yn ymwybodol bod angen digon o amser ar ysgolion i addasu, ac rwy’n cytuno'n llwyr. Er hynny, mae Cymwysterau Cymru yn awgrymu y dylai Llywodraeth Cymru gynnal ei hasesiad effaith ei hun ar ba mor fuan i gyflwyno unrhyw newidiadau. Felly, meddwl ydw i a ydych chi wedi gwneud hynny, ac os ydych chi, a fydd hwnnw’n cael ei gyhoeddi gan y Llywodraeth. Rydych chi wedi sôn yn fyr am y goblygiadau cost, ac eto, rwy'n rhannu llawer o'ch pryderon. Ac er bod rhai pobl yn canolbwyntio ar arbed arian—ac, yn amlwg, mae hwnnw un o nifer o ffactorau—i mi, y brif flaenoriaeth, yn amlwg yw gwneud yr hyn sy'n iawn i'r disgybl. Nawr, mae'r amcangyfrif ceidwadol o £3.3 miliwn yn sylweddol iawn ar lefel ysgol a system o fewn addysg yng Nghymru. Rydych chi wedi mynegi'ch pryder ynghylch y posibilrwydd o rannu costau a'r effaith y bydd hynny’n ei chael ar degwch i fyfyrwyr unigol ac, yn amlwg, cynaliadwyedd hirdymor ysgolion. Ond fy nghwestiwn i chi yw hyn: os bydd hynny'n ymddangos, pa gamau fyddwch chi’n eu cymryd? Gallwch ddweud wrth bobl y dylent feddwl yn ofalus amdano—wel, oni ddylem ni fod yn gweithredu i sicrhau nad yw'n digwydd? Felly, efallai y gallech chi rannu gyda ni unrhyw feddyliau sydd gennych ynglŷn â hynny.

A wnewch chi ddweud wrthym ni beth yw eich bwriad o ran gwerthuso effaith y penderfyniad yr ydych chi'n ei gyhoeddi heddiw, a phryd yr ydych yn bwriadu gwneud hynny? Ac, wrth gwrs, o ystyried y cwricwlwm newydd, diwygio'r cwricwlwm, sut mae'r Llywodraeth yn asesu'r angen am ddiwygio’n ehangach y modd y mae perfformiad ysgol yn cael ei fesur, a pha effaith yn benodol y bydd hyn yn ei chael, neu y bydd y newidiadau hyn yn ei chael, o fewn y broses ehangach honno? Diolch.

Can I thank Llyr Gruffydd for his statement and questions? It was, ‘We agree that you’re doing this, but—’, I suspect, trying to hedge his bets maybe with regard—. I’m not in a position to hedge my bets. I have to make a decision, and I have made that decision in the best interests, I believe, of the examination system as a whole, so that we can have public confidence and employer confidence in our system, and in a way that I believe will be in the best interests of individual children. I have a huge amount of confidence in Qualifications Wales. There was cross-party support for the establishment of an independent regulator of the Welsh exam system, after the debacle a few years ago, which you will be very familiar with. And therefore, it’s only right that when the independent regulator of our exam system writes a report, makes recommendations, they are taken very seriously indeed.

But you’re right, Qualifications Wales themselves admit in the report that their research is limited, and that’s why I will commission further research around this particular area, which will help guide our guidance going forward, about when early entry is appropriate. And I would state again, for some children, early entry is the right decision. For those children, for instance, who may be in danger of disengaging from school, and not simply being in school by June of year 11, the ability to sit maths and English in November may very well be the right one. For children, for instance, who are particularly talented in the field of mathematics, an early entry, thus allowing them to go on to study for further maths, may be indeed the right decision. But let me tell you, even looking at those achieving good grades in maths, a sizeable number of those children do not go on to study maths again in their school career at a higher level. And that’s a missed opportunity—it really, really is.

Can I be absolutely clear, for those people who said that it said in the report that, by changing the school accountability measure, we are essentially banning early entry—we are not banning early entry? If the school believes it is in the best interests of the pupil—and, as you said, surely then that is the same as being in the best interests of the school—schools have the flexibility to enter students when they feel it appropriate. All that is changing is how we include this in our accountability measures.

And the Member asked the question: how does this feed into a broader reform of accountability? The Member will be aware of my written statement, earlier this term, as part of our transitional arrangements; this statement today is another part of that transitional arrangement. And I know that he is an avid reader of ‘Education Wales: Our national mission’, which states very clearly that, by next year, we will have agreed with the sector a new set of school accountability measures, and this time next year, we will also have agreed an entire system set of accountability measures, and I intend to publish a report card on Welsh education.

So, this is not just about changing accountability for schools, it is about developing an accountability system for the whole of the education system, and the timetable is outlined in ‘national mission’.

With regard to cost sharing, this is a grave concern to me. As I said in answer to Paul Davies, I pride myself, and the vision contained within ‘national mission’ is a system that is based on the two principles of equity and excellence. And we cannot have equity if some people get to have multiple goes at exams because their parents are able to pay for that. And I will use all powers that I have, and all methods under my persuasion, to ensure that that does not happen in Welsh schools. I cannot be clearer than that, Llyr.

I’d like to thank the Cabinet Secretary for your statement today. And as a former secondary schoolteacher myself, I wholeheartedly agree that this is a complex issue, and there is no single approach to GCSE entry that is suitable for all. We must ensure pupils are given time to reach their full potential, not entered early, and encouraged to bank a lower grade than they may be able to achieve in the fullness of their two-year studies.

I recognise the issue of exam fatigue too. Pupils sitting various GCSE modules throughout the course of year 10 and year 11 can increase stress levels among many. I also recognise the issue of teachers at key stage 4 constantly teaching to the test. I agree that these reforms will give teachers the time and space they need to deliver a broad and balanced curriculum.

But, Cabinet Secretary, you stated early entry can be very beneficial for our most able pupils, allowing them to spread the workload involved in their studies, and get some qualifications under their belt early, before moving on to focus on others. I am pleased that schools will be encouraged to create approaches that are tailored to the individual, but my question is: how will this be monitored? It also ties in with Estyn advice that we do need to do more to push our most able pupils in Wales. So, how will the Welsh Government make sure that those who could get a good grade early aren’t discouraged by schools fearing that their failure in early entry could impact on the school’s performance or the school’s budget?

I’m always very nervous when Vikki gets up to ask questions having been a recent practitioner, but Vikki will know that one of the unintended consequences of early entry can be—and it’s alluded to in the report—a narrowing of the curriculum, so that all the lessons become about is getting that child through an exam. Now, don’t get me wrong, exams are crucially important, but education is about more than that and we need to ensure that all our children have access to the broad and balanced curriculum that is underpinned by law in this country. We also know, and this was alluded to by Paul Davies, that, again, another unintended consequence and the impact of early entry is lost teaching time. That can be in the issue of pupils lower down the school, whose teachers are displaced to get children ready for a continuous set of external exams, or it can be at the expense of subjects not English, Welsh or maths. And as a history teacher, I’m sure Vikki might have been aware of that, where certain subjects are regarded, perhaps, as less important and lesson time for those subjects gets squeezed. Again, that’s an unintended consequence of some of these practices, which I hope these changes today will alleviate.

I have asked Estyn to look at how schools have approached the implementation of the new GCSEs and how they have coped with that change. The report acknowledges that those changes to GCSEs has been one of the main drivers for such a large increase in early entry and we will be reflecting on that. We will continue to ask our challenge and review advisers, as part of the consortia who are our school improvement arm and muscle, to review this when they meet with their individual schools about what decisions and what choices schools are making with regard to how they apply early entry. I hope to be making an announcement on specific additional support for MAT later on.

Thank you for your statement, Cabinet Secretary. I commend Qualifications Wales for conducting this research and for publishing the report. I also agree with the sentiments you express in your statement, Cabinet Secretary. It is interesting to note that the report comments that there has been no substantive research into the views of professionals on early and multiple entry for examinations. Can the Cabinet Secretary please explain why this is? The Labour Party, which has been in control of the Welsh education system for 20 years now in one way or another, is supposedly plugged into the unions, so why do you think it’s only now, thanks to Qualifications Wales, that the opinions of educational professionals have been sought on the issue? The report also mentions that Welsh Government’s guidance on early and multiple entry was greeted far from enthusiastically by some of the teaching profession. So, where was the Welsh Government’s understanding of the issue when they produced that guidance? There appears to have been a serious and long-term breakdown in communication between the teaching unions and the Labour Party, I’d suggest.

I’m pleased that you’ve decided to implement the two recommendations made by the report. However, it’s disappointing that were it not for this report, you wouldn’t have any suggestions for dealing with the problem and that is something that concerns me and should concern every parent of school-age children in Wales. Apart from implementing the two recommendations made in the report, what are you doing to tackle the root cause of the problem, which is not necessarily schools entering the students for exams early, but the excessive stresses and pressures they’re trying to avoid by doing so?

So, whilst I welcome these ideas that have come from Qualifications Wales, they clearly only deal with the symptoms of an underlying and undeniable illness in the Welsh education system, not the root cause itself, which is a lack of vision sadly matched by a lack of analysis and planning by the Welsh Government. Qualifications Wales have confirmed that some schools are taking action on not putting the educational interests of our children first despite obviously not wanting to. They’re being forced by Government to do so. I wonder if you agree with me, Cabinet Secretary, that it is a damning indictment on this Government that they have brought about an education system that does not have the education of Welsh children as its top priority. What would the Lib Dems have done differently, or is your party happy with a Labour perspective that makes a school more worried about its reputation on paper than the life chances it bestows on its pupils? Thank you.

