Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru

Welcome to this Plenary session. Before we begin, I want to set out a few points. This meeting will be held in a hybrid format, with some Members in the Senedd Chamber and others joining by video-conference. All Members participating in proceedings of the Senedd, wherever they may be, will be treated equally. A Plenary meeting held using video-conference, in accordance with the Standing Orders of the Welsh Parliament, constitutes Senedd proceedings for the purposes of the Government of Wales Act 2006. Some of the provisions of Standing Order 34 will apply for today's Plenary meeting, and these are set out on your agenda. I would remind Members that Standing Orders relating to order in Plenary meetings apply to this meeting, and apply equally to Members in the Chamber as to those joining virtually.

The first item this afternoon is questions to the Minister for Finance and Trefnydd, and the first question is from Russell George.

So far this financial year, I have allocated more than £4 billion as part of our response to COVID-19. I'll continue to make further prudent funding decisions and allocate further resources when they are needed to support vital public services, the economy and individuals.

Thank you for your answer, Minister. A couple of weeks ago, I asked the question of your colleague the Minister for Economy, Transport and North Wales, and he very helpfully suggested that you were best placed to answer the question. I'm sure you would, of course, welcome the £600 million that was allocated by the Chancellor last month in guaranteed consequentials to the Welsh Government, and that's on top, of course, of the £1.1 billion guaranteed from the UK Government earlier this year. That brings a total amount of additional funding by the UK Government to £5 billion to fight the pandemic here in Wales. There has been some concern over the timely distribution of these funds to businesses. Can you tell me how much of this funding is still in the Welsh Government's coffers, rather than providing that vital support to businesses and organisations across Wales during this pandemic? You've mentioned you've allocated £4 billion to date, so I calculate that's another £1 billion yet to spend. Do you agree with that analysis, and when is that going to get to businesses on the front line?

I was very pleased to be able to negotiate that guarantee with the UK Government in respect of additional funding for COVID-19. But what we have yet to receive from the UK Government is that reconciliation exercise, which will help us understand exactly what that guarantee relates to. Because, let's remember, all of this funding is just in relation to spend on tackling COVID-19 across the border in England—this isn't any special treatment or any special favours for Wales. But I have to say that, just last week, we voted and passed our second supplementary budget, to give maximum transparency to the decisions and the allocations that we're making in Wales. And Wales is the only part of the UK that has published a second supplementary budget thus far, to demonstrate the funding that is being provided to individuals, to businesses, and to communities, the NHS and local government as well.

In the second supplementary budget, that increased the overall Welsh resources by £2.5 billion. There is further funding to be allocated, but of course we are only two thirds of the way through the financial year. We have the prospect of a 'no deal' Brexit hanging on the horizon, and we don't yet know the full path of the pandemic through to the spring. So, there will be further allocations to be made, but they will be timely and in response to the specific conditions in which we find ourselves.

Minister, only a few short months ago, we saw Conservative Cabinet members of the UK Government and, indeed, the Prime Minister clapping and thanking key workers every Thursday at 8 p.m. on the doorstep—indeed, outside No. 10. Fast-forward to today, we now know that the Chancellor is planning to freeze the pay for some of those key workers. Thank goodness it's not our NHS workers, and some others, but many, many public sector workers who've been on the front line will have their pay frozen next year. Does the Minister agree with me that if the UK Tory Government can find the money to give, indeed, friends hundreds of millions of pounds in contracts for unsuitable personal protective equipment, then surely to goodness they can find the money to give our public sector workers—all of them—who they thanked every week, the pay rise they deserve, in recognition of how they've kept this country going during the pandemic?

Huw Irranca-Davies is absolutely right, in the sense that the allocations and the decisions made by the UK Government are very much a reflection of the values of the UK Government and the things that it holds most dear. For my part, ahead of the Chancellor's spending review today, I wrote to the Chancellor urging him to rule out the public sector pay freeze and to deliver the funding that we need here in Wales in order to protect health, jobs and support a fair recovery. And the Treasury really does need to use all of the levers at its disposal to stand by those front-line workers who have done so much for us in Wales and across the UK through the course of this pandemic. And the decision today simply pits different parts of the public sector against each other, which is really, really concerning, but clearly it's deeply disappointing and unnecessary. 

Minister, the UK Chancellor of the Exchequer is now announcing the UK Tory Government's spending plans for the coming year, with the very delayed comprehensive spending review. It is disappointing, when we are seeking security and longer term planning across inter-governmental agencies and local government during this time, that this is still a one-year plan. And, of course, the Welsh Government will look, naturally, as part of the union, to receiving money proportionate to any funding to England, thanks to the Barnett formula, and I look forward to those consequentials coming to Wales, although I do remain perplexed and at a loss that Wales still, at this point, has nothing from HS2.

Minister, it is important that the Welsh cultural and musical offering is protected and sustained during this harsh COVID winter, and although the cultural recovery fund has been welcomed and oversubscribed, it still leaves out broad categories, which Welsh Government has attempted to breach. So, Minister, what representations, then, will the Welsh Government make to the Treasury for much needed extra income for Wales? And how does the Welsh Government intend to further financially support live Welsh musical performance? 

It's really important, as I was saying to Russell George, that the Welsh Government has the results of that reconciliation exercise, so that we can understand exactly what the consequentials that we have received thus far pertain to, and then we can get a better understanding as to whether there'll be further funding coming forward before the end of the financial year. I know that there are some discussions going on at the moment in terms of further support for the culture sector, and certainly that will be something I would seek to have some further discussions with Eluned Morgan and Dafydd Elis-Thomas regarding. 

The second question [OQ55934] cannot be asked for technical reasons. 

Therefore, we will move to questions from party spokespeople. The Conservative spokesperson first—Nick Ramsay. 

Diolch, Llywydd. Minister, as we know, the Auditor General for Wales has qualified his opinion on the Welsh Government accounts for the first time ever, because £739 million of expenditure was omitted relating to the Welsh Government's coronavirus response. This was something that was discussed with officials in the Public Accounts Committee on Monday. Had the cost of the business support schemes been included in the Welsh Government accounts, this would effectively had turned the underspend of £436 million into an overspend of £303 million. There are, clearly, a number of accounting issues that need to be tidied up here. What steps are being taken to avoid this kind of thing happening in future? 

Well, as Nick Ramsay will know, through the briefing he's had as part of the Public Accounts Committee's work, this is a technical disagreement between the Welsh Government and the auditor in terms of how funding should be classified for this year, in the sense that funding was announced and when it went out the door was potentially across years. So, it is a disagreement in terms of how things should be coded. But, I have to say, we're not the only ones in this position. I think all four Governments across the UK are facing the same decision. And, absolutely, we don't regret making that early announcement of support for businesses, so that they could plan and prepare as we entered the original lockdown back in March. 

Diolch, Gweinidog. As you say, and I agree, there's no question at all that the Welsh Government were right to commit that funding to support businesses across Wales during the pandemic. But I'm sure you'd agree that it is important that money that is spent by Government is accounted for properly. I also appreciate, as you said, this is a technical issue, and a very technical issue for those of us who got into the details of it on Monday, but it is, nonetheless, unprecedented, and certainly within the context of the UK devolved administrations, although, as you said there might be others that are involved in this too. So, there is, as I said before, a need to tidy this up and to have a firm agreement with the audit office. I wonder if you could update us with any discussions you've had with Audit Wales about how we could proceed in future to make sure that these sorts of disputes don't arise again, or to have a mechanism, indeed, where those disputes can be easily dealt with?

I haven't personally had discussions with Audit Wales on this issue. As you say, it is a technical matter and, I think, most appropriately dealt with, in this instance, through officials. But I know officials have had some significant and lengthy discussions on this matter, and obviously we'd be keen to avoid it happening again in future. 

Thank you, Minister. I know that officials have been working hard, as we found out on Monday, to try and sort this out. I think that this is a technical issue, but, for the good of the Welsh Government's accounting reputation and, indeed, for the good of other devolved administrations' reputations, if there is indeed an issue with their accounts as well, we do need to have an undertaking on an agreement to go forward so that this doesn't happen again. 

Also, and finally, given that this year's £739 million will appear extensively in next year's accounts, given that it wasn't in this year's accounts, is there a strong likelihood that next year's accounts will be qualified too, and have there been discussions with the auditor general about what could be done about this?

It's my understanding that that won't be the case next year, and a line has been drawn, if you like, under this particular episode. But I agree that some good discussions between officials and Audit Wales need to take place, and have taken place, in order to clarify the situation and ensure that we both have the same understanding of the rules and the technicalities within which we operate. 

The Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Rhun ap Iorwerth. 

Thank you very much, Llywydd. The Minister would agree with me in terms of how inadequate the Welsh Government's fiscal powers are, and that has been highlighted during the current pandemic. Can the Minister outline what options the Welsh Government has considered to increase revenue and capital available to them to deal with current issues related to the pandemic, but also to build back better, as we all want to see happening?

Well, as Rhun ap Iorwerth knows, our journey into tax raising in Wales is very much in its infancy. However, we have been able to use the tools at our disposal during the pandemic, and an example would be the way in which we treated the recent announcement on the part of the Chancellor regarding land transaction tax, or stamp duty land tax as it's referred to across the border. By taking a different set of decisions here in Wales, we were able to free up an additional £30 million of funding in order to target that at homelessness, which is a particular concern during the pandemic. So, there have been some things that we've been able to do. We deliberately took the decision not to raise Welsh rates of income tax. If we had done so by 1p, then that would have raised around £200 million. We took the decision not to do that because we made a commitment to the people of Wales at the start of this Senedd that we wouldn't be raising Welsh rates of income tax during that time.  

Given that we don't have the flexibility that I would like to see us having in Wales as an independent nation, we will have to be innovative in how we increase our capacity to invest in the future of Wales. 

So, if I can take the Minister back to her statement on MIM last week, I think there were a few questions that remain unanswered from that statement. Transparency is crucial in relation to MIM. It is a long-term commitment, there are higher costs related to it, and hiding behind things like commercial sensitivity isn't a way of stopping scrutiny of contracts and so on. So, in the name of transparency, I would ask what the profit cap is on the schools contract with Meridiam. And given that MIM evolved from PFI—it's still an expensive way of spending, with the Scottish Futures Trust saying it costs around 23 per cent more than funding projects through public sector borrowing—what assurance can the Minister give that MIM is an effective enough evolution from PFI, where there was far too much profit made for too little risk? So, how can you give us an assurance that we are not paying over the odds for the MIM contracts that the Government will sign?

As I said to Rhun ap Iorwerth last week, I'm afraid, as the contract contains commercially sensitive information, we wouldn't be looking to publish it. But, there is always an element of profit when we procure infrastructure. In this case, however, the precise amount of that profit will be determined by the performance of the company over the life of the contract, and that's one of the benefits of the MIM scheme, in the sense that the pay is very much performance related.

The procurement exercise tested each of the three shortlisted bidders on quality and price in their submissions, and Meridiam submitted the most economically advantageous tender in accordance with the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, so I can certainly provide those assurances and, as Rhun ap Iorwerth knows, Welsh Government is taking a stake in this exercise as well, which means that we will be the beneficiaries of any profits made alongside those other partners.

If I could turn, finally, to another form of borrowing, the Chancellor of the Exchequer announced plans on 9 November for the UK to issue its first green bonds next year, as part of an effort to shore up the city of London's status as a global financial hub and to fund decarbonisation efforts. I accept that if Welsh Government were to issue its own bonds, that would count towards its borrowing cap, which we'd like to increase, of course; I've made my representations to the Minister on that. They also accept the evidence given by Gerry Holtham to the Finance Committee's review on Welsh Government capital funding sources around Welsh Government-issued bonds. But I think there's an important point to make here about nation building and Welsh Government signalling its commitment, and not just to tackling the climate crisis but also its ambition to put Wales in a position to be a part of what is a multibillion pound global market in these bonds, and growing. Has Welsh Government explored the use and application of green bonds, and the potential role of the Wales development bank in this? We can see Germany's KfW as an example—a publicly owned development bank, one of the largest players in the green bonds market at the moment.

Well, as Rhun ap Iorwerth says, any bonds would count towards our Welsh Government borrowing, and of course we have that aggregate limit of £1 billion and a maximum borrowing of £150 million in any one year, which is a relatively small amount of money in the greater scheme of things. He'll also be aware of the discussions that we've had previously, that Welsh Government will always look to use the cheapest forms of borrowing first, and of course bonds come at the more expensive end, which is why it's not something that we've pursued thus far. But I do share his keenness to have greater flexibility in terms of borrowing, so increasing the amount that we could borrow on an annual basis, but then also increasing that overall aggregate figure as well.

Yes. There are no plans to create new taxes before the end of this Senedd.

I thought that there might not be time, but there is one new tax, or relatively new tax, being operated in Wales for around three years ago, namely the land transaction tax. This morning, the First Minister and I heard powerful presentations by residents from the Llŷn peninsula who are being priced out of their communities because of the huge increase in the purchase of second homes. Increasing the higher rate of the land transaction tax could be used as a small way of trying to mitigate the second homes crisis. Could you explain what steps would need to be taken by the Government and yourself as Minister to increase the higher rate—a relatively simple process that could be implemented straight away?

I thank Siân Gwenllian for the question, and also for having the meeting with the First Minister earlier on today, and I look forward to catching up with him later this afternoon on that particular meeting as well. In theory, of course, we can make changes in-year to our land transaction tax. I'm very keen that—. We have the land transaction tax rates and thresholds that were announced just a couple of months ago now, and I do think that, in terms of the housing market, giving some kind of certainty, at least to 31 March, is important. So, I don't think I would be looking to make immediate changes in-year. I'm also very much aware of the behavioural impact of announcing changes that would then come in at a later date. The changes at the moment, which make it advantageous for people to buy houses at the moment, mean that, hopefully, we're bringing forward land transactions from next year into this financial year, which will give us a boost and give the housing market a boost and give all of those businesses that rely on house moving a boost as well. So, I wouldn't intend to give a long lead-in time for any changes in land transaction tax for that particular reason. 

Minister, Members, of course, have raised support for tourism more than any other sector since March, and, in fairness, Welsh Government has recognised those challenges and has tried to respond to a fair few of them. But any argument that a tourism tax would raise money to put back into the sector now clearly just falls apart. If we have businesses closing and potential visitors not coming—obviously, they'll be worried about their own finances anyway—well, there's obviously no-one going to be here to pay that tax. So, please don't give them another reason not to come. I don't think you'll get far with taxes in this term, as you've said, but will your bid to return to Government include a commitment to no tourism tax?

Well, Llywydd, I won't be making any manifesto announcements in the Chamber this afternoon, but I think that there is a great deal to consider in terms of the tourism tax. It's certainly something that is very popular with local authorities, especially in tourist areas, who want to improve their offer in terms of tourism. And although the policy hasn't yet been fully developed, it hasn't been fully consulted on, it's something that we are considering in terms of those four areas of taxation that the First Minister announced some time ago. So, there are no immediate plans. However, I think it is an area that does warrant some further consideration. I'm very aware of the situation in terms of the tourist sector at the moment and the difficulties they've had. So, clearly, it wouldn't be something to consider immediately, but I don't think that that means that we shouldn't have those conversations in terms of what might be appropriate at a future date, when the situation is recovered.

Minister, it seems to me that the economy of the UK needs to recover, and, more to the point, grow. The approach going forward must be more about encouraging spending and growth and confidence, and not discouraging all of these by imposing any higher tax burdens for Wales. Do you agree with that statement?

I would love to encourage spending and growth and confidence, but I think that the Chancellor has poured a bit of cold water on that today in terms of announcing a freeze on the pay of public sector workers—public sector workers who spend their money in the local economy and now will be even more concerned about their future finances as well. So, I think that this will put the brakes on any spending that they might have thought of bringing forward as well.

But my approach to taxation is one that is entirely transparent and inclusive. And you know that the Welsh Government has published its tax principles, and that's about creating taxes within the context of the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015, creating taxes that are fair, and creating taxes that are simple to administer and so on. So, our approach is very clear and I don't think that there's anything that people should be fearful of, because we're very focused on creating a progressive agenda.

I accept that it would be very difficult to bring in new taxes before the end of this Senedd term, which is only four or five months away, but the Welsh Government can make changes to existing taxes. Will you consider adding more, higher bands to council tax? It seems to me ridiculous that somebody paying £400,000 for a house, or has a house in the £400,000 bracket, is paying the same council tax as somebody with a £2.5 million or £3 million house. Also, something that is a recurring theme—stopping properties built as residential properties from being registered as small businesses and getting small business rate relief.