Can I just very briefly say, acting Presiding Officer, that I enjoy a very challenging but productive relationship with the trade unions and that is how it should be? They have things they say to me that I agree with and I have things that I say to them that they disagree with, but we will move the education system forward in partnership.

The Member says that we have no vision for education. I would refer her to the very statement that she asked me questions about just two weeks ago. ‘Education in Wales: Our national mission’ has been widely welcomed by those in the sector and sets out very clearly this Welsh Government’s vision for our education system.

What is clear from this report is that there have been some unintended consequences around flexibility for early entry. I, at the earliest opportunity, on the evidence provided by the independent regulator of our exam system, am making a decision and making that call, and I am very pleased to do so.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary for her statement and welcome her references, which are not surprising, to the importance of closing the attainment gap and the focus on inappropriate early entry. Because of course, for many pupils, those whose improved performance is essential to closing the attainment gap, early entry is the right option. The ability, in the context of a standalone study and entry opportunity, to focus on that qualification and benefit from more intensive support can be very important for particular students to gain the best possible result, which is important in its own terms, but also in terms of giving them a boost to their academic confidence to continue staying on in education. So, I welcome the fact that she will be bringing forward guidance on when early entry is appropriate for some students. I wonder if she could share what her reflections are on how schools that make judgments in accordance with that guidance, in the best interest of individual pupils, will not be penalised for having done so through revised performance measures.

Thank you, Jeremy. It is clear to me from my time in office that accountability measures and how we judge individual schools is key then to the behaviours that we see exhibited within those schools, which is only to be expected and only reasonable. But the current accountability measures only get us so far, and I think it is acknowledged, across the sector, now is the time to look again at how and what constitutes performance measures for individual schools. As I said, we are transitioning away from the old way of doing it to a new system that will be announced next year.

Key to my consideration in that is recognising the concept of progress within a school. Because, for some students, a C is a success story and demonstrates the hard work and commitment of the teaching profession. However, if a student came into your high school predicted from their abilities at the end of year 6 to be somebody who has the potential to go on and get an A*, then a C is clearly a disappointing result. We need to come up with an accountability system that recognises the impact that schools have on the progress of the children they make, because each child is an individual and each child’s set of results will be very reflective of their own innate capabilities. We need an accountability system that recognises the impact of schools and recognises that success looks very different for very different individuals. A simple one-size-fits-all or an entire-cohort approach, which is what we’ve seen sometimes with early entry, does not serve the best interests of individual pupils. We are working very hard to be in a position to make that available before the end of next summer.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary.

We move on now to the legislative consent motion on the Telecommunications Infrastructure (Relief from Non-Domestic Rates) Bill, and I call on the leader of the house.

I welcome this opportunity to explain the background to the legislative consent motion. I’m grateful to the Economy, Infrastructure and Skills committee for considering the LCM and for the report it’s produced. The committee considers there’s no impediment to the Assembly agreeing the LCM.

The UK Government introduced the Telecommunications Infrastructure (Relief from Non-Domestic Rates) Bill on 4 July following an announcement in the Chancellor’s autumn statement 2016. The Bill contains provisions to introduce a five-year non-domestic rates relief scheme for new full-fibre infrastructure, and this is to incentivise the roll-out of new full-fibre broadband infrastructure and future 5G communications to homes and businesses. This will help to deliver our ‘Taking Wales Forward’ commitment to build a united and connected society by offering fast, reliable broadband to every property in Wales. The details of any relief scheme would need to be developed, costed and consulted upon. I believe these provisions fall within the legislative competence of the National Assembly for Wales. However, I’m content that these provisions should be made in the Bill for both England and Wales, so that Wales has fibre relief parity with England to support its investment and ensure that Wales is not perceived as a more expensive place to deploy new fibre. I therefore move the motion and request the Assembly agree this legislative consent motion.

There’s not much to say in opposition to this motion, but I just ask for a few more details from the leader of the house to understand the process that led to this decision to agree the memorandum. She mentioned the main incentive, which as I understand it is the concern that Wales will be seen as a less favourable place for investment in this context. Could she tell us a little bit more about the process that the Welsh Government pursued in order to come to that particular conclusion? Exceptions, of course, we would only want to accept from giving our consent to another Parliament to legislate on our behalf. That should only be done in exceptional circumstances. So, could she explain a little bit more about the process that the Government adopted in this case? And in general, to make that correct assessment, there was reference made in the note from the Cabinet Secretary giving reasons with regard to timing and co-ordination. Was it a lack of time in the legislative timetable here that was on the Government’s mind in this regard? There’s reference to administrative systems and the co-ordinated nature of those between Wales and England. Perhaps the business Secretary could tell us a little bit more about that, so that we understand fully the thought process that was behind this motion.

Well, those are important questions, which I’m sure that the committee will have considered in looking at this proposed LCM. It is important to recognise that these proposals would introduce a five-year non-domestic rates relief scheme for new full-fibre infrastructure from April of this year, and it can be back-dated, of course, to 1 April 2017 for eligible infrastructure. I’ve made the point that we feel that it is important to take this opportunity, albeit we are already making progress in terms of mobile phone connectivity as well as superfast broadband here in Wales. We have, of course, our own mobile action plan, outlining what we as a Welsh Government want to do in terms of creating the right environment to improve connectivity in Wales. But we don’t want to have the—. You know, it is about: what’s the point? What levers do we need? We don’t have the main levers as they do rest with UK Government and Ofcom, and it’s important, I think, to emphasise there’s not a single solution to boost mobile connectivity. You’ve mentioned the point about parity and the issues in terms of the interconnected nature of the relevant Welsh and English administrative systems. I think we feel that we need to have fibre relief parity with England. If we didn’t have that parity, the new fibre market in Wales would be suppressed, as infrastructure providers opt to invest where they will get better returns, potentially seeing Wales moving into digital stagnation over time. So, that provides the case, I think, for us to ensure that we do take advantage in terms of legislative competence. It will help stimulate investment in fibre, and it will encourage competition from smaller providers in a market that is dominated by one major player. So I hope that answers the points that Adam Price has made.

Of course, the provisions—just finally—give Welsh Ministers in relation to Wales powers to prescribe further conditions that must be met for the relief to apply, powers to set the levels of the relief by prescribing the amount of relief in regulations, and powers to impose duties or confer powers on valuation officers.

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? The motion is therefore agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

The next item, therefore, is the debate on tackling hate crime, and I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Communities and Children to move the motion. Carl Sargeant.

Thank you, Llywydd. I welcome the opportunity to talk about the work we and our partners are doing to tackle hate crime and intolerance across Wales. I’m sure that, as in previous years, this debate will demonstrate the fundamental unity of purpose in this Assembly in confronting these evils.

This is, of course, National Hate Crime Awareness Week, which is a key time for our third sector partners and the four police forces in Wales. I have, again, made funding available to the police and crime commissioners to support activities during this week. This year, I have allowed greater flexibility so that the funding also supports some action that lasts longer than the hate crime week itself, and we need to sustain our focus on these issues all year round.

All hate crimes are abhorrent. We have seen a number of awful incidents across the UK this year, and I would like again to extend my sympathies to the victims, their families, and everyone affected. We know that the impact of such atrocities reaches far beyond those who are directly involved, with lifelong effects. Llywydd, the same is true of many other hate crimes. Even though they may be on a smaller scale and often go unnoticed by the wider world, hate crime has devastating and long-lasting effects on people and communities. In 2014, we launched ‘Tackling Hate Crimes and Incidents: A Framework for Action’, which sets out our commitment to challenge hostility and prejudice across all protected characteristics. The framework includes objectives such as prevention, support and improving the multi-agency response.

One of the short-term goals of the framework was to increase the number of victims coming forward to report. We’ve had a lot of success in this area, and victims must have the confidence to report what has happened to them, and know how to do so. They need to be able to secure justice, and they also need to access support and advocacy in the aftermath of sometimes devastating crimes. This morning, the Home Office released its 2016-17 hate crime figures. They show that 2,941 hate crimes were reported in Wales during 2016-17, which is a 22.3 per cent increase on 2015-16. Much of the increase is likely to be due to an increase in the rate of reporting, and this is welcome. Information from the Crime Survey of England and Wales shows that, between 2012 and 2015, only 48 per cent of hate crime victims were reporting them to the police or to a third-party reporting centre. Since then, a lot of work has been done through the hate crime framework to increase the awareness and confidence of victims in coming forward.

The number of hate crimes reported in Wales has increased year on year, demonstrating the value of the work the Welsh Government, the police, the third sector and other partners have put in. We have seen similar increases in the number of cases being dealt with by our national hate crime report and support centre. Last year, 2,655 cases were handled by the centre—a 21 per cent increase, compared to the previous year. In 2017-18, 1,238 victims have already received advice, advocacy and support from the centre.

The centre plays a vital role in supporting all victims of hate crime in Wales, and I’ve confirmed funding for the centre until 2020 to ensure the services can continue.

Our partners on the hate crime criminal justice board Cymru also play a vital role. They include the four police forces, police and crime commissioners and the Crown Prosecution Service. They examine processes and make sure that the reporting system is working from the point of the first reporting to the stage where the case is taken to court. Earlier, I said that a part of the increase in hate crime announced by the Home Office was probably due to an increase in reporting by victims. Nevertheless, Llywydd, we must always recognise that it is, in part, likely due to a real spike in hate crimes in 2016 and 2017 also.

We’ve heard from police forces, the national hate crime report and support centre, third sector agencies and local support groups of the real concern at the rising number of hate crimes committed last year, and we must not ignore this evidence from experienced, professional and dedicated people who are dealing with this on a daily basis. They tell us, for example, of people recently enduring racial abuse from neighbours that they’ve lived alongside for many years who have never expressed such views before, of people being shouted at simply for speaking a language other than English—in some cases where the language being used was Welsh—and even of disabled people suffering abuse on buses and trains. So, we must continue to work with our partners to counter hate and build cohesion in Wales, and we’ve been working closely with them to maximise the impact of our work and build communities where hate crime is not tolerated, and victims are supported to the utmost.

For example, we’ve strong links with our faith communities across Wales. The First Minister and I meet with the faith communities forum twice a year—indeed, yesterday we met—to discuss matters affecting the economic, social and cultural life here in Wales. This reflects the Welsh Government’s commitment to working with faith groups at all levels to promote understanding and foster community cohesion. It is important we’re able to express our views, to listen with respect to others and to improve working together, helping to keep Wales a tolerant society. We’re working closely with the police in collaboration on monitoring and responding to community tensions, and we need to have an effective short-term response to emergencies and long-term work to build resilience and community cohesion.

Community tensions raise levels of fear and anxiety, threaten the peace and stability of communities and can also lead to crime, Llywydd. Some tensions manifest themselves in disorder, damage or physical violence. Other effects are less visible, making people feel vulnerable, excluded and fearful when they go about their daily lives. With effective monitoring of tensions, we can intervene to prevent hate crime and distress. It is about being early and upstream of this. We need a step change in understanding, respect and acceptance. We need more and more people to celebrate diversity rather than fearing, recognising that Wales has always been enriched by people of many backgrounds, cultures and of faith.

So, we will continue to work closely with a large number of partners to strengthen our shared message. Llywydd, together we will put forward consistent, positive messages in communities throughout Wales to challenge prejudice, discrimination and counter hate. We have a number of initiatives to prevent young people from being drawn into far-right activity. No society is immune from the threat of extremism or terrorism, but we are working to ensure Wales remains a safe place to live and work. There are well-established structures across Wales to tackle all forms of extremism. These structures come together under CONTEST and the extremism board Wales. Our approach to countering extreme terrorism includes, for example, a challenging extremism module as part of the global citizenship challenge in the Welsh baccalaureate, and education plays a vital role in addressing hate. Schools need to be clear about their arrangements to challenge unacceptable words and behaviours, including racism, and support child victims. We are updating our anti-bullying guidance, ‘Respecting others’, which was published in 2011, and we’ve already engaged with stakeholders and will be working with children and young people this autumn.

Social media plays a big part and role in the lives of most of us, and this is especially true of young people. The availability of and use of social media brings new problems with cyber bullying and cyber hate, and we continue to work with police services across Wales and the hate crime report and support centre to raise awareness of the need to report cyber bullying and abuse and to monitor this.

Llywydd, I’m grateful for the opportunity to take part in this debate, and look forward to the contributions of many Members during this afternoon’s debate.

I have selected the eight amendments to the motion. I call on Mark Isherwood to move amendments 1, 2, 3 and 4, tabled in the name of Paul Davies.

Diolch, Llywydd. In this National Hate Crime Awareness Week 2017, let us acknowledge that hate crime is defined as an offence perceived to be motivated by hostility or prejudice towards someone based on a personal characteristic. This Welsh Government debate calls on us to note the progress made in relation to the Welsh Government’s 2014 tackling hate crime framework. The all-Wales hate crime research project, on which this is based, said that more needs to be done to increase the confidence of victims and witnesses to report hate incidents and to promote the view that reporting hate is the right thing to do.

It recommended that the Welsh Government should take the lead on ensuring accessible third-party reporting mechanisms being in place for victims who don’t want to report directly to the police. Police recorded 2,528 hate crimes in 2014-15, up 18 per cent annually, with more than 80 per cent racially motivated, although the annual crime survey for England and Wales suggested hate crime had fallen 28 per cent over the previous seven years. Overall, police-recorded hate crimes in England and Wales in 2015-16 increased a further 19 per cent, with 79 per cent being race hate crimes. In July to September 2016, police-recorded hate crime increased 52 per cent in Dyfed Powys to 35 incidents, 22 per cent in north Wales to 56 incidents, 22 per cent in Gwent to 77 incidents and 10 per cent in south Wales to 276 incidents. Police-recorded hate crime figures in England and Wales published today show a further 29 per cent rise in 2016-17, with Home Office statisticians saying that this is thought to reflect both a genuine rise in hate crime and ongoing improvements in crime recording by the police. Last month, new research showed that the number of lesbian, gay and bi people in Wales experiencing hate crime had jumped from 11 per cent in 2013 to 20 per cent this year.

Any incident or crime perceived by the victim or any other person to be motivated because of a person’s impairment or perceived impairment should be recorded as disability hate crime. Reported disability hate crimes across the UK are up 101 per cent to 3,079 over two years, with reported crimes against disabled children up 150 per cent to 450. The Home Office has expressed concern that disability hate crime is still significantly underreported by victims, although there’s been a steady increase in the overall recording of hate crime, with more victims having the confidence to come forward and the police improving the way they identify and record hate crimes.

I therefore move amendment 1, noting that the charity Victim Support has said that more needs to be done to encourage victims to come forward.

I move amendment 2, welcoming the UK Government’s consultation on the new social media code of practice provided for by the UK Digital Economy Act 2017, which will ensure a joined-up approach to remove or address bullying, intimidating or humiliating online content, including trolling and abuse that is often disproportionately targeted at women.

Although the Older People’s Commissioner for Wales has warned that there is an increasing problem of older people being specifically targeted by criminals because of their age, there remains a gap in law that does not recognise this as hate crime. Action on Elder Abuse highlights research showing that over 99 per cent of abusers who target older people are going unpunished, and their February 2017 poll shows that nearly 95 per cent agree that the abuse of older people should be an aggravated offence like hate crimes on race, religion or disability. I therefore move amendment 3, supporting calls for crimes committed against older people because of their age to be recognised as hate crimes.

The Welsh Government’s 2016-17 progress report refers to the autistic spectrum disorder strategic action plan, but it doesn’t address hate crime against autistic adults, and the Learning with Autism programme for primary schools is not necessarily about tackling hate crime. Yes, it’s rightly about raising awareness, but hate crime is not within it. I therefore move amendment 4, calling on the Welsh Government to add hate crime to the refreshed autism strategy. We’ll be supporting Plaid Cymru’s amendments, although it is essential that provision of more victim support officers must be delivered in partnership with Victim Support and local third sector services.

Overall, and in conclusion, as the National Police Chiefs’ Council lead for hate crime states:

‘We know that terrorist attacks and other national and global events have the potential to trigger short-term spikes in hate crime’,

but

‘As terrorists seek to divide us’,

he said,

‘it is more important than ever that we continue to stand united in the face of hostility and hatred.’

Thank you.

I call on Bethan Jenkins to move amendments 5, 6, 7 and 8, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth.

Diolch, and thank you for holding this debate on what’s a really important topic and one that I don’t think has enough attention in this National Assembly for Wales on a regular basis.

I took some inspiration for some of the amendments from Race Equality First and from the Ethnic Youth Support Team in Swansea. Those particular ideas were focusing on teacher training to deal with hate-related incidents and interventions in school. I think what’s important to recognise is that people’s social views are framed from a very young age, and what I found from the Ethnic Youth Support Team in Swansea, when I visited there a few weeks ago, was that they’re having specifically tailored workshops towards some people they’re identifying in the school who’re coming out with potentially racist comments, or derogatory comments at an early, early stage in their youth careers in school to try and understand why they’re coming out with such views and what manifests itself in those views. I think it’s very complex, but I think, if we invest money in that preventative agenda, we will be able to effect change.

In that light, I have had evidence from the Ethnic Youth Support Team where they’ve said that they’ve read from the hate crime framework that the all-Wales anti-bullying framework will look at this preventative work, but they’ve told me that it disbanded in 2016. So, if the all-Wales anti-bullying framework is not in existence, or the group that’s putting that in place is not currently in existence, who is doing that work on the front line?

In relation to the Victim Support amendment, it was in recognition of the fact that there may be diverse groups across society that may inform Victim Support better as to the nuances and the complexities of the advice and the support needed to give to some victims. There may be charities that work specifically with the trauma induced by race-related hate crime; there may be organisations like Stonewall that may be able to give Victim Support more support in relation to that type of hate crime. I think that is the thrust of what I’ve tried to say there—that Victim Support, in and of itself, is working well, but needs more cross-cutting endorsement and support by the charity sector.

I think what’s important also to note is our attempts, as a party and as a nation, to increase community cohesion—this should be at the heart of everything that we do in relation to hate crime, especially given that it’s been reported that hate crime against Muslims often is higher when the media reports on a terrorist incident. We have to address those very real concerns, because we have communities in Wales where people are suffering as a result of actions taken by other people, and it’s not in their name.

I realise that amendment 5 has caused some conflict before this debate happened. It’s not to say that only men suffer from being victims of radicalisation from the far right, but it is a recognition that we could start somewhere and to start with men in this particular group. I don’t apologise for trying to have the debate, but I can understand if perhaps it could be more nuanced, and we will consider that in future. But I think sometimes, as I’ve said to people before I came here today—. We know that young men commit suicide more often, we know that they need to have targeted support, and we know that young men are becoming radicalised by the far right online, social media—we only need to look at Breitbart, who don’t openly advocate violence, but the culture of grievance they play repeatedly with certain white men needs discussion, as many of the talking points have become mainstream. This could be a whole debate on its own about potential problems with mental health, potentially how men feel that their role in society has changed: they’ve been told that they should be the main bread earner, but it winds up that they’re not, and how they feel when where they fit in society doesn’t work anymore. There’s been numerous studies into why ethnic or Asian men have been radicalised towards the Islamic State, and so why not have the conversation openly here in our National Assembly about why certain sectors of our society are going online, abusing women, and finding it easy to justify that because they don’t believe in the ‘PC’ agenda anymore? Why is that acceptable? Why should we accept that as a form of open debate? That has to be questioned, surely. So, I would like to potentially bring more debates of this nature, and have them in a constructive manner, so that we can help our citizens understand one another. Maybe we come from a position of privilege here in the National Assembly, so we don’t understand all of the nuances of why things happen, but we have to try and work together more positively as a society.