I thank Mike Hedges for raising that. Both of these issues are ones that he has raised with me in the past as well. I did explore the first suggestion about adding additional council tax bands, but I'm advised that that couldn't be done properly without a full revaluation exercise of all of our domestic dwellings here in Wales, and that couldn't be achieved before the next Senedd term, so it's not something we could do immediately. And obviously, those changes to council tax bands couldn't really be proposed without some full and substantive consultation with council tax payers, local authorities and others who would be affected.

Revaluation exercises are really significant undertakings and they cost tens of millions of pounds, and I understand that they take around three years to complete, using the current methodology. But, that said, we did commission the independent research from the Institute for Fiscal Studies, which was published earlier this year, and that does look at what the impact would be of a council tax revaluation, and it could definitely make a more progressive system. So, we'll be drawing together the findings of the research that we've commissioned for both council tax and, actually, non-domestic rates in the new year, and I think it would then be for the next Government to determine the way forward. But it is a very interesting proposal. And, similarly, the suggestion in terms of increasing—I think what's behind Mike's question is suggesting increasing—the number of nights that a property must be let for and advertised for if it's to be classified as a holiday let would also require legislation as well. So, we're going to find it difficult, I think, to undertake any further action that requires legislation, given the pressure on our legislative timetable across the next few months.

We'll continue to respond to the challenges of the pandemic and build on the funding we've already made available this year, including £70 million for businesses in Rhondda Cynon Taf, £50 million for the local authority, and funding provided to the third sector and art organisations in Pontypridd.

Thank you for that answer, Minister. I've just been listening to the Chancellor's financial statement, and the first part of it is, basically, a broken promise over replacing EU money, and we remember the promise, wasn't it, 'Wales won't lose a penny.' Well, it's true—we haven't lost a penny, we've lost hundreds of millions of pounds. The second part of it is obviously a kick in the teeth for many public sector workers by imposing a pay freeze on them. But, thirdly, the Prime Minister promised to passport funding to us for the flood infrastructure damage. Minister, can you tell us, have we received the promised funding or is it yet another broken Tory promise?

I'm afraid to let Mick Antoniw know that we have not received the funding that has been promised on the floor of Parliament by the Prime Minister to address the impact of the flooding that we had earlier this year in Wales, which affected us disproportionately to anywhere else in the UK. Ahead of the spending review today, I did write to the Chancellor, setting out that this was an excellent opportunity for him to set out, within his plans for infrastructure investment over the coming years, his response to those floods and to enable us to have that certainty of funding over the coming years. But, unfortunately, that clearly fell on deaf ears. I do have a meeting planned with the Chief Secretary to the Treasury in December to discuss exactly this issue, but I think it was a missed opportunity today. 

Obviously a missed opportunity for many businesses in Rhondda Cynon Taf, and in particular the Pontypridd area, was the ability to access Welsh Government funding, which shut after 24 hours. The Minister for Economy, Transport and North Wales has said he's hopeful that a new round of funding will be made available. When he closed the funding after 24 hours, he said that pot of money was fully subscribed, finance Minister. Have you had a bid from the economy Minister to release additional moneys to his department so that many businesses that lost out on this support would be able to bid in the future to acquire that support to carry their businesses forward?

Well, I do have to tell the Member that 2,379 payments worth over £7 million have been made from the lockdown business fund, covering over 22,000 jobs. A total of 750 micro and small and medium-sized enterprise businesses have been awarded funding through the economic resilience fund, totalling £11.6 million, and 707 payments worth over £1.9 million so far have been made from the ERF phase 3 lockdown business fund. And these are all relating to businesses in RCT. And through the COVID-19 non-domestic business rates grant, a total of 3,767 awards have been processed to businesses, totalling £43.8 million. And, of course, the Development Bank of Wales has been busy lending to businesses in RCT and has provided over £6 million to 66 businesses, safeguarding 900 jobs. So, Welsh Government has been very effective and busy in supporting businesses in RCT, as you'll see from the figures there. Clearly, we want to do more, and we want to better understand the particular challenges relating to the ERF phase 3, and I have constant discussions with the Minister for economy and transport regarding future funding and future support for business.

We have made available an extra £113 million, approved by the Senedd for rail services last week in the second supplementary budget. We are continuing to closely monitor what further funding may be needed for the operation of services until the end of the year.

So, Welsh Government is now directly, or at least through its 100 per cent owned Transport for Wales, paying really quite substantial amounts to subsidise services within England, including for stations that, perhaps, a handful of passengers only are using. In addition, Transport for Wales is the station facility owner for quite large stations in England, such as Hereford, Shrewsbury and Chester. The UK Department for Transport is considering transferring responsibility for those stations away from Transport for Wales. Is that something the finance Minister would support, and shouldn't the UK Government be doing more in this area now?

The UK Government should be doing a huge amount more in this area. We're very aware that, for too long, Wales has been at the back of the queue when the UK Government has been investing in rail infrastructure, and the rolling stock that we're currently using, much of it is nearly 40 years old. Based on known commitments for the period from 2019 to 2029, we estimate shortfalls of up to £5.1 billion over this period.

I have to say I'm even more concerned than ever now about rail funding in Wales as a result of the spending review today. The Member will know that the Barnett formula works on what are compatibility factors between UK Government departments and Welsh Government, in terms of where the responsibilities lie, and my understanding is, although we've yet to look at the spreadsheets following the Chancellor's statements, that the factor for the Department for Transport is going to be slashed as a result of HS2. So, that is a real concern. Unfortunately, I haven't seen the spreadsheets that are always shared after the Chancellor makes his statement, because I've been here this afternoon, but as soon as we have the opportunity after answering questions, we'll have a better understanding of what the real implications for us will be.

Minister, Transport for Wales, of course, will be taking on quite a bit of additional responsibilities over the coming years. I note that Transport for Wales continues to employ a significant number of outside, external consultants rather than using resource from within Transport for Wales. When asked about this last week, what James Price, the chief executive officer of Transport for Wales, said was that if they had a longer term remit letter, then they would effectively be able to resource additional skills within Transport for Wales, reducing the need for external consultants. The implication there is that a huge saving could be made, I think. Is this something that you have discussed with your colleague the Minister for the economy and transport?

We would always love to give partners longer term certainty for their funding, and, certainly, it's something that the Chancellor has been able to offer schools and the NHS across the border in England, and also infrastructure projects, but hasn't been able to offer us that same kind of certainty. So, a one-year spending review, following another one-year spending round, which we had last year, just means the situation is very difficult in terms of providing any level of certainty.

So, yes, I do have discussions about the future funding arrangements with my colleague Ken Skates, and, obviously, he will be keen to have greater sight of funding across future years, and we are considering a model, actually, that might provide that, but I'm very aware that there would have to be a great deal of flexibility in that to allow us to respond to unforeseen situations. For example, earlier this year, we had to use maximum flexibility with Welsh Government budgets to reallocate funding in terms of responding to COVID-19. So, it's a discussion we're having in that context, and also, I have to say, in the context of the future of regional funding, but again, much depends on the outcome of the spending review today in terms of how much we'll be able to allocate to that.

The intended effect of the temporary changes to land transaction tax was to encourage transactions in the housing market during the remainder of this financial year. The latest LTT data show positive trends in transactions and tax revenue compared to the early months of this financial year.

A report earlier this month by Halifax revealed that the average UK house price is now £250,000. This came on top of a report last month by Nationwide that found that UK house prices were rising at their fastest rate for five years, and this has been partly attributed to a rush to buy ahead of the end of England's stamp duty holiday next spring, whereas in Wales we've adopted a much fairer and more progressive approach through the land transaction tax, which better reflects the nature of our housing market. Can the Minister confirm today, with that in mind, as we approach the end of the LTT holiday here in Wales, that the Welsh Government will set out its plans to engage with key stakeholders throughout the process to avoid an increase in prices that would put pressure on affordable housing in the northern areas of the constituency that I represent?

Thank you to Hefin David for raising that particular issue. As we move towards the end of the year, obviously I'll be keen to hear views from colleagues in the Chamber, and also engaging with stakeholders as well about the potential future of land transaction tax. Obviously, I'm keen not to make announcements too far in advance, because then you end up with situations where there's forestalling and people changing the timing of their purchase in order to get the most advantageous deal, which is completely an understandable thing to do, but if you're using tax to try and drive a certain behaviour, then it obviously has some issues there.

So, obviously we're completely committed to transparency on our tax policy, and I'd been keen to have some further discussions with Hefin David about the particular implications and effects of tax changes within his own constituency, particularly in the north of the Caerphilly area.

Minister, we've welcomed the land transaction tax cut, albeit temporary and less generous than is the case in England. It's been our long-standing policy, of course, to raise the land transaction tax threshold to £250,000 for first-time buyers on a permanent basis, not just on a temporary basis. What consideration have you given to making this a permanent change in land transaction tax duty?

There are very good reasons for having different thresholds in Wales as compared to England, and those are most notably around the fact that average house prices are very different here in Wales. So, the average house price in England is currently £262,000, and in Wales it is well below that, around £165,000. So, they are clearly very different housing markets and I think it's entirely appropriate to have different thresholds for land transaction tax to reflect that.

Transforming towns, backing the foundational economy, upgrading major infrastructure and targeting new investment for the Heads of the Valleys are important priorities for the Welsh Government. During the pandemic we have provided over £150 million in business support to protect jobs and businesses across the Heads of the Valleys.

I'm grateful to the Minister for that answer. One area where I do agree with the UK Chancellor of the Exchequer, speaking today in the House of Commons, is when he said that the economic crisis that we're facing as a consequence of the coronavirus pandemic is only just beginning. One of the lessons we've learnt in the Heads of the Valleys is that, whenever there is an economic crisis, we bear the brunt of that crisis. We saw that in the 1980s with the destruction of heavy industry by the Thatcher Governments, we saw it again as a consequence of the global financial crisis, and we've suffered 10 years of Tory austerity that has ripped the hearts out of our communities.

I think people across the Heads of the Valleys are grateful to the Welsh Government for the support that has been provided by the Welsh Government, at a far higher level than in any other part of the United Kingdom. But in recovering from this crisis, can we ensure that the future of towns is at the heart of how the Government moves forward, that there's a focus on towns such as Tredegar or Ebbw Vale, Abertillery or Brynmawr, which are at the heart of not just our local communities, but our local economies as well, and in driving forward economic growth as a consequence of this crisis, that we can ensure that there's a strong focus on the future of towns?

I absolutely agree that, in the future, we'll need to build on the Transforming Towns programme and have a really strong focus on towns. Town centres will look different in future, but I want them to look like vibrant places nonetheless. And we need to be considering more heritage-led regeneration, and there are some great examples across the Valleys of that. Housing-led regeneration, I think, is also really important.

Some of the work we've already been doing that relates specifically, I think, to the recovery picture is funding towards a £1.3 million scheme to create flexible working space at the Works site in Ebbw Vale. I think flexible working will be more important than ever now. And we're providing funding towards a £5.1 million scheme that will bring new businesses into Brynmawr. And also there's some further funding to support new projects in Tredegar, Brynmawr and Nantyglo. I think all of these things will be important as we seek to recover from the pandemic. 

We are investing in all parts of Wales to support our public services, businesses and communities. Investments in Pembrokeshire include £48.7 million for a new secondary school in Haverfordwest and £40 million for improvements to the A40. Pembrokeshire County Council has also been awarded an allocation of £6.9 million of targeted regeneration investment funding. 

Minister, I'm grateful to you for that answer. Now, I continue to receive representations from residents in Lower Town, Fishguard in my constituency regarding road safety in their local community. And despite positive commitments from previous Ministers on this matter, improvements to the A487 in this specific area are still yet to be taken forward. Minister, what assurances can you give the people of Lower Town, Fishguard that improvements to the trunk road will actually be delivered, and will you commit to working with Pembrokeshire County Council and local residents to deliver a lasting solution for the local area, so that this part of Wales gets the strategic investment that it actually deserves?

I thank Paul Davies for that question. In the first instance, I think I should commit to having a discussion with the Minister for economy and transport, so that I can better understand the issues that have held up that particular scheme relating to Lower Town, Fishguard and the A487. 

Finally, question 9, Janet Finch-Saunders.

In the second supplementary budget, the environment, energy, and rural affairs portfolio’s capital budget reduced by £10.8 million as a result of the exercise to identify those capital budgets that were likely to underspend this year due to the coronavirus crisis and could, in the first instance, be repurposed.

Minister, I'm sorry, but I consider it to be quite appalling and very disappointing that you have seen fit to reduce the revenue and capital allocation for environment and rural affairs by nearly £11 million. I would like to refer to an even greater situation that is causing me and the agricultural sector some alarm. As you will know, environment, energy and rural affairs has accruing resources of £97 million. This includes income from the EU to support farmers and rural communities in Wales. Your Welsh Government's historic handling of funds for farm support is a serious failure. In fact, you may recall that the budget for the rural development plan in Wales 2014-20 was £828 million. Now, whilst I acknowledge that expenditure can be made during the three years after the programme period, the funding was purely for 2014-20. Why, then, does around £160 million still remain unspent and what steps will the Welsh Government urgently take to address this budget mismanagement and failed monitoring, to ensure that all the money is made available, and now, to all our desperate farmers? Thank you.

Well, two important things here. The first relates to the £10.8 million funding that was identified to be repurposed. That is only capital funding—that wasn't revenue—and £9.5 million of that relates to radioactivity and pollution prevention. It does relate to slippage this year regarding Cardiff council's clean air quality plan to meet legal limits for nitrogen dioxide under the ambient air quality directions given to Cardiff council and Caerphilly council. It's estimated that the slippages from those councils were in the region of £9.5 million, and this is simply because of the result of the pandemic, meaning work couldn't be taken forward at the same pace.

The other £1.3 million related to enabling natural resources in Wales, and that was a grant focused on co-operative action and activities to provide environmental enhancement and resilience. Again, due to the coronavirus pandemic, those projects had to be suspended during the lockdown. So, these are very much results of the impact of the pandemic rather than deliberate choices to pause work within that important portfolio. I think that we do have to recognise that the pandemic has had an effect on our ability to deliver in a number of areas, and we have been able then to repurpose funding. You'll be familiar with the £320 million package that I announced very recently in terms of a focus on trying to start our recovery.

But if we want to talk serious failings on farm funding, the Chancellor confirmed today that Wales will receive only £242 million in replacement funding for the common agricultural policy, and this leaves Wales £137 million short of the funding that we expected to receive, and amounts to a betrayal of rural Wales. Of course, in their manifesto for the 2019 general election, the UK Government committed to provide full replacement funding for farmers following our exit from the EU, and Wales would normally receive around £337 million per year through the common agricultural policy. So, if you're looking for a serious failure of management of funding and if you're looking for a betrayal of the farming industry, I think that you can find it right there.

Thank you to the finance Minister.

The next item is questions to the Minister for Education, and the first question is from Andrew R.T. Davies.

Thank you, Andrew. The Welsh Government is reviewing the regulations and guidance in relation to travel around the Christmas period and beyond as we continue to monitor transmission rates within Wales. It is too early to confirm any arrangements that will apply in respect of universities in the new year.  

Thank you, Minister, for that reply. I appreciate universities are independent institutions, but, obviously, there was a big movement of students at the start of the academic year in September, and this will be the second opportunity for such a movement of students to be replicated, not just in Wales, but from across the United Kingdom and, indeed, international students. I heard what you said—you believe it's too early to come out with anything concrete at the moment—but can you identify any emerging themes that might need to be put in place to welcome students back in January, in particular around pastoral care? Obviously, we know that the January return does tend to have pressure points of students returning back in normal circumstances, but with the exceptionality that students face at the moment, the pastoral care of students is going to be of critical importance, and the work that Government can do to support universities, via public health et cetera, will be of critical importance, I would suggest.

Thank you, Andrew. You asked about emerging themes; clearly, I'm determined to minimise disruption to students' education, but, obviously, we need to monitor that as part of the overall Government public health response to the pandemic. We’re working very closely with our universities and our student union bodies, and many of the elements that will allow students to return home for Christmas are important elements of our planning for a return in the new year, such as staggered leaving dates for students leaving campus. Obviously, a staggered return is something that we're looking at, and the crucial role of lateral flow testing. All universities in Wales are talking part in the pilot for lateral flow testing. Clearly, we want to learn the lessons from that pilot. That testing will continue to operate into the new year, and will, therefore, aid with any plans to return students safely to campus.