Figures today show that hate crime has risen by 29 per cent, and I believe that is a record rise in England and Wales. I’m sure that the vast majority of fair-minded people in this Chamber, in our communities and our country will agree that this is unacceptable. All of us here have a duty to speak up, stand up and take action to challenge and combat prejudice and hate wherever and to whom it rears its ugly head. I’ve spoken previously in this place on this same issue, and I’ve made clear that there can be no hierarchy of hate.

However, today I’d like to focus my contribution on bullying, and particularly the rise of online abuse. Results from a Stonewall survey in August 2017 showed that one in 10 LGBT people have experienced homophobic, biphobic or transphobic abuse or behaviour online directed towards them personally. This number increases to one in four trans people who have experienced transphobic abuse or behaviour, and half of all LGBT people who have witnessed homophobic, biphobic and transphobic abuse or behaviour online that was not directed towards them in the last month. I’m sure Members in here will be aware that there’s something about social media that seems to make people think that they can say and do whatever they want without fear or thought for the implications.

I just want to bring it home a little bit to illustrate a bit closer to home for Members here. I’m recalling that in February last year, we had an individual Member debate to mark LGBT history month, and as part of that I did some media work around it. In one of the headlines on BBC Politics online, they ran with ‘Hannah Blythyn: I'm proud to be one of the first openly gay AMs’. And whilst the people responding couldn’t quite manage to find me to tweet at me, just to give you some of the things I can repeat in the Chamber of what they tweeted back:

‘Why do people think that the vast majority care what their sexual preferences are?’

‘How does that make you a better AM’

‘I am utterly disinterested. Identity politics is soooo borrrrrrrring. Who cares who she sleeps with.’

My absolute favourite, and I say this with a hint of sarcasm, was somebody saying, ‘this is England’. The reason why I highlight these cases is because I think it’s—. You know, I put myself up there in public life, and I’ve made a decision to be open about who I am, because I think visibility’s important. But I think we also have a responsibility to call out these things, because what is banter and humour to one person can hurt and have consequences to another. So, we need Government and public bodies to act swiftly and seriously to deal with incidents of online abuse, keeping individuals informed on the progress and any actions that have been taken. I also think the global social media players need to take both online hate and abuse more seriously, and have more stringent standards and effective measures in place to hold those perpetrators to account.

Government and other stakeholders need to work together with the police to develop more effective responses to hate online, in consultation with the people that are impacted and the organisations that are there to support them. I think we all need to get tougher on allowing this space for hate to fester and flourish online. We cannot allow the continuation of an area that is allowed to incubate and to also amplify hate, because that online vacuum can then become a platform for people to go offline and perpetrate acts of hate. On that, I’m sure I’m not alone in being troubled that we are becoming less tolerant of others, with a definite shift downwards in the tone and terms of debate. I have to say, this is not about political correctness; it’s about basic respect and consideration for one another as fellow human beings.

I think we must acknowledge and act on why people perhaps feel alienated and distant from the political system, and I think a lot of that is economic factors underneath it, but I don’t think we shouldn’t be clear that that does not mean we should sink to the lowest common denominator and allow that as an excuse to scapegoat and hit out at the most vulnerable in our society, pitching communities and groups against one another.

I get the feeling sometimes when we’re having some of these debates that there are people who somehow think that progress on legislative equality has tipped the balance the other way, and I think we need to be very clear on this. Equality for me does not mean fewer rights for someone else. Equality, by its very dictionary definition, is the state of being equal, especially in status, rights or opportunities. We need to remember that, and we need to speak out in support of that. So, this Thursday, I will be speaking at an event at St Asaph cathedral to mark 50 years since the decriminalisation of homosexuality. The event will provide an opportunity to look at history and hope for the future. My contribution will be looking at the future and the Wales and the world we hope to one day live in, a future Wales and world where I hope each and every one of us can live our lives as we are for who we are, free from fear of prejudice and hate. The onus is on each and every one of us to make this a reality, so let us lead in speaking out, stepping up and stamping out hate and discrimination. Diolch yn fawr.

I think we should start this debate by saying what is true: that we live in a much less prejudiced society today than 50 years ago, when I was young, and that’s a very good thing. I approve of the Government’s strategy on hate crime and I appreciate the tone in which the Cabinet Secretary started off this debate. But one thing that does concern me about debates on hate crime is that we tend to get it out of perspective.

Hate crime is, of course, abominable, and I speak as a victim, because I once had my nose broken when I went to the aid of a gay friend of mine who was being attacked by homophobic thugs, and the perpetrator of that crime subsequently went to prison on account of it. I’ve also been on an IRA list for quite a number of years, and therefore I was under threat of being murdered. So, I do understand what hatred is all about when you encounter it in a real sense. But we have no far-right party today that is active in British politics of any size. The British National Party has disappeared, the English Defence League is insignificant, and I think we should celebrate that. We don’t have the problems that some European countries have, and therefore we shouldn’t get this out of perspective.

I think we have to accept, also, that the figures that are reported as hate crimes really tend to exaggerate the extent of the problem. Mark Isherwood referred, in the course of his speech, to the fact that it’s the perception of the victim that matters, not the actual reality, necessarily. The definition in the Home Office operational guidance, which is accepted by police forces in Wales, is that, for recording purposes, the perception of the victim, or any other person, is the defining factor in determining whether an incident is a hate incident. So, even a third party can report a hate crime as such, and it will instantly be logged by the police as a hate crime, even in cases where the victim himself or herself may not have wished it to be so. There’s an actual example in the police operational guidance, actually, which is, I think, quite instructive:

‘A heterosexual man walking through an area near a gay club is verbally abused in a way which is offensive but does not constitute a public order offence. He reports the incident but does not believe it to be homophobic, or want it recorded as such,’

but the officer taking the report down can himself record that as a hate crime even though the victim doesn’t want to, and the perception of the victim is not to be challenged in any way. Now, I accept that if there is a challenge to be made, then it should be done in a sensitive manner. But, surely, we must base public policy upon actual facts and not just upon perceptions.

The other point that I want to raise in this debate is the attempt to use this issue of hate crime in order to grind political axes. We often hear it related to Brexit, and we often hear it raised in connection with people who believe that it’s very important for the purposes of community cohesion that we should have sensible controls on immigration. I think that this demeans us, actually, and reduces the value of our political debate. Surely we can accept that, if you are concerned about immigration, you are not necessarily a racist, and you certainly don’t believe that hate crime is a good thing. Of course, there are racists who want to control immigration for their base reasons, and there are people in all political parts of the spectrum, just about, who are engaged in political abuse. I have, from time to time, been the recipient of it myself. Anybody who wants to know what online abuse is about should go and see what’s written about me, which often invites me to perform various physical acts that are not within my physical capabilities, or indeed anybody’s, for that matter.

So, I’m well aware that, if you take these things seriously, it can be very hurtful. In politics and public life, we tend to be pachyderms, so we can brush this sort of thing off. In what you might call normal society, we may not find that quite so easy to accept. So, I agree very much with what Hannah Blythyn said in her contribution—that this is all about basic respect for individuals and their differences. I don’t believe that people should be abused or subject to physical violence simply on account of personal characteristics that they can’t alter—or, indeed, for their political beliefs.

In winding up, I will say that, of course, we are happy to note the motion and, indeed, as I’ve already said, to support the Government’s strategy overall. We will not support the Plaid Cymru amendments. We are going to abstain on those, because I think they are drafted in rather a tendentious way, and that goes back to what I said at the opening of my speech. I haven’t time, I’m afraid, to dilate further upon that today. But I think that there is widespread acceptance—universal acceptance—of the general principles that underlie the Government’s policy, and we will support them in that endeavour.

Seeing as everybody else is also talking about their online experiences, I’ll just say a little bit about mine. I have certainly been trolled by far-right extremist organisations for doing little more than supporting an event that I attended in the Senedd on Wales as a nation of sanctuary. I think Leanne Wood was trolled by the same organisations for attending the same event, and we were accused of trying to create a Muslim caliphate in Wales, when really what we were trying to do was offer sanctuary for Syrian refugees trying to escape the horrors of that civil war.

In debating this important issue of tackling hate crime, I would like to take the opportunity to highlight the work of organisations like Show Racism the Red Card, and ask that this Friday 20 October we all support Wear Red Day 2017. That will certainly give me an excuse to get into my favourite colour, both in terms of my politics and my football team, so I shall be wearing red on Friday. But, on a serious note, Wear Red Day is a practical and visible way that we can all show our support for the work of Show Racism the Red Card and to support their valuable work in helping to promote equality and in tackling hate crime in our communities. Those of us who follow football will recall the unhealthy culture on the terraces in the 1970s and 1980s—the blatant racism, the outrageous chanting aimed at black footballers, and the football grounds being used as a recruiting agent for the far right. Since those dark days, it’s clear that a lot of work has been done to move things on and tackle that side of football, but there’s still a huge amount of work still to do.

In my previous role in Unison, I was certainly very proud to be part of the arrangements for establishing Show Racism the Red Card in Wales. I’d like to place on record my thanks to Unison for their vital funding of that organisation in those early, important days. As a result, we now have the benefit of an organisation that’s built a great reputation for promoting positive messages through the production of educational resources, developing activities to encourage people, particularly young people, to challenge racism, and in challenging racism in football and other sports. I would encourage all Assembly colleagues to get in touch with Show Racism the Red Card and take the opportunity to see their work in action across Wales, in schools, in sports clubs, and in the community. Because such grass-roots activity is absolutely vital in changing attitudes, providing positive role models, and in building those early interventions that will help to develop more tolerance and equality in our communities.

And it’s this type of work—changing attitudes and providing positive role models—that will also be central to tackling homophobia in sport, but most particularly in football. Removing hatred towards the LGBT community is the next big challenge. And, once again, as a football supporter, I will know that we’ve made progress in tackling homophobia when football players are comfortable with their own sexuality in sport and are out and proud and not afraid. So, I’m sure that the Assembly will wish to encourage Show Racism the Red Card as one part of the tackling hate crime agenda in Wales, but we should also continue to support Stonewall Cymru and others as we help to rid our communities of hatred, racism and homophobia.

All the work that we support to prevent the hate crimes in our communities is important, and we should focus efforts on those organisations and initiatives that help to prevent the risks. That is why the work that the Welsh Government is doing in this area is to be so warmly welcomed. Thank you.

Llywydd, I represent Newport East, which is ethnically diverse. I was born and brought up in Pill in Newport, which is ethnically diverse, much more so now than in my youth. The EU enlargement, for example, has added considerable pace to that. There have always been tensions, I think, in such areas, along racial lines, but it certainly has got worse, in my experience, in recent times, partly because of the perceived terrorism threat and partly, perhaps, because of the pressures around EU enlargement. So, I do think it’s timely that we have this debate today, and what I wanted to concentrate on, really, was how we go about setting messages and making it as clear as possible that we don’t want xenophobia, we don’t want hostility, we don’t want mistrust, and we don’t want misunderstandings. In that respect, I think it’s very important that all of us as front-line politicians say the right things and so do organisations with key roles to play, but civic society more generally, and, really, that people at large, communities at large, understand the importance of countering the sort of sentiments, the sort of prejudice and discrimination that none of us wants to see Wales.

Because I think all of us, even personally, would be able to remember examples of where somebody in our company has said something that was wrong, was factually wrong, was discriminatory, was prejudicial, and, you know, there possibly have been times when we’ve spoken out against it and made them aware of our contrary views, as it were. But there have also probably been times where we haven’t, for all sorts of reasons, and I would include myself amongst those with that experience. Increasingly, I think that all of us, people at large, need to understand the importance of countering the sorts of views, the sorts of prejudice and discrimination that do lead to problems. It doesn’t stop there always. When people say those things, it creates an atmosphere. It can lead to incidents. So, if you want more integrated and cohesive societies, I believe everyone has a responsibility, and we need to say that. We need to make it as clear as possible, and we need to support organisations that get that message across.

So, as well as having the Welsh Government’s framework for action, you know, the delivery plan, the reporting call centre, various groupings and infrastructure, I think it’s also important that it goes beyond that and that it percolates down to all levels of our communities. I think that there has to be a strong effort to get this bottom-up approach to making clear what’s considered acceptable and what isn’t.

As part of that effort, Llywydd, I would like to highlight an event that I attended last Saturday, which was reaching out to younger people particularly. It took place in Newport city centre. It was the Crush Hate Crime festival. It ran through the afternoon and into the evening at a couple of venues. It continues its effort through the week, and it was about using music, live theatre performance and indeed speeches. I spoke there, I know that Steffan Lewis did, I know that other politicians did, and academics. It ran through the day, it had a good audience and it sought to bring these various media together—music, speech, theatre performance—to get the right messages across, to get, I hope, a lot of media coverage, and to start helping to build this effort to show what we consider to be acceptable and unacceptable.

I well remember—others here might, Llywydd—Rock Against Racism and how powerful it was, quite some time ago now, and how it had a lasting legacy that continues to this day. So, you can use music, you can use art and culture as part of the general effort to bring about what I think we all want to see. So, I hope the Cabinet Secretary will be able to pay tribute to these efforts, because it’s not easy to organise a programme of events. It takes a lot of time, a lot of effort from a lot of people and a lot of organisations. I believe it was very effective. I believe we need more of it, and in years to come, Newport will build on what took place last Saturday and what will take place through this week to increase that effort and, I hope, increase its efficacy.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Communities and Children to reply to the debate.

Thank you, Llywydd. A really useful discussion we’ve had, a debate within this Chamber, with many Members contributing today.

Can I pick up on some of the amendments and then some of the comments that have been made first? Turning to the amendments, we’ll be supporting all amendments other than 4, 6 and 7. Amendment 4: the Government opposes the amendment on the basis we consider the tackling hate crime framework to be the appropriate place for the policy on all forms of hate crime, but we’ll ensure that close links are maintained between action on autism and on hate crime, and I listened very carefully to the contribution Mark Isherwood made. I just think it’s where it lands rather than what the principle of this is.

Amendment 6: the Government opposes this amendment in regard to new funding for victim support. Now, we began new funding in April and there’s been no additional budget available at present to increase the number of victim support officers, but I pay tribute to the work that they do, and we will keep this situation under close review and, budget allowing, we’ll consider that carefully.

Amendment 7: the Government opposes this amendment also in Wales, only because—it’s not, again, that we don’t agree with the principle, but what we are already doing in Wales, with the qualified teacher status, already requires teachers to challenge stereotype views, bullying and harassment, following relevant policies and procedures. So, therefore, we already believe there is a duty in place.

Llywydd, many Members made reference to their own personal experiences. Hannah Blythyn brought a very real experience to the Chamber of her online trolling and exposure to individuals who think it’s okay to say it online, it’s not as harmful, but it certainly is, and I’m grateful for the Member standing up and calling out, as she says. Dawn Bowden and the campaign around Show Racism the Red Card, which is on Friday, as the Member says—so please wear red, whatever political persuasion you may be. You’ll be allowed to wear red on Friday, supporting this great campaign that has certainly put Wales on the map and tackles the issues head-on.

John Griffiths mentioned his vision and views around where he grew up, in Pill. I’ve visited Pill on several occasions, visiting that community, and what a fantastic young school they have there. I think the local primary school has around 20 languages, or 20 languages and cultures within the school setting, so it’s an amazing opportunity for children to integrate with each other, and shows a shining light in Pill about what can be done when people come together. I also congratulate the Crush Hate Crime and Rock Against Racism programme that the Member talked about. Sorry, I wasn’t able to make it, but I’m sure it will flourish in the future. Actually, the community of Newport, and many others as well, should be congratulated on the way that they go about creating community cohesion within their very diverse communities, which the Member represents as well.

Neil Hamilton raised some issues. He started his debate with when he was young he said there was less prejudice. What I hope he didn’t mean by saying that there was less prejudice then was that there’s acceptable prejudice now. Because what I do see—the Member alluded to and said that there are no far-right extreme parties of any number in the UK now. I’d probably disagree with him because, actually, we see on a regular basis, on a daily basis, where individuals, groups of individuals, have far-right extreme views, and we must stop that now. In fact, his party paraded refugees on a poster on the side of a bus, and if they were white British people, they wouldn’t have had the same impact there, Neil. So, I think we have to learn by our mistakes and accept the fact that sometimes we get things wrong and sometimes we should apologise to the people of Wales and the people of the UK. [Interruption.] I will give way to the Member, yes.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary for giving way. We could all trade stories of this time. We know all about some of the anti-Jewish things that have been said by members of the Labour Party. There is prejudice in all parties. Don’t ask me to defend that poster—I had nothing to do with it. It certainly does not represent the kind of approach that UKIP wants to bring to the immigration debate.

Well, that may be the case now, but I must say that that wasn’t the debate that was created during the Brexit programme that we all followed. Particularly, judging people by the colour of their skin or their language is certainly not appropriate in terms of moving forward.

Llywydd, it is important to emphasise that there are differences of views in this Chamber, but this will not undermine the cross-party consensus on the need to tackle hate crime. Can I finish the debate by pointing out that this year marks the eightieth anniversary of Pastor Niemöller’s imprisonment by the Nazis? I’d like to remind Members of his historic call for people to stand together against bigotry, intolerance, oppression and hatred. His words are as powerful today as they were then:

‘First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—Because I was not a Socialist. / Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—Because I was not a Trade Unionist. / Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—Because I was not a Jew. / Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.’

Llywydd, failure to confront hate crime will threaten all of us in the end. Abuse or discrimination against people because of their race, faith, nationality, age, disability, sexuality, gender or gender identity is wrong. Nobody should think that they have the licence to abuse people. We continue to tackle behaviour head-on. Nobody should suffer hostility, bullying or prejudice. By our votes today, Llywydd, we can take a clear stand on the defining issues of our time. I hope all Members, having voted on the amendments, will feel able to support this motion today. Diolch.

The proposal is to agree amendment 1. Does any Member object? Amendment 1 is therefore agreed.

The proposal is to agree amendment 2. Does any Member object? Amendment 2 is therefore agreed.

The proposal is to agree amendment 3. Does any Member object? Amendment 3 is therefore agreed.

The proposal is to agree amendment 4. Does any Member object? [Objection.] I will defer all further voting on this item until voting time.

The next item, therefore, is the debate on the circular economy, and I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Environment and Rural Affairs to move the motion—Lesley Griffiths.