Minister, can I commend the work that's been done in the University of South Wales, not only in terms of the innovation of the development of testing equipment that may well have commercial viability in the early new year and make a difference, but also the way in which the university has developed pastoral support for the students, certainly in the town of Pontypridd, and in Treforest, where the university is based? Following on from the last question, obviously, there have been major challenges in terms of the testing of students as they return home, and one of the concerns and one of the issues is, as students do return, and with lots of part-time students and lots of foreign students, the ability to test and to maintain control to contain the COVID pandemic, which will still be with us, is still there. What sort of measures will be in place, what conversations are taking place with, for example, the University of South Wales and other universities, and are there any funding implications that would actually assist universities to enable this to happen for the benefit of all?

Thank you, Mick. I would like, indeed, to put on record my thanks to universities—the University of South Wales and, indeed, all our institutions of higher education—that have worked incredibly hard over the start of this academic year to maintain quality educational experiences, to look after the welfare of their students, and to play their part in managing public health risk in the middle of a global pandemic. And I'd like to thank the students themselves, who are doing their bit to follow the rules, keeping themselves and their friends safe. We are seeing the virus incidence rates decline in most of our universities, which is very welcome and we hope that that trend will continue. We're working very closely with our vice-chancellors; indeed, I met with them all at the beginning of this week to reflect on the experiences to date and to make sure that measures are in place to see a successful end to this term and to begin to plan for a safe return in January. And clearly, we're also working with colleagues in other parts of United Kingdom, given the fact that many of our students travel in and out of Wales to England, to Scotland and to Northern Ireland. Where at all possible, we are seeking to have a common approach to managing that process.

The Welsh Government continues to work with stakeholders to ensure that support is available for supply teachers. This includes financial support, employment opportunities through the Recruit, Recover, Raise Standards programme, and funding a service to promote mental health and well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic.

I'm grateful to you, Minister, for that. I'm aware that the Welsh Government has worked hard to ensure that there is a framework of support available for supply teachers throughout the whole country and throughout the year. But the Minister will also be aware that supply teachers have had a very difficult period throughout the last year with the pandemic and the impact it's had on their ability to gain work. But this reinforces a more fundamental problem with the system of supply teachers. We know that the fragmented system of private agencies means that there is no system for supply teachers to gain adequate work through the year. It may be that the most straightforward way of ensuring that we are able to support and sustain a workforce of supply teachers is to ensure that all local authorities have a local register of supply teachers to ensure that teachers are able to find work and that schools are able to find teachers, and to do so in a more coherent and structured way.

Thank you, Alun. Can I say that supply teachers form a very important part of the education workforce in Wales? But under local management of schools, governing bodies have the flexibility to appoint and deploy supply teachers as they see fit. There is nothing, nothing at all, to prevent local authorities and schools, as the employers of teachers, working together with other key stakeholders—including perhaps regional consortia—to support a co-operative or collaborative model. The decision to operate any local authority list would rest with individual local authorities as the employers of school staff, and as I said, there is nothing to stop them from doing that now. We continue to have discussions with all of our local education authorities to ensure that they—or their individual schools, if they are using agencies—ensure that they do not undercut the framework arrangements we have in place with those agencies to pay the proper wages. I'm grateful for an undertaking by all the directors of education, via the Association of Directors of Education in Wales, that they will be taking action to ensure that schools are made aware of this responsibility and should not be looking to undercut the framework that we have put in place.

Minister, I heard your opening comment about the financial support that you're affording to supply teachers. Could you just give us a little bit more detail about it? Because I've had a couple come to me raising concerns about the fact that if they've been to one school—they may have done a short-term project for a couple of weeks—they've yet to go to the new school, and then they've had to self-isolate, not because they had COVID, but because they've been in contact with somebody who is suspected of having COVID, so they had to go through the self-isolation process—they were really struggling to get any form of financial support, and were worried about what was going to happen to their income. So, if you could either outline that to us now or point me in the direction—because I have looked, and I can't find how we support the people who fall between the gaps there. Then I'd like to go and have a look at it and be able to give it to these constituents of mine. 

Absolutely. The Welsh Government and the National Procurement Service worked with agencies at the beginning of this pandemic to ensure that they were all able to furlough their staff under the job retention scheme. All agencies on the framework confirmed that they were able to access the scheme for eligible staff, and we understand that they did so until the end of the summer. We continue to work alongside our agencies to understand difficulties that supply teachers may be experiencing at the moment, and I will write to the Member with additional details of support that may be available in the current situation.FootnoteLink I should say that we are encouraging those who are willing to work supply to take up opportunities. Some of the enforced closures that we've seen in some of our schools have been because of an inability to find agency staff to keep schools going. I understand that people may be reluctant to take up a position in an area where they feel that COVID transmission rates are high, but we really do need supply staff to work with us and to understand the reasons they may not feel able, at this point, to take up assignments if they are available.

Questions now from the party spokespeople. The Conservative spokesperson, Suzy Davies.

Diolch, Llywydd. Afternoon, Minister. We heard yesterday evening that Qualifications Wales have scrapped January's unit exams in ICT, English literature and Welsh literature, although other exams—not just resits—will still go ahead. I wonder if you can say why the learning of those students sitting level 2 and 3 units in health and social care is deemed less affected by school and college closures than those sitting literature and ICT.

Qualifications Wales has made a distinction between what are legacy qualifications—it's the last time that those papers were ever going to be sat; they will not be offered any longer—and those papers that will have a different opportunity to be assessed in a different way.

Thank you for that answer. My understanding is that some of the legacy GCSEs would be sat, but never mind.

I want to move on now to school closures, and I can see that all but one year group in my old alma mater in Aberdare were sent home to self-isolate the other day. Schools in Ceredigion, of course, are closing for two weeks, including primary schools, which surprised me, I have to say, when we are told repeatedly that in these settings the risks of transmission are low. You've told me that you don't collect data on whether positive cases in schools are there as a result of coming in from the community, or whether they're the result of in-school transmission, which doesn't help school heads assess the risk of the latter. The updated guidance that you issued—it must have been about three weeks ago now—to help schools has clearly had no affect in reducing the numbers sent home either way, and neither has the test and trace programme. So, I understand, then, why you have gone for the new guidance on face coverings in communal areas in schools, but why have you taken the advice from the technical advisory group document that you received to mean that pupils should wear them in the outdoor areas of school premises?

Thank you for that, Suzy. As you have quite rightly identified, we are continuing to see a considerable period of disruption, because of the pandemic, on our education. We are working with schools to minimise that disruption as much as we can. I'm delighted that Pembrokeshire schools that were closed at the beginning of this week are now in a position to reopen. I met yesterday with the chief education officer and the chief executive of Ceredigion to understand the decision-making process that has led to the closure of schools in that particular area.

It's incredibly disappointing, isn't it, and it demonstrates very, very visibly that the choices and the actions of individuals in the community, and making poor choices, can have a devastating effect, in this case, on the sustainability of education in that particular area, and, I understand, Presiding Officer, and you would know this very well, in terms of the fire and rescue service available in that area. We all have a responsibility—each and every one of us—if we want to see schools continuing and education continuing, to do the right thing.

Now, with regards to face masks for secondary school pupils outside of the classroom area, we know that a critical element of the successful implementation of any mitigating measure is clear communication and messaging. And with this in mind, we want to do more to support our headteachers, to ensure that the messages are clear, and to minimise the taking on and taking off of masks. Therefore, the message is very clear: when you're in a classroom, you are not required to wear a face mask; if you're out of the classroom, wear a face mask.

Well, thank you for the response, but it didn't really answer my questions about why, when you're out in the fresh air, you should wear a mask. If you'd turned around to me and said that there is a lot of evidence of pupils huddling up in the schoolyard and not behaving, then maybe I would have been prepared to hear your evidence for that. But yesterday, for example, I had communication from somebody—a parent—complaining that there were 30 children outside in, well, she called it a yard, the size of a hockey pitch, and they were all being told to wear face coverings. Now that, clearly, is not a great idea. So, I was hoping to hear something about the difficulties, perhaps, that teachers were experiencing in enforcing distancing in the yard, and why they're having difficulty doing that, because I don't see why they should.

The suggestion now, of course, is that lateral flow testing is the way forward. I don't want to talk about testing in general, but one specific case has come to me. I've had sight of one school's parental consent form, asking for their child to be tested. It doesn't say whether that child would still be permitted to attend the school if consent were not to be given. So I don't want to talk about testing in general, but in terms of parental refusal to give consent, will you be leaving this decision to schools, or will you be showing the leadership on this, and making the position plain about what schools should do in those circumstances?

Certainly. And can I say to the Member, she talks about huddling—we've got a lot of huddling going on in schools. As you can imagine, we've received numerous reports from our local authorities about adults huddling together at school gates. And indeed, within the playground setting, the idea that all children are running around and keeping 2m apart, that's a lovely idea, it's a beautiful thought, but let's face it, that's not exactly what is happening. Pupils do indeed huddle together in playground or field situations. Each of our schools is different. Some are able to have enough outdoor space to keep their bubbles in unique parts of their outdoor part of their school; other schools are having to bring bubbles together in outdoor spaces. And this is another mitigating measure that we are introducing to try and minimise disruption and keep children in schools for as long as possible. All of us, even when we're outside, should look to socially distance, and if we can't socially distance, or choose not to—we all need to be wearing masks. And unfortunately, we're in a position now where we are seeing this disruption that we feel this is the appropriate test.

Lateral flow testing is an important development. We are looking to roll out lateral flow testing in our schools as a result of the Merthyr Tydfil pilot. And in that circumstance, we are not compelling anyone to take a test. They are purely voluntary, and we wouldn't force a child, or an adult, to take a lateral flow test if they did not wish to do so. But clearly, as we go through the pilot and learn the lessons for that, we will be in a better position to make policy statements when we see a greater roll-out, I hope, of that technology.

Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Siân Gwenllian.

Thank you very much. I want to start where you finished there, namely with the tests on a wide scale. I'm aware that you are doing work and considering introducing a programme on a wider scale in schools and colleges, for pupils and teachers, and I agree entirely that we do need a planned programme of tests going forward. There are tests going on in schools in the Liverpool area, and you've just talked about the pilot programme in Merthyr. Teachers' unions are, generally, in favour, I believe, and other parts of the world are holding wide-ranging tests on pupils and staff—New York, Vienna, Berlin, Nashville, Montreal. Are there any specific barriers preventing asymptomatic testing in schools in Wales? Why is it taking a little bit too much time before this is being rolled out? Will you be targeting specific areas? What will your criteria be in rolling this programme out? And what exactly is the timetable? 

Well, we're rolling out lateral flow testing in the education community as quickly as they are being made available more widely to Wales. So, all of our universities are taking part in the pilot programme, ahead of the end of the academic year, and we have now the Merthyr Tydfil programme, where we are looking to deliver lateral flow testing at school, in our high schools and in the local college, and communicating to parents who live in the Merthyr Tydfil area, but whose children attend school outside of Merthyr Tydfil, encouraging them to come forward and take part in the lateral flow testing community programme. We are looking at extending that into areas of Rhondda Cynon Taf, given that, again, that is an area of high incidence, and we are learning the lessons and the potential barriers and the difficulties of delivering this programme within the school setting. 

Can I say, having met last week with the headteachers of the high schools in Merthyr, the principal of the college and the chief education officer in Merthyr, they are all very committed to making this technology available in their schools? It's not only potentially an important part of understanding what the disease is doing in the community, but it could also help us, with the situation that Suzy Davies just referred to, in allowing children to get back to school more quickly, rather than a 14-day period of isolation, if they were deemed a contact. A daily test may allow them to keep being in school or a teacher to keep being in school, as opposed to a 14-day isolation period. So, we're looking at it in terms of not just a wider community benefit, but actually as a way of limiting disruption going forward. 

Thank you very much, and I'm sure that you'll agree the sooner the better that this programme is rolled out, especially remembering that there is some slackening going to be over the Christmas period, and that this testing will be vital in January, as we move forward. 

As well as the large-scale tests, and the wearing of masks that we discussed earlier, what further measures are you considering to keep schools open, but in a safe way? For example, better ventilation of buildings. Is there detailed guidance for that? And, can you talk about other special measures to safeguard vulnerable school staff members—the clinically vulnerable employees? Those two areas—the unions are asking for clarity on. 

And, then, there have been demands for smaller classes and a rota system in place, if cases were to increase, of course. What is your opinion on that? And, if that is going to be introduced, then, clearly, there will be a need for additional support for remote learning with more pupils at home. 

Operational guidance is available to all schools and all local education authorities, that includes reference to ventilating buildings. Each member of staff should be subject to a risk assessment. So, any vulnerabilities pertaining to that individual should be taken account of by that individual risk assessment and by the employers.

With regards to the rota system that the Member has suggested, clearly, we have asked schools and local authorities to have a number of scenarios in place that potentially could include a rota system, if that was felt to be the necessary step that was needed to take to maintain the pandemic. So, that is kept under guidance and kept under review, should it become necessary. 

Thank you very much. And, finally, may I turn to the COVID catch-up scheme? There are doubts with regard to this particular scheme. It's not very clear how the assistance is targeted, how the needs are measured, what monitoring is taking place. Now, clearly, we need to ensure that the funding is used in a purposeful way to deal with the loss of education that is certain to be happening at the moment, and is going to continue for some months. So, I asked last time that this session was held about an update on that, and I haven't received that. I think it's important for us to know exactly how this scheme is operating, and if there are any barriers, that we should know that too. 

Well, I certainly agree with the Member that the resources are spent in a purposeful way, and I have every confidence that the headteachers who are making decisions on how to spend this money, because it is for them to decide how best to use the money that has been made available to them, will also have been making decisions to ensure that the resources are spent in a purposeful way. 

With regard to data collection, we are awaiting the final returns from some individual schools, and some individual local education authorities, but I'm delighted to say to the Member that I'm very satisfied indeed that our initial targets of approximately 900 full-time equivalents has been reached. 

David, the uncertainties arising from the coronavirus pandemic are particularly challenging for children and young people with additional learning needs and their families, and those who support and care for them. I'm committed to doing everything possible to support these learners, parents and carers during this difficult time.

Thank you, Minister, for that answer. I wonder if you've had the chance to reflect on Professor Sally Holland, the children's commissioner's remarks to the Children, Young People and Education Committee earlier this month, that certainly, during lockdown, there was a huge variety of service, running from those schools offering full-time attendance or active outreach, to hubs that barely existed, and the frequency of travel arrangements breaking down so that these students were unable to get either to the school or to the hub, and that we don't see a repeat of this in any future disturbance, and that we place a high emphasis on attendance levels in special schools, because there is a lot of ground to catch up. 

Thank you, David. I think it's important to note that, unlike other jurisdictions, we did not amend any of our existing regulations and laws pertaining to services for children with additional learning needs. But I agree with you, the situation on the ground was patchy in terms of different levels of support. I'm aware of excellent practice, schools that never closed and had their students attending on a daily basis. It is exactly because of that reflection on the experiences in the first period of lockdown that, during the firebreak, all of our special schools remained open. 

Thank you, Jack. The creation of strong and inclusive schools that are committed to excellence, equity and well-being is a key objective of the national mission. Our additional learning needs reforms will ensure all learners will be able to access a high standard of education to ensure that they reach their full potential.

Can I thank the Minister for that answer? Last week, I visited Ysgol Tŷ Ffynnon in my constituency to congratulate them on becoming the first school in Wales to be awarded the 'ADHD friendly school' award from the ADHD Foundation, a really fantastic achievement. Minister, will you take this opportunity to congratulate the school, and advise on how schools across Wales can follow Ysgol Tŷ Ffynnon's lead?

Thank you, Jack, for giving me the opportunity to put on record my sincere congratulations to all of those involved at Ysgol Tŷ Ffynnon in Flintshire, which is indeed the very first school in Wales to receive this accolade. It is a testament to the hard work and the dedication of the team of that school to become the living embodiment of that promise of the national mission of fully inclusive schools that look to meet the needs of all of their children. 