Diolch, Llywydd. Wales, at 64 per cent, has the highest municipal recycling rate in the United Kingdom. We are a long way ahead of the other UK nations and within a few percentage points of the best in the world. We’ve made great advances in sustainable waste management and must use this as a springboard for further development of the circular economy in Wales.

A circular economy is one where materials can be productively used again and again, creating added value and associated multiple benefits. Recent studies by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, WRAP and the Green Alliance have identified potential savings and income of more than £2 billion each year to the Welsh economy and up to 30,000 new jobs through the development of a more circular economy. We need to place much more value on the resources we all too often take for granted, reduce what we use, and wherever possible keep materials and goods in use for longer. We must move away from the throwaway culture we are all too familiar with and encourage behaviours that will help protect our environment. The success we’ve seen in Wales is largely due to the clarity and direction of the national waste strategy for Wales towards zero waste. I want to continue to work closely with all interested parties, from the citizens of Wales to local authorities, business and the third and public sectors to ensure progress towards our ambitious targets is maintained. Achieving a more circular economy is a challenging task that involves all parts of the supply and waste management chain.

Last year, we asked WRAP to set up a circular economy taskforce for Wales, involving representatives from manufacturers, retailers, local authorities and the waste industry. Their initial focus has been on plastics, where in Wales we have a significant number of diverse manufacturing companies producing moulded plastic products and components. WRAP is working with stakeholders to produce a plastics route-map with the aim of creating a better market for recycled plastic in products made in Wales. This will help create jobs in Wales and reduce our reliance on overseas markets for waste plastic.

The Welsh Government has allocated capital funding of £6.5 million to develop a significant number of small-scale capital projects to assist SMEs in making the transformation towards a circular economy approach. We need to see more circular economy business models developed in Wales. Through procurement activities, the Welsh Government and the public sector can lead by example by saving money as a result of sustainable product selection, waste prevention, reuse and recycling. The Welsh Government is working with public sector bodies to drive cost-effective, sustainable outcomes in Welsh businesses in the public sector supply chain, so they can develop more sustainable products and services, using resources more efficiently, including products using high recycled content, designed for reuse, ease of repair, disassembly and recycling.

An excellent example of the power of public sector procurement can be seen in the case study produced by WRAP Cymru on the use of remanufactured furniture by Public Health Wales when they moved to a single central office in Cardiff. All of over 2,000 items of furniture were either reused or remanufactured using a third sector organisation, yielding significant social benefits as well as environmental ones.

I’m committed to driving forward policies that will deliver on a more circular economy for Wales and will be introducing additional measures to increase resource efficiency in Wales. We are developing a route-map for a more resource-efficient economy, building on our success in recycling and reducing the environmental impacts of production and consumption. This will be published for consultation in July 2018. I’m committed to a range of ideas, including proposals for legislation, setting higher recycling targets and setting new reduction targets. As part of the route-map, I intend to consult on an 80 per cent municipal waste recycling target for 2030, and a 50 per cent food waste reduction target by 2025. Data shows that despite our excellent recycling rate, there is still, on average, as much as half of the residual black bag waste put out by householders that is easily recyclable. This consists of the commonly recycled materials such as glass, paper, cardboard, metal cans, plastic and food waste. An 80 per cent recycling rate should be achievable, providing everyone plays their full part in recycling.

I’m sure all of us would agree that the amount of food wasted is unacceptable. Wasted food is also applying unnecessary pressures on our environment and on our limited natural resources. We must redouble our efforts and play our full part in challenging food waste, building on the Love Food, Hate Waste campaign and working more through the food supply chain through the Courtauld 2025 agreement.

Unfortunately, there is still a great deal of packaging that is difficult or impossible to recycle. Packaging is also a major component of the litter that blights our public spaces, land, coasts and seas. I’ve commissioned an extended producer responsibility study on food and drink packaging to look at measures to prevent waste, increase recycling and reduce litter on the ground and in our seas. It will investigate how producers and retailers may share more evenly the financial burdens of managing waste. A review of deposit-return schemes will also be included in the study. As part of the budget settlement, we have announced funding to support pilots to test the feasibility of deposit schemes for recycling. This will help inform the evidence base on extended producer responsibility.

Our tax-raising powers are an important part of new policy development. The recently published tax policy framework and work plan included a commitment to consider the case for introducing new taxes in Wales, exploring the policy and administrative elements and the mechanism for change. The devolution of tax powers provides a range of opportunities for the Welsh Government to develop a Welsh approach to taxation, and presents an opportunity to build on Wales’s leading role in recycling and waste reduction. Disposable plastic taxes in particular received public and stakeholder support during the debate on new taxes, highlighted most recently by a campaign and petition launched by Greenpeace to introduce a tax on plastics.

Will the Minister give way?

Yes, certainly.

I’m particularly interested in what she’s just said about a disposable plastics tax; as she may be aware, that was actually in Plaid Cymru’s manifesto and that’s the one of the four taxes that we particularly want to promote at this stage. But does she also bear in mind that there might be greater support amongst the Welsh public for a new tax if it was clearly designed to change people’s habits, rather than simply raise money for Welsh Government?

Yes, I think that is something, certainly, that we can consider. As I said, you’ll be aware that the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government produced that shortlist of possible taxes, and that’s one of them. So we are going to be exploring options for a tax or a levy on disposable plastics. So that’s part of the conversation that we can be having.

Just turning now to Brexit, obviously we recognise as a Government that we will need a Bill to provide clarity and certainty for citizens and businesses as Brexit takes effect, going forward. And we accept there will be a need to make some amendments so the existing law is workable in the new context of the UK being outside the EU. We’ve made it repeatedly clear that any Bill brought forward must respect the devolution settlements and, as colleagues are aware, the First Minister has made it very clear that the current drafting of the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill places significant new constraints on the Assembly’s ability to legislate effectively after Brexit on matters that are currently dealt with in Brussels. I think this is particularly the case for resource efficiency and recycling targets, and we’ve absolutely proven that setting them in Welsh legislation achieves the necessary results. As I said at the outset, we’re doing so much better than the other UK countries in this regard.

So, in conclusion, Llywydd, a more resource-efficient economy will help make our businesses more resilient and competitive in the future. It will create jobs, it will bring more social and environmental benefits, and we are absolutely committed to taking action to achieve this, and I look forward to Members’ contributions.

I have selected the five amendments to the motion, and I call on Simon Thomas to move amendments 1, 2, 4 and 5, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth.

Thank you, Llywydd, and I move those amendments.

May I welcome the fact that we are discussing a success in this area and the fact that the Government has ambition and wants to raise recycling levels even more and move towards a no-waste economy? Plaid Cymru’s amendments turn around the fact that although there is ambition, there’s always room for greater ambition in my view.

Given that Ceredigion is the best performing council on recycling at the moment and is already reaching 70 per cent recycling, then setting 80 per cent for everyone by 2030 isn’t challenging enough, in my view. Therefore, Plaid Cymru is of the view that we should set a target by 2030 of a zero-waste economy, moving everyone along with the best performing to that objective. But I welcome the fact that there is at least some progress and a strong message conveyed by Government that they do want to increase the targets for those few authorities in Wales that are only just getting the targets at the moment.

Will you take an intervention?

Indeed.

Would you not accept that zero is impossible if you’ve got incineration, because incineration will always end up with residual waste?

I’ll come to incineration later on in my remarks. Hopefully, I’ll address some of that in a moment.

Rwyf hefyd yn meddwl bod yna gyfle i ddefnyddio’r pwerau trethu newydd fel mae’r Ysgrifennydd Cabinet newydd ei grybwyll. Rwy’n siomedig, a dweud y gwir, gyda geiriad y gwelliant gan y blaid Dorïaidd yn y cyd-destun yma. Os edrychwch chi ar yr ychydig o wledydd sydd yn ailgylchu plastig yn well na ni—gwledydd megis yr Almaen, Norwy, Sweden a Ffindir—mae gan bob un ohonyn nhw gynllun dychwelyd blaendal. Felly, nid yw’n wir i ddweud bod cynllun o’r fath rywsut yn tanseilio ailgylchu. Wrth gwrs, mae’n rhaid i ni ystyried, gydag ailgylchu o’r stepen drws fel sydd gyda ni yng Nghymru, efallai y byddai yna effeithiau o gynllun blaendal yn y cyd-destun hwnnw. Ond yr ateb, wrth gwrs, yw cynllun peilot, a dyna beth sydd wedi cael ei gytuno rhwng Plaid Cymru a’r Llywodraeth yn y cytundeb ar y gyllideb, ac rwy’n edrych ymlaen at drafod manylion y cynllun peilot hwnnw gyda’r Ysgrifennydd Cabinet maes o law, a chlywed mwy o fanylion felly yn y Cynulliad. Rwy’n gobeithio ar ddiwedd y dydd heddiw y bydd gyda ni o leiaf rhyw ddealltwriaeth o’r ffordd ymlaen ar hynny.

Mae gwelliant Plaid Cymru, gyda llaw, yn benagored o ran pa fath o gynllun dychwelyd blaendal y byddwn yn gallu ei weld yng Nghymru o safbwynt y deunydd a fydd yn cael ei ailgylchu. Mae’n bwysig ein bod ni yn gweld beth sydd yn cael ei ddefnyddio eisoes gan rai cwmnïau. Mae Pret a Manger, Veggie Pret ac Asda hyd yn oed yn dechrau sôn am sut y gallan nhw ddychwelyd cynnyrch. Mae hyd yn oed cwmnïau mawr fel Coca-Cola wedi newid eu meddyliau ynglŷn â chynllun blaendal a chynllun dychwelyd.

Mae’r ail ran o hwn, wrth gwrs, yn ein galluogi ni i edrych ar drethi newydd, a’r posibilrwydd o gael treth ar bolystyren, fel mae Plaid Cymru wedi sôn amdano. I fynd nôl i ryw gyffwrdd â’r pwynt mae Mike Hedges newydd ei wneud: mae rhai deunyddiau nad oes modd eu hailgylchu, fydd yn y pen draw naill ai yn mynd i dirlenwi neu’n cael eu llosgi. A’r ateb fanna, wrth gwrs, yw ceisio cael defnydd gwell o’r deunyddiau yna neu hyd yn oed geisio gwthio’r deunyddiau yna allan o’r gadwyn fwyd yn benodol, gan ddefnyddio dulliau trethiannol. Felly, rwy’n gweld bod y posibilrwydd o dreth ar blastig, sydd wedi cael ei chrybwyll fel un o’r pedwar posibl gan y Llywodraeth, yn rhywbeth y byddwn ni ym Mhlaid Cymru am ei gefnogi ar hyn o bryd, a dyna ein dewis ni o dreth, i fod yn gwbl glir wrth y rheini yn y Siambr yma. Y rheswm am hynny, wrth gwrs, yw ei fod yn ein maniffesto ni, ein bod wedi bod yn gwneud gwaith arno, fy mod i wedi gwneud cynnig deddfwriaethol ond rhyw bum mis yn ôl yn y Senedd hon a chael cefnogaeth i’r cysyniad o’r ffordd yma o weithio yn ogystal, gan fod treth o’r fath yn perswadio pobl naill ai i ddefnyddio llai o blastig neu, wrth gwrs, drwy osod pris ar blastig na ellir ei ailgylchu, mae’n perswadio cwmnïau i fuddsoddi mewn deunyddiau compostadwy neu ddeunyddiau amgen sy’n gallu cael eu hailgylchu. Drwy hynny, rydym yn torri lawr ar faint o blastig sydd yn ein hamgylchedd ni. Mae’n arswydus, gan fod archwiliad gan swyddfa Llywodraeth y Deyrnas Gyfunol ar wyddoniaeth ei hunan wedi canfod bod tua 70 y cant o’r holl wastraff sydd yn y môr bellach wedi cael ei wneud o blastig.

I did promise to briefly touch on incineration, which I’ll do in conclusion. There is a role for incineration in terms of agricultural forestry biomass for energy purposes, and so forth, but Plaid Cymru is very clear that large-scale incineration of waste is actually against the principles of a circular economy. In that regard, I hope that the Government bears in mind developments such as the Barry incinerator and really works against such proposals, and in favour of a genuine circular economy.

I call on David Melding to move amendment 3, tabled in the name of Paul Davies. David Melding.

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd, and I’m pleased to move amendment 3 in the name of Paul Davies. It is a notable feat that Wales is a leading nation in global efforts to increase recycling rates, and this is a credit to the work and determination of the Welsh Government, the National Assembly, local councils and, indeed, people across Wales who have enthusiastically responded to this challenge. I also welcome point 2 of this motion with regard to the environmental benefits that a circular economy can bring to Wales. This is a concept that we support. And I think it’s unanswerable if we want to meet these ambitious targets, as mentioned in the motion. It’s crucial that we should maximise the value of our resources beyond the life of a product. I’m glad that the circular economy aspect has been emphasised today, because the Welsh Conservatives feel strongly about this and, indeed, it’s been previously championed by my colleague Darren Millar in a previous debate on waste and recycling in March.

I would like to run through the amendments, because they’re all fairly policy-heavy and, I think, deserve a response. We’ll be supporting amendment 1 to the motion and offer our congratulations to Ceredigion council, who are leading the way as the best-performing council in Wales. I think it’s only fair that we commend the efforts of local authorities. We often criticise them. So, if we are calling them out when we think their performance is poor, I think we should then commend when they are exhibiting excellence. I’m glad that, in my region, South Wales Central, two of the three local authorities are performing above the average and I’m disappointed that the third, Cardiff, is a little below the average, and I will be taking that matter up with them to see what they’re going to do to raise their performance.

Unfortunately, Presiding Officer, amendment 2 is not so straightforward and, for that reason, we will abstain on this particular amendment. Whilst I think it’s bold and ambitious, I do believe that it may be a little impractical, if that’s not an impolite way of putting it. When the Government announced their target for reducing food waste by 50 per cent by 2025, there was agreement across the majority of stakeholders and across the majority of political parties here, that this was extremely ambitious. To offer some comparisons, the EU recently agreed to halve food waste by 2030; I understand the USA has a similar goal. Additionally, Scotland, which led the way in the UK in introducing a food waste target, actually set it at a 33 per cent reduction by 2025, so we are heading for a more ambitious target as it is. So, I’m not sure that it is going to be achievable and therefore is an appropriate thing to establish now.

We will be supporting amendment 4, as it echoes our own amendment. I fear Simon thought I was damming the concept with faint praise. I’m not at all. I think some form of deposit scheme is required and the reason I phrased it as I did is that there’s actually a consultation going on and whilst we’ve suddenly now had this pilot pop up as a result of your obviously great negotiating skills with the budget, this has kind of disturbed the policy environment a little bit. But, again, you know—

It moved it on.

If that moves things on, then maybe that’s to the good after all. In supporting amendment 4, we don’t commend in any way the budget deals that have gone on. I’ve no idea what the trade-offs have been, so I’m not going to get involved in any of that.

We’ll be opposing amendment 5 really because, whilst we accept the need to reduce non-reusable and non-recyclable plastics—and in any significant waste reduction strategy that is needed—I’m not sure a tax is the best way. There are all sorts of practicalities. Now, this is not me just being awkward. I think banning some products is, frankly, a more coherent approach. Now, it may take a UK approach post Brexit to do that, but some materials are not really in our interests now in terms of their use in the food industry, particularly the takeaway food industry. But I think the problem with a tax is that it would have to be quite high to be effective and, if it’s fairly slight, given the convenience of polystyrene, I’m not sure it would put off customers. So, for that reason, I’m not sure it would be effective. There are also problems as polystyrene is technically recyclable. So, the definitions that you’d need in some of these things, I think, need a lot of attention as well. So, for that reason, we’re not going to support it.

I don’t have time to elaborate our enthusiasm for a deposit scheme, but we will be very interested in what’s happening now with the consultation. Perhaps the Minister is going to be able to say something about that in the wind-up. And, also, how the pilot scheme’s going to be conducted—I’d appreciate it if she’d give more details or write to me on that. Again, if it’s a robust and useful way forward, then we’ll be happy to see that, but, at the minute, it kind of has popped out of thin air when there was a general consultation going on anyway.

However, I want to end on an enthusiastic note and say there’s been real progress here. It’s nice to see Wales as a leader in some areas, and I think, as a responsible opposition, we should acknowledge good practice where we see it.

I’m delighted to see the pilot of the bottle deposit scheme in this year’s budget. I think that’s completely excellent, enabling us to understand the number of miles that may need to be travelled to get the containers back to the factory and to understand the process to make sure that it really is sustainable. It can’t come too soon, because David Attenborough has, once again, made a plea to the world to do something about the number of plastics that are ending up in the ocean and killing off the wildlife in parts of the world that we are never going to visit. It is completely deplorable that we’ve been so wasteful of our planet’s resources in allowing this to happen.

I think that the 80 per cent municipal recycling target is ambitious but doable, but it does require a renewed effort by some local authorities. Cardiff, for example, my own local authority, is bouncing along the bottom at 58 per cent and that isn’t good enough. It’s partly an attitude of mind, that it’s not robust enough in pushing forward the education campaign that’s needed with all our citizens, not just those who are already committed to this process. I’ve been campaigning for weeks now to get recycling bins reinstated into a few blocks of flats in my constituency and it simply hasn’t happened. There’s no way that people can be doing the right thing by putting their bags of green waste separately from the residual waste, and then not having an appropriate place to deposit them. If they then end up in the landfill site, then that is a completely hopeless approach, and, obviously, demoralises people. So, that has got to change, and we need to ensure that all our citizens are engaged in this process, and not just those who are most enthusiastic about it.

Similarly, we simply can’t justify throwing away a third of all the food produced in this country. It’s completely grotesque in a world where many, many people are going hungry, both in this country and in other parts of the world. This is absolutely not a sustainable or responsible practice and so we all need to do our bit to ensure that we are not ordering more than we need, that we are using the food that we’ve got in our fridges, and, if not, we need to be ensuring that we’re giving it away to people who can use it more effectively than we can. So, I think the targets are great, but I think that there’s no room for complacency and we need to ensure that all citizens are engaged in this process.

UKIP fully supports and applauds the Welsh Government’s strategies on recycling in Wales, and acknowledges the outstanding progress made so far.

There is, of course, more to do if we are to achieve the ambitious target set for the next few years. Given that the Welsh public has, to a great extent, taken on board the whole concept of recycling, is it now time that the Welsh Government began to concentrate on the companies that produce much of the non-recyclable waste, blister packs and cellophane packaging being some of the biggest culprits? I believe that many in this Chamber share my frustration at the amount of waste we have to commit to the landfill bin because the items are deemed non-recyclable.

Whilst I appreciate that much of this packaging is done outside Wales, particularly in the supply of supermarket chains, there are many companies within Wales that now supply a sizeable proportion of goods to supermarkets and surely it is in the capability of the Welsh Government to encourage the supermarkets themselves to eliminate packaging as much as possible.

I would echo many in this house who advocate deposit-returnable items, and think that the Welsh Government could go so far as opening special facilities that would offer deposit-return to the public at large, effectively becoming additional collection points to the retail trade. One word of caution here, however, is the deposit would have to be high enough to encourage the return without disparaging the sale itself. If it were to impact on sales, the retail trade would be far less likely to support this scheme.