I was also hugely impressed when I visited that school myself. It's an exemplar that others need to follow, because attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, ADHD, can be masked in an education environment. ADHD, or other related conditions, are not as a result of environmental issues or bad parenting. How do you therefore respond to the Flintshire constituents with children at other schools, whose e-mails in the last month alone include, 'My son was not afforded decision-making that afforded for his behaviours to be fully investigated and to be put on to our waiting list for an assessment. Instead, once again, it was determined to be a parenting issue, and not ADHD, autism or spectrum-related conditions'; and, 'I'm caring for a teenage boy with ASD and ADHD. The school have labelled us as parenting problems and reported us to social services, and CAMHS in my experience fail to provide an adequate assessment outlining the needs of the children, and openly admit they won't consider ADHD until at least seven years old. The issue I have with this is the strong genetic history of both ASD and ADHD in our family, and that the two combined present very differently to just one or the other condition on their own'?  

Well, Mark, as we've heard from Jack Sargeant, excellence in this area is achievable, and I'm very pleased to hear that you yourself have taken the opportunity to go and see that excellence for yourself. Training for professionals with regard to a range of additional learning needs is an important part of our £20 million transformation programme for ALN, and we have also commissioned an independent capacity review for neurodevelopmental services. It has already been commissioned and that will help us inform the development of further services, both inside and outside educational settings, and that review will commence early in 2021.

Thank you, David. I published 'The journey to 2022' document just last month to help schools prepare for designing and implementing the new curriculum. I intend to publish a curriculum implementation plan in early 2021 to set out the wider steps that we will take to support schools.   

I thank the Minister for that answer, but I'm sure that she will agree with me that the role of teachers is critical in the implementation of this curriculum. So, is it true, Minister, that only 30 per cent of the teachers who implemented the new curriculum trial supported it? Most of the teachers that I have spoken to say that if the curriculum is entirely driven by the four purposes, much of the content associated with traditional school subjects in the areas of learning and experience become largely redundant. If, on the other hand, teachers prioritise the areas of learning and experience, then the four purposes are unlikely to be met. So, can the Minister comment on the apparent conundrum in that matter? And, could the Minister tell me whether she is going to consult the general public with regard to the sex education element within the new curriculum?

First of all, can I suggest to the Member, if he has not done so already, to read the draft curriculum and assessment Bill? There is no conundrum at all. Teachers cannot, and schools will not be able to, prioritise individual areas of learning and experience because they have equal status within the law. With regard to consultation, I have to say again to the Member that there have been ample opportunities to comment on the White Paper that has led to the Bill, and there have been specific consultations with regard to RSE—a number of them, actually, and probably more than I would like. So, there have been plenty of opportunities for people to feed into this process.

I acknowledge that, for some teachers—especially those who have only ever taught under the principles of a national curriculum, where they have been dictated to on what they must teach, regardless of whether they feel that that is in the best interests of the children in front of them—this new curriculum could be a challenge. That's why this Government is investing record amounts in the professional development of our teachers to get them ready for the changes of the curriculum. I don't know which teachers he is meeting with, but I speak to headteachers every single week when I do this job, and I have to tell him that there is immense excitement at the prospect of the delivery of this new curriculum.

Minister, the success of the new curriculum will be heavily dependent on how well teachers and other school staff have been able to prepare for its introduction. Given that almost half an academic year was missed earlier this year, and we are now seeing whole year groups being taken out of school on a large scale—. For example, 1,000 pupils in Caerleon Comprehensive School are currently being taken out of school in whole year groups—7, 8, 9, 12 and 13—arguably unnecessarily, when other councils are using track and trace more effectively, and this is not uncommon in other parts of the south-east Wales region. What assessment have you made of missed school time on preparations for the roll-out for the new curriculum, and are you concerned about reports that some teaching unions and councils are now discussing shutting schools a week early to enable a two-week isolation period before Christmas when this Government's priority, obviously, is to keep children in school as much as possible?

Well, Laura, you are absolutely right—it is the priority of this Government to minimise the interruption to children's education in the light of this pandemic. Undoubtedly, there has been a significant impact on schools at this time, but, as Estyn has confirmed, there remains a great deal of enthusiasm and support for curriculum reform, and they also advise that important gains have been made by schools in their planning and provision of learning. Now, clearly, you're also correct to say that a lot of this depends on the skills of our teachers, and certainly the professional development programme has had to be delivered in a different way than perhaps we had initially expected. But, as I said, those days when professional learning was delivered by everybody trekking to Cardiff to sit in a lecture theatre, to listen to the sage on the stage, and then they promptly went back to the schools and ignored everything that they'd heard that day—. We have to do things differently, and we are doing things differently, and actually, again, speaking to headteachers, the fact that we've had to move all of our meetings online means that they are now able to collaborate in a way that keeps them in their schools and allows them to connect more readily, and because we've taken some of the paperwork off schools at this time, it is giving them an opportunity to really engage in the new curriculum.

Minister, I believe that the plans for every child in Wales to have a mandatory right to developmentally appropriate RSE is one of the great strengths of the new curriculum. Will you take this opportunity to agree with me that having that provision is not just fundamental for children's rights, but is absolutely crucial in order to ensure that children and young people can keep themselves safe, no matter how old they are?

Lynne, I'm so glad that you've raised that question today of all days, White Ribbon Day, where hopefully everyone in this Chamber unites in their determination to defeat violence against women. I'm sure all of us today would want to remember those women whose lives have been lost to horrendous, horrendous violence and those women who continue to live with the consequences of that violence day in, day out. And that is precisely, precisely why we need to ensure that every child—every child—has the right to relationship education within our curriculum. It is an integral part of how we can ensure that those purposes of the curriculum, including healthy confident individuals who are ready to be active citizens and to live happy and successful lives, will be achieved. Eating into that and saying that that provision should only be available to some children, I think, is an abdication of our duty.

Thank you, Leanne. I continue to be guided by the latest scientific and medical advice. We have recently agreed with higher education institutions across Wales the opportunity of piloting asymptomatic testing of students and staff, and we also intend to offer testing to students and staff in secondary schools, as well as the local college, as part of the mass testing programme in Merthyr Tydfil.

I welcome the recommendation that all schoolchildren, college students, teachers and staff should be tested for coronavirus given the high numbers of people that are asymptomatic, especially in the younger age groups. This should have been a key priority when the schools reopened before the summer. Now, the current situation is not sustainable. As one teacher told me, just last week, 'We are expected to adhere to COVID guidelines, which is absolutely fine, but we have not been offered any tests and I'm still waiting for the magic antibody test that we were promised. I've been teaching for 12 years and never have I felt so pissed off, so exhausted, so physically and emotionally drained. I'm trying to hold it all together for my kids, but I honestly can't go on much longer. I'm at breaking point.' So many teachers are fearful and anxious for their own safety. Now, I heard what you said earlier about Merthyr and the hopes that you had for rolling out mass testing in Cynon, but will you give teachers and parents in my area concrete answers and reassurances about when mass testing and regular testing in schools is likely to be available in Rhondda Cynon Taf and in other high-incidence areas?

Thank you, Leanne. I recognise the immense strain that teachers have been under since schools returned to full opening in September, just like the immense strain that all of our public sector workers have faced. I want to say that evidence to date from the latest Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies paper and the technical advisory cell paper says that, when looking at the teaching population as part of the wider population, teaching is regarded by the Office for National Statistics to be a low-risk profession. Although we have got incidents of transmission within a school setting, especially from staff to staff, that is a concern, and that's why it is really, really important that senior management teams and the school governors in particular schools ensure that all steps are taken to adequately follow the operational guidance that has been made available.

With regard to antibody testing, antibody testing was carried out amongst a significantly appropriate sample of teachers, especially those who had been working in hub scenarios, remembering, of course, that 500 schools in Wales never closed. So, that was done and those individuals have been followed up with further antibody testing to help us understand the epidemiology behind the disease.

It is early days for lateral flow testing. We need to ensure that the pilot in Merthyr Tydfil in the schools and colleges goes well there. There are active discussions going on at the moment to move that pilot into areas of the RCT area, and as soon as we're in a position to be able to work with our schools' local education authorities to carry out further lateral flow testing as a way of protecting and providing reassurance and minimising disruption, then I will come back to the Chamber and give full details of that. We're not in a position to do that as of today.

Thank you, Minister. I fully appreciate the measures that have been taken to suppress the spread of COVID in schools and how difficult it is for headteachers and staff to keep bubbles even as small as whole year groups. However, in the last few weeks, we are starting to see this problem across larger secondary schools in particular, and in my constituency there have been a number of schools where one positive case is leading to hundreds of children having to self-isolate for two weeks. In one case, a year group returned for two days only for another case to be identified and isolation having to start again. I've had an increasing amount of parents getting in touch who are understandably concerned about the impact that rolling isolation periods are having on their children's welfare and education. I completely understand the risk posed by transmission across year group bubbles, and the hopes for lateral flow testing, which would help. However, the current situation is very worrying when the cases are at current levels and disruption is increasing. What plans does the Welsh Government have to address this as quickly as possible?

Well, Jayne, the best thing we can do to minimise disruption to education is to get community transmission levels down in all of our communities, because it is community transmission that is leading to cases in our schools and the disruption that you discussed. We are working and providing best advice and examples of good practice to all schools with regard to bubbling and what constitutes a close contact, and therefore to try and reduce the number of children who are asked to self-isolate for these periods. Sometimes it is dependent on the advice that individual local TTP teams are giving to headteachers, and sometimes it is down to the way in which schools have operated their bubbles. We are, as I said, providing ongoing advice to schools and to local TTP teams to minimise the numbers of children who are asked to stay at home.

Lateral flow testing does indeed offer us that hope of minimising that disruption, especially to those who are regarded as contacts and do not have symptoms themselves, as a possible way of administering a daily test over a number of days that then would allow them to go into school. But as I said, the TAC paper asks us to explore the viability of offering an asymptomatic testing programme. It's not simple, and, as I said, we're keen to learn the lessons from both our universities and our schools before we can roll that out further.

Thank you, Helen Mary. All our schools have faced, as I said, unprecedented challenges this year, and many in mid and west Wales, though, are making good use of the new curriculum guide and thinking about their future curriculum developments. I understand schools' access to support and professional learning is increasing in the region as we move towards 2022.

I'm grateful to you, Minister, for your answer. I've been contacted by a young teacher from Llanelli, in my region, who's actually really enthusiastic about the new curriculum. The phrase she used is, 'I can't wait.' But she is very concerned about not being properly prepared, and, at the same time, concerned about being—'distracted' is the wrong word, but having to work so much harder with pupils, especially when you're having to deal with blended learning, young people who are having to catch up. She's really worried that, if we proceed on the timetable as it stands, she won't be ready to deliver the new curriculum in the way that she wants to at the same time as preparing and providing support for her young people, many of whom—. There are emotional issues; she's a form teacher, so she's very involved in that support. She's asked me to raise this with you directly, Minister, not because she wants in any way to undermine the new curriculum process, but because she really, really wants to get it right, and she's not sure, as a relatively young professional, that she can do both at once. What would you like me to tell her?

Well, first of all, can I ask you to tell her 'thank you' for what she is doing at the moment? Our NHS and social care staff have done tremendous work for us during this pandemic, and people often forget that our teaching and educational professionals and our youth workers are also on the front line. So, please tell her 'thank you' for me and 'thank you' for her enthusiasm and the promise that the new curriculum brings. And her worry is, I think, characteristic of the professionalism we have within the education workforce in Wales. They want to get it right and they are frightened of the consequences if they don't, because they do not want to let their pupils down. As I said, there is financial support for professional development available. We have provided additional guidance just last month to schools to begin to think about how they can plan their programme going forward. There will be further advice and support available in the new year, and we will continue to keep the timescale of the curriculum implementation under review. Because the last thing any of us want, including myself, alongside this dedicated professional, is not to get it right. This is a once-in-a-lifetime chance, the first time ever our nation will have its own curriculum, and we all, collectively, want to get it right.

Minister, in evidence to the Children, Young People and Education Committee on the Curriculum and Assessment (Wales) Bill, Mind Cymru rightly said that the new curriculum provides a unique opportunity to place the mental health of all our young people at the heart of their learning and school experience. Given that the pandemic has also had such an impact on children's mental health, can you tell us how the Welsh Government will now be prioritising mental health and well-being in the new curriculum?

Absolutely, Paul, and, indeed, this precise point that you made, that, now more than ever, attention to children's well-being, both their physical and their mental well-being, is at the forefront, and that's why many schools are anxious to continue to pursue the new curriculum, because, under our area of learning and experience entitled 'health and well-being', and the 'what matters' statements that lie beneath, that gives us a huge amount of scope to deliver a curriculum to support children's mental health and well-being, for an understanding of what impacts upon their mental health and well-being, and to develop a culture of help-seeking behaviour if people are struggling and to break down some of the stigma and barriers that in the past, perhaps, have stopped children and young people coming forward. But, of course, lessons themselves are not enough, and that's why we have a whole-school approach to mental health and well-being, where the mental health and well-being of everybody in that school environment, including the staff who work there, needs to be a key consideration. Getting well-being right is the crucial first building block to making learning stick and to having a really successful school. So, it's about the curriculum, but it's also about the environment that we surround our children and our workforce with that promotes well-being and supports people if they begin to struggle.

Thank you very much, Minister. Thank you.

The next item on the agenda are questions to the Senedd Commission, and the first question this afternoon will be answered by Commissioner Suzy Davies. Andrew R.T. Davies.

Thank you very much, Andrew. Annual leave is actively managed to ensure that staff take as much leave as possible for their own well-being and for the resilience of continuity of business at the Senedd. However, as you might imagine, since March this year, the impact of the pandemic has significantly increased demand on staff, including through recess, and the opportunity for many of those to take leave has been greatly reduced.

An international accounting standard requires the Commission to account for the cost of unused leave entitlement accrued by Commission staff as of 31 March, and this is an accounting requirement, not an additional cash requirement on the Welsh consolidated fund. And so, in short, while the Commission is considering the requirement for a supplementary budget for 2020-21 to cover this increase as of 7 December, it has no cash impact.

Thank you for that answer, Commissioner, and I'd endorse the comments that you've put on record—how important it is for the welfare of staff to take their leave, and, importantly, the hard work and dedication that all the staff across the Commission have put in to supporting Members in these very difficult and trying times. I was just taken by the statements you made at the time of the budget, when it was laid, that this was an issue that the Commission were having to deal with, and I'd be grateful if you could give an indication whether you'd be able, as Commissioner, to make Members aware of the scale of the amount of accrued holiday time that has to be worked through, because, obviously, that will, ultimately, at some point, have an impact on the ability to support Members in their role, but, importantly, for Members to understand the pressures that staff are facing when they haven't been able to take the time that they've built up over the pandemic.

Thank you, Andrew. Yes, and we can give that commitment. In laying a supplementary budget, obviously, we'd have to explain the reason for doing so, and that would explain the level of accrued leave and the value that's been attached to that. But can I just thank you for taking this opportunity for sharing your congratulations, if you like, with members of the Commission and their staff, who have, indeed, gone over and above, as indeed we have as Members, during a very difficult time to make sure that we serve the people of Wales well? Thank you.

Thank you. Question 2 will be answered by the Commissioner David Rowlands. Mike Hedges.

The Senedd is a naturally ventilated building, using automated opening windows for the open spaces and a ducted fresh air system for the Siambr, committee rooms and other enclosed spaces. Tŷ Hywel has a ventilation system that brings in fresh air to internal areas and a separate system that extracts internal air to the outside. Tŷ Hywel also has opening windows for ventilation.

I'm sure Tŷ Hywel has got opening windows somewhere; I'm not convinced that it's in every room that Tŷ Hywel has those opening windows. What I would like to suggest is that the Commission ensured that all windows open so that people could open windows and we could not have the situation that used to be called sick building syndrome, where somebody sneezes on one floor and that is circulated around the building, but we actually ensure that the windows open and people can get fresh air coming in and stale air going out.

Well, actually, we have commissioned some things with regard to replacing the windows in the Senedd throughout Tŷ Hywel, and I'm sure that that matter will be taken into account when that actually happens. But I think it's important to note, at this particular time, that, since we've come back in September, estate occupancy has remained low during the pandemic, with just approximately 15 per cent of people being here on business days. This has ensured that we are able to effectively comply with social distancing regulations and other systems in place to prevent the transmission of COVID in the line of best practice and guidance.

Thank you. The following questions will be answered by the Llywydd. Question 3, Janet Finch-Saunders.

Thank you for that question. The pandemic has made it challenging to engage with children and young people, particularly through schools and youth groups. Regulations make it impossible for us to host schools in the Senedd or to visit those schools. So, for part of the year, the team focused on creating resources that education professionals can use themselves. However, since October, we have seen an increasing demand for virtual schools sessions, and we will be providing more of those over the coming weeks. We have supported the Welsh Youth Parliament in moving its activities online. They published reports on litter and plastic waste, and emotional and mental health support, and I chaired their latest Plenary Zoom meeting on 14 November. As part of our GWLAD series of events, we've held a virtual meeting looking at the future for young people in Wales and their experiences of the pandemic. Commission staff have worked with young people and education professionals to co-produce a range of materials to promote votes at 16 ahead of the Senedd elections in May.

Diolch, Llywydd. You'll be aware that I have raised concerns before about external engagement with our constituents, and indeed our younger members of our community, without the participation and indeed involvement of us as elected Members, and that has continued. However, in light of the pandemic, I do welcome the fact that the Senedd is offering online sessions to help young people to better understand how our democracy works, and some of the sessions sound excellent, such as 'Introduction to your Senedd', 'How to be an active citizen', and 'Our Senedd'. The 'My first vote' sessions, focusing on the upcoming Senedd elections in May, where 16 and 17-year-olds will be able to vote for the first time in Wales, sound really good sessions, and whilst I acknowledge there is a need for education ahead of this—I think it's overdue, really—I struggle to see how this can be achieved effectively without reference to and inclusion of all our political parties in Wales, and I would like to see Members involved. So, could you clarify to me whether the education officers informing these students participating in the 'My first vote' session—? How are they going to be educated on the different political parties and indeed the political system? Also, what intentions are there of the Senedd to assist already-elected Members to be involved in some of these sessions? Diolch.

Well, I'm sure you'd agree with me, Janet Finch-Saunders, that, in the run-up to the election, a period now after Christmas that we all face, it's important that the sessions that the Commission holds, and that schools and others hold in schools, are politically balanced and include all political representation for that purpose. That's why the Senedd, in designing our and the Welsh Government resources available to young people, working with the Electoral Commission as well, ensure that there is a fair political balance in the debate leading up to elections. We all know as individual Members, leading up to elections, that we're very often invited into schools to hold political hustings, and we hope that that possibility will happen at a local level as well. That's a matter for the schools to initiate their own discussion on, but I do hope that schools will be in a position to do that. That may well be in a virtual context, still, by May of next year, but ensuring that our young people have all the information that they need to be able to be inspired to and practically to cast their vote in May of next year is something I think that unites us all as elected Members, present and future.

Whilst the public can't access meetings at the moment, we've made every effort to ensure the work of the Senedd is more accessible than ever via other means. Senedd proceedings are televised and are promoted across a range of channels. We provide a stream to news outlets, and First Minister's questions is often broadcast on BBC2 Wales and BBC Parliament. We also stream FMQs live on the Senedd's Twitter accounts, and ensure that footage of FMQs can be watched with signing on the following day. The Members' Research Service continues to provide high-quality blogs to explain key issues in upcoming Senedd debates, in order to make the debates more accessible, and Commission staff have been developing new ways to engage virtually with the public. This includes new virtual tours of the building, virtual exhibitions, and online introduction to the Senedd sessions, which were launched earlier this month.

I thank the Llywydd for that answer, and I commend the innovation, which I think it's fair to say we've had throughout the period of Welsh devolution, and certainly in this fifth Senedd. And I do urge that we build on this success, because we all want, as we've heard in previous answers, active citizenship. And it seems to me that, as well as watching our proceedings, there are more opportunities by virtual means to allow citizens to take part to some extent in a manner that is not, perhaps, as intimidating as turning up and giving evidence in front, formally, of a committee, for instance. And there's a lot we've done, but in the sixth Senedd, there's probably a lot more we could do, and I would commend whoever is in charge then to look at this very carefully. 

Well, most definitely, I think that the experience of the last six months, both in terms of how we've undertaken our sessions here as a Chamber, Senedd proceedings, but most importantly in the work of our committees, has enabled the use of a virtual setting to enable a wider, more diverse array, a more geographically dispersed array, of witnesses and evidence sessions, and has possibly broken down some of those both physical and other kind of barriers that people have to giving evidence or taking part in our committee proceedings. So I very much hope, and in my discussions with the Chairs' Forum, we've all been very aware of the very many positive experiences that we've had in a more virtual setting over the past six months, and we must not lose sight of those as we think about how we construct the business for the next Senedd.

Thank you. The Welsh Youth Parliament has had a busy autumn, as Members near the end of their term of office. The Commission supported Welsh Youth Parliament Members to produce and publish two reports based on the work of their committees. One looked at emotional and mental health support, and the other at litter and plastic waste.

The final meeting of the Welsh Youth Parliament was held on 14 November, and I chaired that session. And it also included contributions from Welsh Government Ministers, Senedd committee Chairs and the commissioners for future generations and young people. In addition to that, Members of the Youth Parliament have been supported to hold scrutiny sessions with a range of Ministers, including the First Minister and the health Minister to share their experiences of coronavirus during the summer. And more recently, some Members held a session with the Minister for Education to share their views, and the views of other young people, prior to the Minister’s announcement on exams. And there will be a further session where some youth parliamentarians will meet with the First Minister next Monday evening. 

I know that the Welsh Youth Parliament will continue for a few months yet, but I'd like to pay tribute to the hard work of the young Members and to thank parents, schools, partner organisations and our own staff for helping to bring the three strands of their work to a successful conclusion.

I'm very grateful to the Llywydd for that response. 

Thank you so much for that answer. I think we must all be very proud of the young people and what they've achieved in these very difficult circumstances, and I think we'd all want to thank the staff very much who've been able to enable them to continue their work in exactly the same way, of course, that the staff of the Senedd have enabled us to continue our work. 

I have had some concerns, though, about the emotional well-being of the young Members. Their experience of being young Members of the Senedd won't have been what they expected. So can you confirm, Llywydd, that members of staff here have been in touch with those professionals—youth workers and others—supporting those young people just to make sure that they're okay? And further to that, as you said, the first term has come to an end, it's been incredibly productive, they've done a huge amount of work and I'm sure we'd all like to thank them. Can you tell us a bit more about what steps are in place to prepare for the next elections for our next young parliamentarians? That may potentially be done, of course, in a challenging time where schools and youth groups have got an awful lot on their plate that they wouldn't normally be having to deal with. So, I'm hoping that there is thought and planning going into how we can ensure that our next Youth Parliament is as effective as this one has been.

Well, it's been one of the highlights of my time as Llywydd to chair the events and the meetings of the Welsh Youth Parliament. They are inspiring young people who have wanted to represent their fellow young people and to make sure that the views of young people in Wales have an influence on us as a Senedd, and it's been an inspiring journey for them and, most definitely, for me as well. So, in planning for the future of that, we learn from the experience of the first Senedd, and we will put together a legacy report, as we do for many aspects of the work of the Senedd, to take forward into the next Senedd and into preparing to elect the next Youth Parliament in the autumn of next year.

As you say, the young people who are 60 Members of our Youth Parliament have experienced the pandemic, as all have, and they've had their own individual experiences of that. Our Commission staff, who have worked with them on the committees and in the Senedd in the Welsh Youth Parliament itself, have been very conscious of the fact that they come from different circumstances—each and every one of them—and they have been supported, as much as we can, in enabling them to carry on their work in whatever way they could as youth parliamentarians. Therefore, it's been an incredibly positive experience, and I hope it has been for the 60 Members who were elected. They were trailblazers and pioneers, and we will soon be electing our second Youth Parliament, and I think we've done a good job as a Senedd in supporting our young people in allowing them to have a voice, but in particular, as well, in listening to what they had to say.  

And the final question of this session is question 6, Alun Davies.

The Senedd Commission has no such plans at the moment. Unless provision is made to the contrary, section 3 of the Government of Wales Act 2006 prescribes that ordinary general elections of the Senedd must be held on the first Thursday in May, five years following the last Senedd elections. As such, the next Senedd election is due in May 2021.

I'm grateful to the Presiding Officer for that answer. I think she will agree with me that we need more democracy and not less democracy in Wales, and the root of the change to our electoral cycle, of course, lies in the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011, and that dreadful piece of legislation has now been on the statute book for a decade. In that decade, of course, we've had three UK general elections, which renders it utterly meaningless, and the one part of the Conservative manifesto that I welcomed last year was its commitment to repeal the Fixed-term Parliaments Act. That removes, of course, the justification for changing our electoral cycles, and it removes the need to do so.

Many of us here feel that this place has sat for too long. We need an election here, and we need an electoral cycle that provides for regular elections every four years, as was envisaged by the framers of the Welsh constitution. It is important, therefore, that those people seeking election next May understand that that Parliament should only sit for four and not five years. I would be grateful if a commission would work with Members on all sides of the Chamber—I can see particularly noisy support from the Conservative benches, which I welcome by the way—and ensure that we're able to frame legislation to ensure that we return to a four-year cycle for this Parliament, for all Welsh elections, as soon as the Fixed-term Parliaments Act is rightly thrown in the bin of history.

Thank you for the supplementary question. I think we can all breathe a sigh of relief that this Senedd wasn't a four-year term, otherwise we would have had to plan an election for May of 2020, and I'm not sure whether we would have been able to do that at that time, or it would have diverted our energies at that time from something else that was equally as important, if not more important, to do.

In terms of going forward, as I said in my response, it requires legislative change to change to a four-year-period term. I hear this afternoon, and I've seen many references made by Members to the fact that some would prefer a four-year term rather than a five-year term, and I've heard you, Alun Davies, say it before. Equally, I'm open to that idea, certainly, myself. But, it will be for the political process within this Senedd and within the next Senedd to undertake that piece of legislation if seen necessary. I look forward, then, to reading the manifestos of all political parties to see if any are putting it in their manifestos for Government and for the Senedd election next May.

Diolch, Llywydd.

Item 4 was topical questions, and no topical questions have been accepted.

Therefore, we move to item 5, which is the 90-second statements. The first this week is Vikki Howells.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. November 2020 marks the centenary of the birth of Elaine Morgan. Elaine, born into a mining family, achieved the truly remarkable during a long, varied and glittering career. She won a scholarship to Oxford University, a phenomenal achievement for a miner's daughter in the 1930s. After graduation, Elaine worked for the WEA, and then married Morien, who had fought against the fascists in Spain. Three sons were raised from the family home in Mountain Ash, as Elaine embarked on a career as a writer for the BBC. She wrote acclaimed adaptations of—amongst others—How Green was my Valley, The Life and Times of Lloyd George, and Testament of Youth. For the latter, she won a Writer of the Year award, to go with numerous BAFTAs, Writers' Guild Awards, and even the odd international trophy. Elaine also developed and promoted the revolutionary aquatic ape theory, publishing many books on the subject and winning prizes for her contribution to scientific knowledge. In her 80s, Elaine took on a new challenge as an award-winning columnist for the Western Mail.

Elaine died in 2013. Seven years on, there is a new biography of Elaine, recently written by local historian Dr Daryl Leeworthy, and plans to erect a statue in her honour in Mountain Ash, in the heart of the Valleys whose communities she captured so vividly. As journalist Carolyn Hitt observed, Elaine changed the world from her desk in Mountain Ash.

I rise to celebrate volunteers. As the Member for Ynys Môn and as a Senedd Commissioner, I am very pleased that the Senedd is creating a gallery of COVID heroes who have worked tirelessly for their communities this year. Every Member has been able to select who should be represented in the gallery, and I asked the people of Môn to help choose. With over 40 nominations, it’s clear how much good work has been done.

Congratulations to the three nominees who came to the fore: the Gwalchmai Hotel, the Love Amlwch group and Chippy Chippy in Holyhead. But, I am just as proud of the work done by Stayce Weeder and Matthew Southgate in helping to distribute PPE; Gwyneth Parry and the Rhosneigr volunteers; Eirian Huws and Bryngwran community group; and Steve MacVicar and the Seiriol Good Turn Scheme. Llinos Wyn in Amlwch; Lisa Hall and the Llangaffo volunteers; Roy Fyles and Môn food bank; Julie Parkinson, Vaughan and Louise Evans, Pam Gannon and Delyth Jones-Williams from Llanfairpwll Scouts; and Sophie Mae Roe, seven years of age, for her fundraising.

There were health and care workers: paramedics in Amlwch; Plas Garnedd home; Dr Nia Allen from Llanfairpwll; Dr Claire Kilduff from Ysbyty Gwynedd. The organisations Neges, Medrwn Môn, Menter Môn, the county council, Môn CF, Citizens Advice, Môn Youth Services and COVID-19 Mutual Aid Môn.

Businesses: Dylan’s; Mojo’s; Catch 22; The Codmother, Niwbwrch; the Holland Hotel in Llanfachraeth; Raymond Jones the butcher’s; Blas Mwy at the Black Lion; the Oyster Catcher; Siop Elis and Beaumaris Spar; as well as Anglesey Outdoors for providing accommodation to key workers. To Môn FM; the Côr-ona Facebook group; Môn gymnastics club; and Helen Barton school of dance, your work is appreciated. And, finally, to postman Ben Williams, who gladdened hearts with his fancy dress. Thank you.

Thank you to everyone in Môn. But, on behalf of everyone at the Senedd, thank you to everyone across Wales for showing that we are a nation of allies.

From 30 November to 6 December, we celebrate Electrical Safety Week Wales. The Electrical Safety First charity are the only charity working in Wales who are dedicated to reducing the number of injuries and deaths caused by electricity. They use Electrical Safety Week to promote electrical fire safety in the home, raising awareness that over half of all accidental house fires are caused by electricity.

This year, COVID-19 presents new challenges for electrical safety. There is evidence that COVID concerns are pushing Welsh consumers away from the high street and onto online marketplaces, risking dangerous gifts. New research from Electrical Safety First suggests that 57 per cent of Welsh residents will be shopping online this year, and the majority of these people said they were planning to shop online because they believed these websites are safer than going to the high street during the pandemic. However, Electrical Safety First is concerned that consumers are simply replacing one risk with another, as multiple investigations for the charity have unearthed dangerous electrical products for sale via third parties on these sites, with Electrical Safety First investigations repeatedly finding unsafe electricals for sale on sites including Amazon Marketplace, eBay, Wish.com and others. Repeated calls for online marketplaces to take responsibility for the products sold has not yet yielded significant action. So, the charity is urging consumers to reduce their chances of buying dangerous items by sticking to the stores and websites of well-known and trusted manufacturers and retailers, such as those on our high streets. So, in Electrical Safety Week, ask Santa to bring you safe electrical gifts this year—ho, ho, ho!

Jan Morris led an extraordinary life—an explorer who opened windows onto other worlds with her writing, a pioneer who traversed new terrain and opened doors of possibility. So many of us will be familiar with her evocative books about Venice and Trieste, but it is her magnificent work The Matter of Wales that led readers to discover the hidden treasures of our own nation, her despairs and defiances. Writing when this Senedd was first founded, Jan invites us to capture a glimpse of this country on the brink of her new fulfilment, with place and people joined together.

Wales was a community for Jan—a community brought together by tragedy and by hope. In an article written in 2011 to mourn the lives lost in the Gleision colliery, she said that her eyes were full of tears, as she extended her love from one end of Wales to the other—from Llanystumdwy near the Dwyfor river to unknown friends who were mourning in the Swansea valley. That mourning for Jan Morris is felt across Wales—this incredible woman, who broke the news to the world that Edmund Hillary had reached Everest base camp. Now, in the words of her son Twm, she has started her greatest journey. May you rest in peace, Jan, from one end of Wales to the other—from base camp to the top of the mountain.

Thank you. We'll now suspend proceedings to allow changeovers in the Chamber. If you're leaving the Chamber, please do so promptly. The bell will be rung two minutes before we restart our proceedings. Thank you.

That bring us to our next item, a debate on a Member's legislative proposal, a deposit-return scheme and waste reduction Bill. I call on Janet Finch-Saunders to move the motion. 

Diolch, Llywydd. In moving this legislative proposal, I would like to thank my north Wales colleague Llyr Gruffydd for supporting this.