One area not specifically covered by the Cabinet Secretary, but, in considering the circular economy, we cannot ignore, and that is the motor car, which in itself is a major contributor to waste if it is not handled properly. All too often, the recycling of car trade components has been carried out in a haphazard manner by small-scale scrap facilities that do not take a holistic approach to breaking cars. I would call upon the Welsh Government to look favourably on the establishment of purpose-built facilities that would address all the aspects of car dismantling, including the proper disposal of oils and braking fluids, even to the extent of funding their development.

Can I make one other point in closing? I do not think the travelling fraternity has received proper recognition for the contribution they have made to recycling over many decades, long before recycling became a fashionable item, and that they continue to make that valuable contribution to this present day.

In the second half of the twentieth century, we became a throwaway society. My grandmother, who was born in the nineteenth century, and lived with an unemployed husband during the 1930s, was often horrified by the general wastefulness of society at that time—items that were working, and nothing wrong them, often thrown away and taken to landfill because they had been replaced. Sometimes, something would go out of fashion and be sent via the refuse collection service to the local landfill site—not that there was anything wrong with it, just no longer fashionable. It can be identified as the time the refuse collection service stopped being called the ash carts, because they used to collect ash from coal fires, and just started dealing with large quantities of refuse.

I also remember deposits being charged on pop bottles. It’s amazing how a few pennies can affect behaviour. The plastic bag levy: it might only be 5p, but it’s had a massive effect on behaviour. No longer do you see plastic bags blowing in large numbers across parks and sports pitches, and I believe that a return to a deposit on bottles would have exactly the same effect on recycling. Wales has made huge strides in recycling over recent years. It is the leading UK nation in terms of municipal recycling—thank you, local authorities—currently third in the world. More, however, can be done.

First, I’m going to turn to metals. All metals should be and can be recycled. I’m sure that, however, metals including gold and rare earths are finding their way into landfill in Wales. Rapid technology change, low initial cost—

Will the Member give way?

Please.

Thank you, Mike. I’m sure you’d agree with me, wouldn’t you? I’m very concerned about the return of mobility equipment when people have had operations in hospital. I know of two patients recently where, when they phoned up to say, ‘Can we return our equipment?’ ‘No, they’re no use to us. No, we can’t reuse them; just take them to your local tip’. I find that a complete and utter waste of money. I’ve raised it with the Cabinet Secretary, with the local authority, and I don’t know if you can help in some way, but we’re talking about wheelchairs, hundreds and hundreds of pounds’ worth of equipment, that is finding its way into landfill.

I agree with you entirely. I don’t see why these things can’t be refurbished, and I think that it’s unfortunate there are still some people who have this throwaway mentality. We’ve had rapid technology changes. The mobile phone—I know that’s interrupted this session on several occasions this afternoon. That contains gold, heavy metals—in fact 70 per cent of the heavy metals in landfill come from discarded electronics, while it only makes up 2 per cent of America’s landfill; I assume Britain will not be dissimilar. The value of precious metals inside a mobile phone are worth around 75 cents in America, which means going on for £1 here, and it’s about 18 cents to take them out. There’s a huge saving in doing it, but far too many electronic devices end up being put into landfill. In mobile phones there’s gold, there’s rare earth metals, and yet they’re still being thrown away without being recycled. No metal or product including metals should be ever be thrown away. We have a finite amount of metal in the earth’s crust. The more we recycle, the less we need to extract and the less damage to the environment. I think we are likely in the future to see the mining of old refuse tips to access metals and other items previously discarded.

Turning to food, in a world where many are going hungry, in a country where people are having to go to food banks, where children would have gone hungry in my constituency during the summer if it had not been for the action of Faith in Families and Carolyn Harris MP in providing meals, we are still throwing food away. The supermarkets, of course, must take some of the blame for food waste. Giant bags and buy-one-get-one-free offers promote over-purchase and waste. We need to cut down on food waste: things such as buying less, avoiding offers that would provide you with more than you can use, cook and freeze, creating smoothies and creating soups.

It’s not only the waste of food; there is a cost to the environment and there’s a cost to the purchaser as well. We just cannot afford to keep on throwing food away. There are people who are going hungry because we are doing it. Huge progress has been made in Wales. We need to continue making this progress. I’ll just finally end with: well done local councils in Wales for what you’re doing with recycling.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Environment and Rural Affairs to reply to the debate.

Thank you very much, Chair, and I thank Members for partaking in this debate. I think it was very good to have such a constructive debate, and I think, as David Melding said, it’s fantastic that we are third in the world in our recycling, but I want to be first in the world. I want to make sure that we beat Germany and Singapore. We have invested over £600 million in local authority recycling services through the sustainable waste management grant, and the fact that we have achieved this position of being third in the world is down to Welsh Government working with local authorities, but of course, it is down to the people of Wales who are so keen to recycle. However, we know there are a group of people that just seem to refuse to do so, and that’s one aspect of work that we will be continuing to do with local authorities.

Jenny Rathbone mentioned food waste, and I think it is absolutely appalling that we do waste so much food. If we look at the average household in Wales, they throw away food worth £480 a year, so that equates to £600 million across Wales as a whole. We really need to value the food that we buy, and we mustn’t recklessly throw it away. I mentioned that we will be bringing forward the target of halving food waste in Wales by 2025. I think that is bold and ambitious, and I think it’s also pragmatic and realistic, so I will be consulting as part of the refresh of our waste strategy that I plan to do next year.

Several Members mentioned the deposit-return schemes, and we have agreed to have this pilot scheme as part of our budget settlement. We’ve put £0.5 million aside to do that. We haven’t worked up the details yet. As Simon said, that will be part of the work that we do, and I will be happy not just to let David Melding know, but obviously all Members, when we’ve brought forward our ideas.

Alongside that, I mentioned I was doing an extended producer responsibility study. So, that was part of the scheme but we are now going to have a pilot as part of the budget settlement. I am aware of calls for the deposit-return scheme to be introduced. As a child of the 1960s, like Mike Hedges, I remember it very well, but I think it’s absolutely important that we make sure that there aren’t perverse or unintended outcomes in relation to having such a scheme, because we do have the best recycling service in the UK and already 75 per cent of plastic bottles in Wales are being recycled. So, I think it’s very important that we don’t have those perverse outcomes.

We’ve also got to consider the financial impacts of a deposit on household shopping bills. We know, for example, that a great deal of people now shop online, so it’s really important that we make sure that we help those people that cannot easily redeem such a bottle for a deposit in a shop. David Melding queried about polystyrene. It is recyclable and I’m having discussions with well-known food outlets and businesses. Again, it’s going to be part of the EPR study that we’re going to look at recycling polystyrene.

If I can just turn to the motion, obviously I’m asking Assembly Members to support the motion. Looking at the amendments, I’m accepting 1, 3, 4 and 5. I particularly want to pay tribute to Ceredigion on being the top recycling county in Wales, at 70 per cent. I’m asking Members to reject amendment 2 because there is already an evidence-based target for zero waste for that milestone of 2050 in our waste strategy, ‘Towards Zero Waste’. The 80 per cent target and the 50 per cent target that I referred to are specific new targets that aren’t already in ‘Towards Zero Waste’. To get to that zero waste by 2050 will require a huge amount of effort to achieve that, and we will have to bring in interim measures. One of the interim measures that we have looked at is working with local authorities to develop 25-year contracts for energy recovery of non-recyclable waste.

So, in conclusion, Llywydd, I’d just like to thank Members again for their contributions. I think the next few years are going to be really exciting. As I say, I want to be best in the world. I’m sure that’s shared by all Members, as we make that further progress on our resource efficiency and circular economy journey. I’m really pleased to have had this debate today. Thank you.

The proposal is to agree amendment 1. Does any Member object? Amendment 1 is therefore agreed, in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

The proposal is to agree amendment 2. Does any Member object? [Objection.] I will defer voting until voting time.

Unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, I will proceed directly to voting time.

The first vote is on the debate on tackling hate crime. I call for a vote on amendment 4, tabled in the name of Paul Davies. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 17, no abstentions, 22 against. Therefore the amendment is not agreed.

I call for a vote on amendment 5, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 38, two abstentions, none against. Therefore amendment 5 is agreed.

I call for a vote on amendment 6, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 14, three abstentions, and 23 against. Therefore, amendment 6 is not agreed.

I call for a vote on amendment 7, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 14, three abstentions and 23 against. Therefore amendment 7 is not agreed.

I call for a vote on amendment 8, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 37, three abstentions, none against. Therefore amendment 8 is agreed.

I call for a vote on the motion as amended, tabled in the name of Jane Hutt.

Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 34, no abstentions, none against, and therefore—. Forty in favour, no abstentions, none against, and therefore the motion as amended is agreed.

The next vote is on the debate on the circular economy, and I call for a vote on amendment 2, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth.

Open the vote?

Open the vote. Thank you, Rhun. Close the vote. In favour eight, nine abstentions, 23 against. Therefore, amendment 2 is not agreed.

I call for a vote on amendment 3, tabled in the name of Paul Davies. Open the vote. Close the vote. Thirty-nine in favour, one abstention, none against. Therefore amendment 3 is agreed.

I call for a vote on amendment 4, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 37, two abstentions, one against. Therefore amendment 4 is agreed.

I call for a vote on amendment 5, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 28, no abstentions, 12 against. Therefore amendment 5 is agreed.

I call for a vote, therefore, on the motion as amended, tabled in the name of Jane Hutt.

Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 31, nine abstentions, none against. Therefore, the motion as amended is agreed.

That brings today’s proceedings to a close.