Last year, Sir David Attenborough described plastic pollution as an unfolding catastrophe. He, of course, is quite right, as we can and should be doing more to avert the problem facing us. It is estimated that, currently, only 77 per cent of glass bottles, 66 per cent of aluminium cans and 65 per cent of plastic drink bottles are recycled. In fact, littering is a Wales-wide menace. Between July 2019 and June 2020, there were 1,034 instances of fly-tipping across Monmouthshire, 2,281 across Caerphilly and 2,816 across Rhondda Cynon Taf.

Plastic is the major material in our pollution problem. Bottle caps and lids are now within the top five items found on Welsh beaches, and analysis of the litter pick I held quite recently with the Marine Conservation Society found that 55.9 per cent of the items picked were made of either plastic or polystyrene. The vast majority, of course, were bottles and on-the-go food items. We can tackle this by introducing a deposit-return scheme. Many of the Members here have discussed this and said they've wanted this along the way, but here we are now still talking about it and still wanting it.

In fact, Scotland is leading the way, as a DRS will be introduced there from 1 July 2022. And I know that Welsh Labour are interested, because a DRS formed part of the consultation on 'Beyond Recycling', which did highlight some concerns such as alleged ineffective applicability in Wales, the potential carbon footprint from establishing a DRS, and impacts on our local authorities reaching recycling targets. But they do not justify any further delay.

This DRS could actually support local authorities in tackling fly-tipping. Scotland's Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform Committee found that the benefits from collection efficiency and reduced costs for disposal of materials outweigh the costs of a DRS on local authorities. And in South Australia, DRS made kerbside recycling more profitable. So, there would be major benefits to our environment. Zero Waste Scotland stated that Scotland's scheme will cut emissions by the equivalent of around 4 million tonnes of carbon dioxide over the next 25 years. Making aluminium cans from old ones uses one twelfth of the energy utilised in production from raw material, 315 kg of carbon dioxide is saved per tonne of glass recycled, and even a Welsh Government survey highlighted that three quarters of adults support the idea of a DRS, and they are right to do so. The scheme could reduce the total amount of litter in Wales by up to a third.

Now, I appreciate the Welsh Government is working on a joint basis with England and Northern Ireland, and that preparations are being made for a second consultation. But do we need another one just to take this DRS forward in Wales, which we've all agreed on previously? Members will know that this item has been a recurring point since 2016—in fact, before—and should note the success of the schemes elsewhere, such as Finland, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Denmark and Croatia. Iceland had a 90 per cent return rate in 2014; Germany 98 per cent in 2016; and Lithuania, 92 per cent in 2017.

So, my proposal aims to reflect another challenge of our time: personal protective equipment. We needed it, but we've certainly not needed the waste from it. Latex gloves take up to 100 years to biodegrade, yet worldwide, over 80 million gloves are needed by the COVID health response teams each month. There is room for innovation, and Meditech Gloves and Cranfield University have developed a natural latex, which would only take a couple of weeks to biodegrade. TerraCycle regulated waste have created a recycling programme to keep the environment PPE-free, and a Swansea-led team are developing a novel process called photoreforming, which uses sunlight to convert non-recyclable waste into clean hydrogen fuel. 

Now, I do know that the Welsh Government are supportive of the Swansea scheme, but we need to do more to harness such innovation, especially now that we are seeing more gloves, masks and sanitiser bottles decorating our environment. I also share Dŵr Cymru's concerns about the disposal of single use, plastic wet wipes, which contribute to around 2,000 sewer blockages every month. Yes, 2,000 every month. Welsh Government should include wipes in the list of items to be banned. We need decisive action to ensure Wales is zero waste by 2050, and we need legislation that shows that this Parliament responds promptly to public demands and the evolving climate crisis, hence my proposal to establish a duty on the Welsh Government to lay an annual report. 

Llywydd, Senedd Members, I opened by referring to Sir David Attenborough, and will close with his remarks that he said only last year:

'It is high time we turn our attention fully to one of the most pressing problems of today'—

and that is—

'averting the plastic pollution crisis, not only for the health of our planet, but for the well-being of people around the world.'

We all now need to act on his calls. And I have shown today that there is more we can and should be doing now in Wales to help avert the current crisis. Thank you. Diolch yn fawr. 

I've supported this legislation proposal for two reasons. Firstly, I agree there's been an unacceptable delay in introducing action on this agenda, but also, I want Wales to go further than what is being proposed. It has been a big frustration, really. The Welsh Government has talked the talk for a number of years but, really, it isn't walking the walk. The Government has been talking about this for over a decade. I was elected in 2011, and at that time there was talk of action on a deposit-return scheme. Nearly a decade later, we're still waiting for those interventions to materialise.

Now, I understand the Government's wish to work in tandem with the UK Government, but, of course, it has meant severe delays and procrastination. I hold both the Welsh and the UK Governments equally culpable for the failure to act sooner. Now, we know from recent experiences, of course, that when Wales goes its own way, we very often can do much better. Scotland, as we've heard, has ploughed its own furrow on this, and it already has detailed plans in place for 2022, with set targets for 2025. So, why wait for Westminster, I say.

A deposit-return scheme, among other things, was a clear commitment in Plaid Cymru's manifesto in the 2016 election, and had we formed the Government, I'm convinced that we would already have a scheme in place. But, Labour's decision to hitch its wagon to the Tories in Westminster on this has clearly held us back. Now, Plaid Cymru has been consistently clear on our commitment to reducing waste. We want to place Wales at the forefront of the circular economy, and we want to ensure a zero-waste Wales by 2026, through a combination of legislation, policy initiatives such as the deposit-return scheme, of course, extended producer responsibility, which we're still talking about in the Senedd, and the use of planning laws, levies, and tax-making powers, et cetera, et cetera.

We know that the benefits of a deposit-return scheme are clear, as we've already heard. Drinks bottles, cans and lids contribute to around 10 per cent of all rubbish, and evidence shows that a deposit-return scheme is the best way of reducing that kind of waste and, of course, to increase levels of quality recycling. Now, last year, 45 countries around the world had already adopted this system. Norway and Australia have been doing it for many, many years, with the proven results becoming apparent very soon after rolling it out to the public.

Research from WRAP Cymru estimates that 400,000 tonnes of plastic waste is generated in Wales every year, of which around two-thirds is packaging waste. As we've heard, you can add to that now the new, emerging epidemic of PPE waste, especially face masks and gloves. I also joined the Marine Conservation Society recently for a beach clean, where it became immediately evident that this is now a huge problem that is going to haunt our environment for many, many years to come.

So, we all know what needs to be done. It's just a case of getting on and doing it. Instead of spending another decade talking about reducing waste, and merely aspiring to a waste-free Wales, we need concrete action on recycling and waste reduction. The Welsh Government should, at the very least, in responding to this debate, recognise that the measures that have been talked about for so long should already be in place. And, of course, in that respect, this Government has certainly failed our environment.

Can I say how much I welcome this proposal from Janet Finch-Saunders? I agreed with every element of the contribution that she made in introducing this debate this afternoon. I won't seek to repeat her comments and observations. I also agreed with the contribution from Llyr as well. He's absolutely right. If there's anything we've learnt over the last few years, it's: why wait for Westminster? We know they will let us down. We learnt that earlier today yet again.

The management of our waste is absolutely critical if we are to deliver on our ambitions for future generations, but also deliver on the vision that we have for our communities, our towns, our villages, our country and our planet. We have all witnessed the heartbreaking scenes of pollution, from the depths of the ocean to—as we've learnt in the last week—the very heights of Everest, where plastics are polluting the planet and polluting and destroying our wildlife.

We have to accept responsibility for it. We can't simply say, 'We'll wait for the Tories to do something', although, in this case, I'm glad that a Conservative is doing so. And, we can't simply say that this isn't our responsibility. We have to act ourselves. But, I want us to go further than what is being proposed this afternoon. I want to see a clean Wales Bill introduced in the next Parliament that does include—and rooted in the deposit-return scheme that is being proposed this afternoon—legislation on producer responsibility, which has to be at the heart of what we want to see, not only in cleaning up our own country, but also delivering a circular economy.

But there are other wider issues as well. We need to ensure that we outlaw the export of municipal waste from the United Kingdom and that no Welsh municipal waste finds its way into the oceans of this planet. It isn't good enough for us to pat ourselves on the back, here in this Chamber and elsewhere, saying that we have high recycling rates, saying that we're very good at managing waste, knowing all the time that we are exporting too much of that waste to other parts of the world. We must outlaw that completely.

Finally, the point that Janet Finch-Saunders and Llyr Gruffydd ended on is that of fly-tipping. This is something that affects my constituency, my community, and affects every constituency and community in this country. It is heartbreaking to walk on some of the most beautiful countryside in this country and to see the impact of fly-tipping. I have spoken to farmers in my own constituency who are heartbroken at what they're seeing. I talk to people who walk the hills around Blaenau Gwent every week of the year clearing the rubbish from there. It is clear to me that the current statutory frameworks that we have in place to outlaw fly-tipping are ineffective and not delivering the response that we require. So, we do need to look again at the statutory framework around fly-tipping. We need to increase the fines, and we need to ensure that we are able to deliver the sort of country to future generations that we all want to see. So, I very much agree and commend and will support the legislative proposal this afternoon.

I will be supporting Janet Finch-Saunders and Llyr's proposals this afternoon. There is no doubt that we are all aware of the scourge of discarded plastic bottles and cans that litter our streets and are all too often found in some of our most beautiful, rural and seaside settings. I believe that the amount of such litter would be drastically reduced by the introduction of a deposit-return scheme, particularly with regard to plastic bottles and cans. However, the amount of deposit paid is critical to its success. People, particularly the young, will not bother to return these items for, say, 5p. The deposit return must be in the region of 25p for the scheme to be successful. Those of us who remember a deposit being put on a bottle of lemonade will point out to you, you could buy a full bottle for around 11p—old money, that is—with a thruppence deposit return, which represents a value of around 25 per cent. I hope the younger ones can stay with me on this old money concept. So, I would urge whoever brings in legislation on return schemes to take these figures into account. With something like 25p per item, even if a number of people continued to discharge their cans and bottles, there would be many who would be willing to collect such items for the financial rewards this would bring. If the Welsh Government is to bring forward any legislation in the sixth term, let it be the deposit-return scheme. We know how successful the plastic bag charge was, so let's bring forward this legislation with utmost urgency. Thank you.

Most of my constituents feel extremely strongly about the litter disfiguring our communities, and I want to pay tribute to all the volunteers who take part in regular litter picks to clear up the mess created by the thoughtless few. I was out in Llanedeyrn last week with staff from the Cyncoed campus of Cardiff Metropolitan University, and I thank them for turning out in the rain. You won't be surprised to know how we picked up lots and lots of bottles and cans. A deposit-return scheme would, I hope, encourage people not to chuck items they can get money back on, and in particular, would, I hope, whet the entrepreneurial appetite of our young people. That is certainly how I increased the size of my pocket money in the long, distant past. My question to the proposer is this. The United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 2019-21, we know, would prevent this Senedd from being able to meaningfully eliminate single-use plastic, as we could only apply any measure to Welsh-based companies, which would, at a stroke, leave out the ubiquitous global brands of fizzy drinks that litter our landscape as well as advertising billboards.

So, how would the internal markets Bill fetter the Member's proposal? Please convince me that it wouldn't have the perverse consequence of causing drinks currently bottled in Wales to be relocated to the other side of the border to evade having to take part in a deposit-return scheme. How would your proposed legislation get around the iniquitous internal markets Bill in the form that the UK Conservative Government has framed it?

I'd just like to register my support for these proposals as well. I echo what Llyr said about similar commitments appearing in manifestos and policy documents since 2016, and before that. So, I don't think it's unfair to draw attention to the fact that no decision has been made by Welsh Government in these intervening years. And while other contributors may want to blame this all on the UK Government and how long they're taking, that doesn't get away from the fact that it's Welsh Government that's behind them all. So, I'm hoping that Members will support the thrust of these proposals and send a strong signal to our constituents that we will seek primary legislation on this in the sixth Senedd, and I hope that that primary legislation is Janet's.

I have my own views on how well Welsh Government has prioritised its legislative programme over this in the last five years. We have had time for a Bill on this. But, in the meantime, I am grateful to the Deputy Minister for her virtual visit to RPC Tedeco-Gizeh, a factory in my region that produces single-use plastic cups for the NHS across the UK—these are not the cups that appear in the litter that Jenny Rathbone was talking about. It was an important visit, because it illustrated that there's existing legislation that limits the recycling of certain types of plastic that has been in contact with food and drink. And so I think we need to be clear that this scheme accommodates only that that's currently recyclable, whilst, at the same time, encouraging research into different types of plastic that could be used for food and drink. Certainly, the consultations were on two different types of plastic in particular.

The proposal refers to the wider aim of reducing waste as well, and the new challenge of how we handle all the disposable PPE. I think that the discarded face mask has become the new street litter and, of course, they contain plastic. I especially noticed Janet's reference to marine life, and hope that the UK's £0.5 billion blue planet fund will include consideration of this new type of litter.

But it's Welsh Government that needs to get cracking as well on its own first steps to achieve anything under the zero waste strategy. So, like I think it was Alun Davies mentioned, I'm happy to welcome Wales's good score and high recycling collection rate, but that is just collection; we don't hear about what happens to the recyclate and we have a responsibility there, perhaps even more than for the collection of the recycling in the first place.

Finally, a deposit scheme encourages personal responsibility and I think it would work well alongside other incentives that drinks providers currently offer—so, taking your own cup for use for takeaway drinks, for example. Just a quick shout out to the wonderful Hideout cafe at Kenfig nature reserve, who knock money off their coffee if you do just that, and it runs alongside a sort of refill culture that's starting to take off, with milk container refills looking particularly popular at the moment.

And finally, of course, the Senedd Commission has to publish an annual report on its policy action taken to meet sustainability targets, because there's more to it than getting rid of just single-use plastic, and, if we can do it, I don't see why Welsh Government can't do it for policies designed for the whole nation. Thank you.

Minister, I welcome this motion and the proposal. It's a debate we've had on several occasions with regard to deposit-return schemes, which I fully endorse and support. I've commented numerous times myself on my childhood, where we were, effectively, the 1960s equivalent to barcoding—that is, we collected the bottles, we returned them and we got the money, which went into our pockets. It's very interesting to see how, in countries like Germany, they've introduced barcoding machines, whereby, when you purchase a bottle, you return the bottle, you barcode it as you deposit it and it automatically refunds your bank account with the deposit equivalent. So, there are ways of doing it and I do very much support that. 

Can I also comment on the fly-tipping issue, because I made the point, I think, in this Senedd some while back that the fines are not sufficient? You have councils that are doing good work in prosecuting those who are caught fly-tipping and tracing those caught fly-tipping, but the fines are derisory, to be honest. The fines, in my view, should be substantially increased and there should be also a mechanism for recovering the cost of actually clearing the site where the fly-tipping takes place.

But I do want to come on to the point that Jenny Rathbone raised, and I think it's a very serious one. Effectively, a deposit-return scheme is not one that we can now implement if the internal market Bill goes through, and I think Janet Finch-Saunders has to confirm that she and the Conservative group will oppose the internal market Bill, and those provisions in it that would actually prevent us from introducing this. Because it's all very well us talking about introducing something that we all support and want to see happen, whilst, at the same time in Westminster, we have a Government that's introducing capricious legislation that would actually prevent us from doing what we know we all want to do and have a mandate to do within Wales. Thank you, Llywydd.

First of all, can I thank Janet Finch-Saunders for bringing this before us? I am a long-term advocate of a deposit-return scheme. I remember the 5p and 10p deposit on a glass bottle of Corona pop, which was then taken away, washed and reused. That would be a wonderful way of going forward. It worked. People dumped them; we as children would collect them and get the money. We are suffering from cheap plastic, which has led to a throwaway society, and the world is suffering from it. Plastic is cheap to manufacture and has been used for more and more containers. Only a few years ago, sauce and vinegar came in glass bottles. Something needs to be done to stop plastic being a cheap product. I remember the first time I picked up a plastic vinegar bottle; I was absolutely bemused when I squeezed it and it moved. One way of stopping it being so cheap is a plastic tax, and I know we're not talking about that today, but I think it's something else that needs to be looked at.

We've seen the behaviour change from 5p per single-use plastic bag, which is over a 70 per cent reduction in the provision of single-use plastic bags. I support the introduction of a deposit-return scheme, initially for plastic drink bottles, but then you could expand it to all bottles and plastic containers, and then to all containers. Cheap plastic that you just throw away cannot be allowed to continue. We all have a duty to act now to support the planet and future generations. While I support a deposit-return scheme, I would much prefer a UK-wide scheme. People buying bottles in England and claiming back a deposit in Wales is obviously a cause for concern—and I see the Minister there—people in Chester bringing large numbers of bottles over to Wrexham, which may be just, in some cases, crossing the road. The simple solution of marking bottles as English or Welsh is unlikely to occur. There's no benefit in it for the producer of either the bottle or the product. I will support this today, but what I really hope is that it will motivate the Westminster Government to act. We've got to do something.

The Minister for Environment, Energy and Rural Affairs to contribute—Lesley Griffiths.

Diolch, Llywydd. The issues of waste reduction, recycling, littering and single-use plastics are of great importance to our citizens and to all of us in this Senedd. Recycling has become part of who we are as a nation, and the fact that we've risen to third in the world in our recycling rates is due to the partnership working between Government, local government and the people of Wales. As a Government, we have ambitious plans to do more, so I therefore welcome the objectives and sentiment behind this motion.

Twenty years ago, Wales had a recycling rate of just 7 per cent, and, through our actions as a nation collectively, we've achieved a rate that is now more than 60 per cent, on our way to that 100 per cent recycling that we want to see by 2050. To do so, we have wide-ranging plans in place that will deliver many changes. We've just completed a consultation on banning nine single-use plastic items, going further than similar proposals in England, and the summary of responses to the consultation will be published shortly, and our aim is to bring the ban into force next year. We're also progressing work on a deposit-return scheme for drinks containers, and, again, we'll be publishing proposals early next year. And we also intend to publish proposals on how we tackle packaging waste, through an extended producer-responsibility scheme.

Powers for Welsh Ministers, alongside those of other devolved nations, to introduce both schemes have been included in the UK Environment Bill, which is currently at Committee Stage in the UK Parliament. The powers also include the ability to introduce charges for single-use plastic items, where appropriate, to reduce their use. Furthermore, to increase recycling for businesses and other organisations, we've already committed to introducing legislation that will require the separation of their waste by autumn 2021. And this will make it not only easier to recycle, but also ban recyclable material from going to landfill and incineration.

Like others, I'm very concerned about the littering of single-use items, the use of which has increased as a consequence of the COVID pandemic. Evidence from the annual British beach litter survey shows single-use face coverings and gloves on our beautiful beaches. To tackle this issue, we will be launching a social media campaign to encourage people to wear reusable face coverings where possible, or they should dispose of single-use ones responsibly.

Janet Finch-Saunders mentioned the work that's ongoing with Welsh Water at the current time in relation to wipes, and I have asked officials to discuss this to see what we can do, because it's clearly becoming a massive issue and something that we must deal with, I think, as a matter of urgency.

In terms of mandatory reporting, we've published recycling rates for Wales every year since devolution, and will continue to do so. The new deposit-return and extended producer-responsibility schemes will also include mandatory reporting, so that everyone can judge the success of these policies.

In relation to fly-tipping, this is an aspect that's just come back into my portfolio, and I've asked officials again to continue to look at fly-tipping, because it is certainly a blight on our communities, and the framework that Members referred to. I'm not quite sure why there was a link between bottles, because fly-tipping, generally, seems to be bigger items, but, again, it's something that we must continue to do more on.

So, although I agree with the objectives behind this motion, I don't think a separate Bill is required, as the relevant powers are included in the UK Environment Bill, as I've referred to. Unfortunately, though, the positive inclusion of these powers for Wales is tempered by the provisions in the UK internal market Bill, and this means, without amendment, our ability to act in the interests of Wales will be limited, and it does risk tying us to the lowest common standard within the UK. We've got a really successful history in this area, which has seen us progress faster than any other UK nation, and it's now a matter of pride, not just amongst ourselves, but amongst our citizens. So, I do not believe Wales's ability to continue to act in this area should be reduced in any way.

So, I do welcome today's debate, Llywydd, and we will continue to listen to the views from Members of the Senedd as the proposals I've outlined are developed further and implemented. Diolch.

Janet Finch-Saunders to reply to the debate.

Diolch, Llywydd, and thank you to the Member for responding to the debate—and I think we welcome the consultation responses that are forthcoming—and to all Members for their excellent contributions, whereby everyone was in agreement, really, that this is something that's been badly needed for quite some time. Some of the soundbites that came from some of those contributions, such as personal responsibility, the entrepreneurial skills of young people, raised by Jenny Rathbone—the point about the internal market Bill I think was a red herring, because, at the end of the day, this is about a devolved Government and the powers that we have here in Wales. I do think that we can't hide—or Welsh Government here shouldn't be hiding—behind the internal market Bill.

The points that Alun Davies raised about fly-tipping are excellent points. The statutory framework isn't strong enough, and we need to really go that bit further.

Llyr Gruffydd saying about the talking the talk, now we need to walk the walk—and I would like to put on record my immense thanks for the work that Sir David Attenborough does, his passion, his compassion, and his ability to convey across to the world what a ticking timebomb we have in terms of plastic pollution. I would just ask, and there are Members in this Senedd here today—David Rowlands—I would just ask all Members to get behind this legislative proposal today, give it your support, and let's go forward positively. As we end what has been an awful year, let's go forward positively, collectively, as one Senedd, and let's bring in this deposit-return scheme. Diolch yn fawr iawn. Thank you.

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

The next debate is the Climate Change, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee debate on the national development framework, and I call on the Chair of the committee to move the motion—Mike Hedges.

Diolch, Llywydd. I'm pleased to be able to speak in this committee-led debate on the draft national development framework, which is now called 'Future Wales: the national plan 2040'. Members of the Senedd will be aware that the Planning (Wales) Act 2015 set out scrutiny procedures for the draft NDF. The Act refers to a Senedd consideration period that lasts for 60 days after the draft NDF is laid. Welsh Ministers must have regard to any resolution passed by the Senedd and any recommendation made by a Senedd committee during that time.

The 60-day period comes to an end tomorrow. This debate is the second we will have had on the draft NDF, following a Welsh Government debate very early in the 60-day period. The purpose of today’s debate is to give the Senedd and Members a final opportunity to consider the draft NDF. This is not a debate on the Climate Change, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee's report, although I hope it will be informed by our recommendations. As Chair of the Committee, I will not be addressing the amendments tabled by Members. It is more appropriate for the Minister to do so.

The committee published our report on Monday. In it, we made 26 recommendations across several policy areas. Before I go any further, I would like to thank everyone who gave their time to contribute to the committee’s work, either through written submissions or appearing before us virtually. I would also like to thank the committee’s expert adviser, Graeme Purves, for his assistance during the scrutiny process.

'Future Wales' is an important document; it sets out a 20-year framework for planning and development in Wales. If done right, it has the potential to articulate a bold, long-term vision for this country. As a committee, we are generally content with 'Future Wales'. All members of the committee can point to elements that they would wish to strengthen, or even remove, but overall, we were content. However, one Member of the committee expressed opposition to some policies in 'Future Wales' and, as a consequence, to aspects of the committee's conclusions and recommendations. I'm sure the Member will explain his reasons in full shortly.   

The overarching challenge the Welsh Government faces is to ensure that this 40-year planning framework is resilient enough to be able to respond to the three biggest challenges we currently face: COVID and any future viruses, Brexit, and the effects of climate change. The Minister has assured the committee that 'Future Wales' is sufficiently flexible and resilient to respond to societal changes arising from the COVID-19 pandemic.

But we believe it is too early to judge the medium and long-term impacts of decisions that are being made in light of the pandemic. For example, Welsh Ministers have talked about up to 30 per cent of Welsh workers working from home. This has the potential to fundamentally change the way areas such as town and city centres operate. And this will affect infrastructure, housing and connectivity, and very much those businesses that are based on providing services to those working in offices within city centres. 'Future Wales' needs to be able to reflect all of these changes. We've recommended that 'Future Wales' should include a clear statement to reflect the lessons learned from COVID-19 and explain how it will support post-COVID-19 recovery.  

One of our key concerns was around strategic development plans. 'Future Wales' will be the highest level of strategic plan, providing a national planning framework. Strategic development plans will fit between the national development plan and the local development plan. In terms of a hierarchy of strategic planning documents, this makes sense. But the approach is hamstrung by the absence of the middle tier of strategic development plans. Frankly, local authorities haven't shown much of an interest in developing these plans as yet. But for the Welsh Government's approach to work, they need to come on-stream as soon as possible. 

There is an added complication. Local authorities will need to come together to develop these plans under the Local Government and Elections (Wales) Bill, which was passed by this Senedd last week. The Bill provides for corporate joint committees to be established, which will consist of representatives of more than one local authority to develop SDPs. Of course, more co-operation between local authorities is a good thing in principle, but what we don’t want is an unintended reduction in accountability to local communities. One criticism we heard about 'Future Wales' was that, in places, it seems to extend into territory you would expect to be covered by strategic development plans. We hope this will be rebalanced over time, as SDPs come forward.

I will now turn briefly to some of the other key areas we have covered in our report. Energy: we have made several detailed recommendations in our report, but the main point I want to make is a strategic one. We believe that the shortcomings of the grid are impeding strategic development in Wales. We know that if you want to build a windfarm or you want to put in a solar farm, then you need to do it where there used to be a power station, so that you get access to the grid. That causes huge problems in lots of areas.

The Minister has said that 'Future Wales' will provide a basis for further discussions with National Grid and distribution companies. These discussions must happen as a matter of urgency, otherwise 'Future Wales' is hamstrung from the start when it comes to energy. There needs to be a strategy to improve electricity transmission and distribution infrastructure, including any new infrastructure required in mid Wales. We have recommended that the Welsh Government should work with National Grid, electricity distribution companies and the renewable energy industry to take this forward with urgency.

On housing, we were generally content with the policies set out in 'Future Wales', but we want to place on record our disappointment that amendments to Part L of building regulations have been delayed yet again. These amendments are necessary, but continuing to delay the inevitable changes is a cause of concern. We have recommended that the Welsh Government should progress the development of an amended Part L of building regulations so that the next Welsh Government, whoever it is, can introduce subordinate legislation as soon as possible following the 2021 election.

'Future Wales' talks a lot about connectivity. In our report published in November 2019, we said that 'Future Wales' needed to address the poor connectivity between north and south Wales. Despite being accepted by the Welsh Government, it doesn't go far enough. We also have concerns about connectivity to west Wales, which quite often gets forgotten, except by those who have to travel from Pembrokeshire towards the south-east of Wales. We believe that transport connectivity is an ongoing strategic problem across parts of Wales. 'Future Wales' places too much of the onus for promoting improved inter-regional linkages on the regions themselves. This must be addressed by the new national transport strategy that the Welsh Government is currently consulting on.

Finally, we made several detailed recommendations about biodiversity and green infrastructure, the national forest and the national parks. On the subject of green belts, contributors told us that local authorities should have more discretion than is set out in 'Future Wales' when it comes to determining the location and extent of green belts in their regions. As a committee, I’m afraid we could not agree. We believe that green belts are an essential tool in constraining urban sprawl. We have recommended that their function should be strengthened, and their benefits should be emphasised in 'Future Wales'.

In conclusion, I would like to end by thanking the Minister for the constructive way that she and her officials have engaged with the committee and the helpful way that the many documents related to 'Future Wales' have been presented and explained. When the committee published its report on 'Future Wales' in November 2019, we set out 50 conclusions with the aim of improving the NDF. Most of our recommendations were accepted. In this report, we have made a further 26 recommendations. I look forward to hearing the Minister's response. Thank you.

I have selected the two amendments to the motion and I call on Llyr Gruffydd to move amendments 1 and 2, tabled in the name of Siân Gwenllian. Llyr Gruffydd.

Thank you very much, Llywydd. We could spend a great deal of time going through the individual recommendations made in the committee’s report, many of which I agree with, but I have more fundamental issues with the foundations of the development framework, which are, of course, highlighted in the amendments tabled by Plaid Cymru, and by the fact that the committee’s report, ultimately, is a minority report.

One of the problems I have is that the spatial footprint of the NDF is flawed. It, in my view, puts in place the United Kingdom Conservative Government's vision, a unionist vision, which is entrenching Wales’s reliance on the English economy. There are four regions, of course, modelled on Boris Johnson’s growth deal areas, and it’s disappointing that the Wales map for the future is based on serving the Northern Powerhouse, the Bristol and Western Gateway, and the Midlands Engine—the east-west axis that means, of course, that the economic future of Wales will be based on crumbs from someone else’s table. Yes, we need cross-border collaboration to bring benefits to Wales from these entities, of course we do, but we shouldn’t base the whole vision of 'Future Wales' on that model. And the failure to prioritise building the Welsh economy in its own right does create, of course, more reliance on decisions taken by Conservatives in London and less likelihood that Wales, of course, will grow stronger and stand on its own two feet.

Now, rather than providing a vision that unites Wales, Labour, in doing this, are risking pushing south, mid and north Wales further apart. It does neglect the need—the great need—for better connectivity between north and south Wales, in my view. The Minister has said in her evidence that the framework was flexible enough to respond to north-south transport policies. But we shouldn’t be responding, we should be driving the vision and the ambitious policies that we need in order to bring Wales together. And that, of course, is reflected in one of the committee’s recommendations, which refers to the lack of focus on connectivity within Wales.

The second fundamental problem I have, of course, is the way in which the NDF does centralise growth in certain specific areas, and that inevitably will be at the expense of other areas. And Dr Neil Harris, an expert from Cardiff University, drew our attention as a committee, in his evidence, to the fact that the plan is based on growth that is focused on urban areas, but only mentions stability in other areas. Now, that isn’t the vision of sharing prosperity across Wales that we would want to see. It’s that failure to distribute wealth, growth and development in an equal way throughout Wales that is one of the features that I want to see overturned. You could say that that is one of the failings of devolution over the past 20 years. But what’s happening now, of course, is that that is being entrenched as a permanent feature of the Welsh Government vision until 2040.

There isn’t sufficient emphasis on Arfor and the need for growth in the west of Wales, as I’ve previously raised with the Minister, or on the Valleys as a specific entity that needs a stronger focus, in my view. There’s also a risk, of course, that these growth areas will ultimately face overdevelopment. We’ve seen it happening in certain parts of Wales already. When you look at those areas that are prioritised as favoured locations for significant residential developments, well, of course there’s risk of overdevelopment there, when there’s virtually nothing, on the other hand, to tackle the need for sustainable developments in other parts of Wales, particularly when it comes to the need for social housing and affordable housing to meet the housing crisis.

There are also problems, of course, with the top-down nature when it comes to the planning system. We had that debate at the time of the passing of the Planning (Wales) Act 2015, some years ago, but this takes the problem to the next level, through the regional development plans and through the reliance on the corporate joint committees, which take those key decisions further away from the communities affected by those decisions.

So, to conclude, Plaid Cymru cannot support this plan, which plays into the hands of the unionist agenda and the agenda of the Conservatives in London, which will weaken rather than strengthen Wales as an economic entity, a social and cultural and political entity. In light of that, we feel strongly that we must make fundamental changes to the national development framework for Wales.

This is the second time I've spoken on the NDF, and during the last debate I clearly outlined a number of weaknesses in the NDF. During committee, my resolve that these need addressing has strengthened.

As I have said previously, the current regional approach is flawed, especially when looking at north and mid Wales. I recommended that policy 20 should be amended, so that the whole of north Wales benefits, and that the main focus should be shared between Wrexham and Deeside and Caernarfon, Bangor and the Menai strait area. So, I implore you to ensure that north-west Wales has a national growth area. Plaid Cymru are wrong to call on the regional model to be replaced—the problem is actually with where the national growth areas are to be. So, I must express my frustration again that policy 25 has not been amended to introduce Aberystwyth as a main focus for investment.

'Future Wales' continues to fail to drive investment to the west of the whole of Wales, and this brings me to my support of recommendation 10, that a clear statement is needed now as to how the strategy will help to further post-COVID recovery. Yes, there is a statement on this pandemic in there, but you actually need to show how the document has evolved because of this horrendous pandemic. For example, should you amend policy 20 and see more drive for investment in north-west Wales, it could be said that you are responding to the need for boosting economic growth in the region following the 114 per cent jump in universal credit claims in Conwy, 117 per cent in Ynys Môn and 147 per cent in Gwynedd.

Similarly, in response to COVID-19, considerable emphasis is being placed on the opportunity for a green recovery. Now, the Prime Minister, the Rt Hon Boris Johnson MP, has given a brilliant boost to fostering a green revolution in the UK. This strategy does not reflect any such ambition. Now, I agree with the committee recommendation 11 that the Welsh Government should work with National Grid, electrical distribution companies and the renewable energy industry to develop a shared understanding of the strategic improvements that need to be made to electric transmission and distribution infrastructure. I would even go further, and ask that you include a commitment in policy 17 that if new grid infrastructure is to be built across mid Wales, that this will be placed below ground. Attention should also be given to the oral evidence of Hedd Roberts, who highlighted the need to protect the limited number of sites suitable for cable landfalls. That would help align 'Future Wales' with the national marine plan. As the Campaign for the Protection of Rural Wales's Montgomery branch have highlighted, there needs to be a greater emphasis on a range of renewables, including marine energy.

Policy 22 refers to the need for a green belt around Wrexham and Deeside, and you will be aware that our committee have recommended that their function should be strengthened. I agree, but I am still concerned that by stipulating strong policy protection for the green belt in one corner of Wales, it could have a negative impact elsewhere. For example, if you wish to be direct, why not amend policy 22 so that it protects the green area around Llanrhos in Aberconwy? Again, there seems to be only two references to brownfield sites in this whole document. We should have a policy that gives priority to development in those areas.

It has been made clear to us that national parks are facing major challenges, so I do agree with recommendation 25 that there should be a specific policy on the matter, and this is what the Snowdonia Society themselves have advocated. I agree that policy 12 should include an additional priority: support for measures to reduce car dependency and to facilitate greener modes of access to our anchor visitor destinations in designated landscapes that are currently experiencing such chronic road congestion, proving more so during the times of the release of lockdown during the COVID pandemic. Despite you accepting the committee recommendation that the framework should address the poor connectivity between north and south Wales, it isn't there yet, as a lot of responsibility is being placed with the regions themselves.

Finally, I want to note my disappointment that 'Future Wales' in policies 4 and 5 leaves the future of rural areas to strategic and local development plans. Issues affecting rural Wales are of national significance, and as such, I reiterate calls for those policies to be amended so that they champion the saving of our rural schools and facilities, improvement of our B roads, diversification on our farms, and the Welsh Government working with digital communication providers to address the needs of rural areas. I urge you to act on these constructive calls, and to go back to the drawing board on this NDF. Thank you. Diolch.

There are lots of good things in the revised version of 'Future Wales'. A picture tells a thousand words, so the maps of proposed zones for different activities are very welcome, and much easier for citizens to understand how 'Future Wales' is relevant to their vision for the well-being of future generations. So, I think there's been a considerable improvement on the first iteration. Thank you very much, Minister, for that.

There are two points I'd like to make. First of all, it's imperative that 'Future Wales' has a strong and clear message that we have to have green belts to stop the urban sprawl that joins up different communities. For example, we must have a green belt between Cardiff and Caerphilly, because otherwise, developers will always want to build on the edge of Cardiff, because they can make more money out of it than building in Caerphilly, and if we don't have that sort of arrangement, then it makes a mockery of our strategy for developing our Valleys communities and ensuring that Cardiff doesn't just become a monstrous overcrowded city with no green spaces to easily access. Equally, I think it's really important that we protect the floodplains between Cardiff and Newport, to safeguard them against the appetite of developers to build wherever they can, so long as it's on a greenfield site, even if it's on a floodplain. And the uncertainty over our future food supplies imported from the European continent make it even more important that we are able to safeguard this floodplain as a place where we can produce food for both Newport and Cardiff, and therefore improve our food security.

I'd also like the Minister to clarify the extent of the protection given to sites of special scientific interest. Wildlife Trusts Wales told the committee that SSSIs must be sacrosanct or, at least, granted the same protection as they are in continental Europe. Could we give Welsh SSSIs the same assessment steps as Natura 2000 sites, so that SSIs are afforded the necessary protections against development? This seems particularly important, given the disturbing loss of species across Wales from a multitude of activities by human beings. So, can we specify in 'Future Wales' that a habitat regulation assessment is de rigueur to test the impact of any proposed development and probe the conservation objectives of any particular proposal? If they're judged to have a significant impact, this could, then, be followed up with an appropriate assessment to determine whether the integrity of the site would be damaged. If this assessment, then, says such an impact would be unavoidable, despite mitigation efforts, then it seems to me that the only way development could proceed is if there are no alternative solutions and there are imperative reasons to override the public interest.

Most recently, we saw a proposal to build a relief road to the M4 going across the Gwent levels, which would have, of course, meant the invasion of this environmentally protected site by vehicles, which would have destroyed the virtues of the site. I hope that if the Welsh Government implements revised and more rigorous standards they can ensure that we never see such a proposal having traction again. It is, of course, brilliant that the First Minister decided the impact on the environment in that proposal was, indeed, far too great to allow it to go ahead and many other alternative proposals are now being drawn up. Thank you.  

I rise to contribute to this debate as the Chair of the Culture, Welsh Language and Communications Committee. We felt it was incumbent upon us to take evidence with regard to the possible effects of the national development framework on the Welsh language and on the Government's own target to reach a million speakers of Welsh. We took evidence on 15 November and we have written to the Minister. Of course, we await her formal response in due course. It is true, at a national strategic level, that the framework does make a number of references to the Welsh language, but at a regional and spatial level, the references are much more general, and overall our committee believes, and the evidence that was presented to us showed, that this risks being a missed opportunity in terms of using our spatial planning as a nation to protect and ensure the future of our national language. 

Witnesses raised a number of concerns and I'll touch on a few of them briefly. One concern was around the issue of accountability at a regional level. The framework makes a great play of the need to operate at a regional level, and there is some reason for that, though I have personal concerns about the regions as set out in the framework. But, for example, the Welsh Language Commissioner's office noted that its oversight of statutory duties relates to legal entities and individual bodies, and it's very far from clear to the Welsh Language Commissioner how his legal responsibilities for ensuring that those bodies operate properly in the Welsh language legislation—how is that going to be carried out when they're co-operating at a regional level. Where is the responsibility? If he has to make representations about a failure, where and to whom does he make that representation? It isn't clear how the regional approach, as set out in the framework, will support and promote the Welsh language, and the committee would like the Welsh Government to show much more clearly how it intends to ensure greater transparency of the work of the regional bodies and how they can be accountable. 

Another area where we took extensive evidence was the issue of housing and the Welsh language. We know that for the language to have a future it needs to have live communities in which it is spoken regularly on a day-to-day basis. And we know that, in those communities in the north and the west, access to housing is a huge issue. Members will remember the story from last year of a headteacher of a primary school who could not afford, in Gwynedd, to buy a house that was within 40 miles of the school where she lived—for somebody in that senior professional position not to be able to afford a home in her community. Now, we don't feel that this is adequately addressed as an issue in the framework, and the impact of not having access to affordable and, crucially, social housing will really get in the way of those communities being able to survive as living communities and, therefore, the future of the language. We recommend that the link between social housing and affordable housing in Welsh-speaking areas, and the impact on the Welsh language, should be set out much more thoroughly in the framework document.

We are concerned about the way in which rural communities are referred to in the framework as a hinterland for towns and cities. It is in those rural communities where the Welsh language is often at its strongest, and to see rural communities as something that just exists in the context of the town that they surround is really an error, in our view. We would like the Government to take a more balanced approach to helping urban and rural centres to prosper, rather than one that focuses on urban centres with their hinterland, as if, somehow, the rural area belongs to the city or town. The framework we'd like to see updated to take account of the greater need for fast and reliable access to broadband—that, again, is crucial to enable people to work in those communities. And more information from the Government on what they're thinking on local hubs.

And finally, Llywydd, to touch on the issues of mainstreaming the language, there needs to be a recognition of the impact of these policies on the Welsh language at all levels of the document, not just at a national strategic level. We also think there's a need to see stronger links with other strategies. Where, for example, are the links with the Welsh in education plans? How will the framework contribute to the 'Cymraeg 2050' strategy? All this this needs to be spelt out, and then it needs to be monitored. We've asked the Government to specify how the contribution to the outcomes of 2050 will be measured and monitored if the framework is rolled out, and we've asked for the regional level of spatial planning in the framework to be flexible enough to allow the growth of partnerships that address specific issues. For example, those counties where Welsh is a community language should be able to work together beyond the framework as set out here.

We look forward as a committee to the Minister's formal response. There is still time to address our concerns. If they are not addressed, this will be a missed opportunity for the Government to put real meat on the bones of their commitment to 'Cymraeg 2050', and it will be necessary for an incoming Government to substantially reform the framework if this is not addressed. 

As a Member of the committee that scrutinised this Bill, I stand here to make some comments. There is no doubt that we need a national development plan, and underneath that, there's no doubt that we probably need a strategic development plan. But I'm going to raise my voice in support of communities that might feel somewhat removed from that process.

I note that the local government and elections Bill does have a mechanism for the development and establishment of a strategic development plan, and would be delivered by corporate joint committees, and that's made up of representatives from more than one local authority. Whilst I do support that, I think it's absolutely critical that we put in a system and a process to ensure that those representatives are, indeed, reflecting the views and the principles of the local communities that they serve. And I think that it is absolutely important that the frustrations of the current planning Act are not repeated. Over and over again we've seen development not able to go forward because there was no local development plan, and that, clearly, is not a good place to be in terms of trying to get any investment into that area.

I do want to welcome the fact that the neighbouring local authorities are considered when strategic plans are drawn up. The Minister, when she gave evidence, gave the example of Ystradgynlais, which is, of course, in mid and west Wales, as an area where connectivity into the Swansea city bay area is as good as its connectivity back into that area. Particularly when we talk about Powys and Ceredigion joining together in an economic development area, which, again, I support, it's about those peripheral areas that are joining other areas. Powys is a particular example where, along its very long periphery, it will abut many other areas, including some parts of England. So, it is really important that that is taken note of.

The biggest challenge, of course, is outlined in building back green and blue into the economy. When we look at the alternative energies that are writ large in this, if we particularly look at the offshore energy developments, there will have to be, in all cases, access back to the land. I know that the Minister has made it quite clear that this has to be read alongside the Marine and Coastal Access Act (2009). Nonetheless, the two have to work together. Otherwise, we cannot have the energy that we all hope to have—the new green energy—without that joining up together.

I do have to say that I support what Jenny Rathbone, and, I think, others have said here today, that we have to absolutely ensure the integrity of Natura 2000 sites. We must absolutely avoid, as a result of any implementation of policies within 'Future Wales', the degradation of biodiversity. It is never going to be good enough that we maintain things as they are, because to maintain things as they are, in terms of biodiversity, is only to keep us behind the loop, when, actually, what we need to do is restore what we've got to a pre-existing state, before it was degraded in the very first place. Thank you. 

Can I thank, first of all, the climate change and rural affairs committee for their work on the NDF? I have some observations of my own to make, and I'm also going to reference the Economy, Infrastructure and Skills Committee, which also scrutinised relevant aspects of the NDF that were relevant to that committee. But, I should add that I'm not speaking in my capacity as Chair of that committee today.

There have been a number of rounds of consultations, and I broadly welcome a number of very significant changes and improvements that have been made up to this point. There is a big 'however' coming later in my contribution. In regard to the EIS committee, we did feel strongly that, for the purpose of the NDF, Wales should be best broken down into four regions, not three. So, I was very pleased that the Government took note of that and introduced a four-region model. That was very positive indeed.

I note that in the Government's consultation process response, they strongly refuted the committee's view that the NDF lacked ambition. I think this is disheartening. I think a key national planning document like this needs to set an agenda, and it needs to make clear the route that we can take to tackle national challenges like economic an social inequality. I'm pleased as well to see that the updated NDF included a reference to the foundational economy. Earlier drafts did not include any reference to the foundational economy, and later documents did, so another positive change as well.

I'm coming on now to the bit that I mentioned—the 'however' bit. I, like many people across mid Wales, am deeply, deeply disappointed that the representations from across rural mid Wales seem to have been ignored, and that the renewable energy section has only been strengthened in what seems to be a drive to increase onshore wind. I will remind the Minister of the June 2011 protests that took place outside this Senedd a month after I was elected. Thousands of people came to protest, in dozens of buses that came from mid Wales. This is a signal that, yet again, the Welsh Government considers the huge damage to our landscapes to be acceptable, but it is not acceptable. It is not acceptable to me and it's not acceptable to the people of mid Wales, and it's clear that the Welsh Government give far more credence to the lobbying from onshore windfarm developers than the population of rural mid Wales, who they are supposed to represent.

I listened very carefully to the comments of Jenny Rathbone when she talked about the Welsh Government's scrapping of the M4 relief road due to environmental factors. Isn't it interesting that that's important to the First Minister when it comes to that particular project, but when it comes to mid Wales, it's a different story? In the NDF, no evidence or objective or rationale in regard to the designated area is outlined, and landscape is not an expendable commodity, and once spoiled, it is lost for future generations. Once again, the Welsh Government has opted to place far too much emphasis on onshore wind.

I know that the Campaign for the Protection of Rural Wales made strong representations in this regard. I'm just going to highlight a few of them in the time I've got left, but tourism is critical to the rural economy. In Powys, it is the second highest producer of GDP, at around 11 per cent. Rural Wales's unique selling point as a fabulous landscape cannot be ignored, and this isn't just a case of being about national parks or areas of outstanding natural beauty, but the whole wonderful variety of tranquility and extensive unspoilt panoramic views. Rural Wales attracts tourism all year around.

And there are, of course, negative opinions regarding turbines and transmission lines, which are all very well documented. Then there is the flood risk, which CPRW point out in more detail as well, and the scale of what is proposed, how that would change water flows and have wider damage. Then there is the transport of turbines, also to remote rural areas, and that creates huge logistical issues in terms of narrow roads and steep winding roads and low bridges. Then, of course, there is the issue of remote locations that require extensive transmission infrastructure across considerable areas of beautiful countryside. The landscape implications of this are simply ignored within the NDF.

So, I would urge you, Minister, to consider very carefully again what I've outlined today and the views of CPRW. We need to have greater emphasis on a much wider basket of renewables, including offshore wind in that. Ten years ago, the people of my constituency called for 'Technical Advice Note (Wales) 8: Planning for Renewable Energy' to be scrapped, and the Welsh Government said 'no'. Now they are scrapping TAN 8, but they're effectively putting in place something that is worse in regard to this particular section of the NDF.

Like Russell George, I am deeply concerned about the potential impact—indeed, the likely impact—of the national development framework upon the landscapes of mid and west Wales. I'm an enthusiastic member of the Campaign for the Protection of Rural Wales, and I see in this document the fundamental aim of the Welsh Government, which is to wreck the landscapes of mid and west Wales in order to conduct a virtue-signalling exercise in relation to renewable energy.

Huge blocks of Ceredigion, Carmarthenshire and Powys are designated for solar and wind, and big areas of Pembrokeshire for solar farms. We've just spent some time this afternoon debating the effects of plastic pollution. Well, at least with plastic you can pick it up and remove it, but when the hills of Wales are covered with windfarms and solar panel parks, then they are going to be there for a generation or more, and as Russell George has just pointed out, mid and west Wales relies on its landscape to generate a huge quantity of the economic activity within the region. Tourism is fundamental to the Welsh economy in these areas. I think it's monstrous that the Welsh Government, which is overwhelmingly urban in its representation and its interests, will be now riding roughshod over the interests and opinions of the people of mid and west Wales.

What we're seeing here is a strategic centralisation of planning and planning decision making. The national development framework and 'Planning Policy Wales Edition 10' will override any strategic development plan that might be developed and the local development plans that are currently in existence. We've seen this already in a number of controversial instances. The Welsh Government has ridden roughshod over local opinion in relation to the Hendy windfarm, for example, near Llandrindod Wells, where the local authority rejected the proposal, the planning inspector appointed by the Minister rejected the proposal and the Minister just approved it nevertheless.

The developments of national significance that are at the heart of all this, which are identified in the national development framework, will mean that decision taking in these areas is taken away altogether from local people and their representatives at a local level, and will be ultimately harboured in Cardiff. You know, when devolution was introduced, it was supposed to bring Government closer to the people, but I don't think that the people of mid and west Wales, and less still people in north Wales, feel closer to Cardiff than they feel close to Westminster. And so, the result of this national development framework, I believe, will further undermine the support for devolution, which has been draining away in any event in recent years.

Developments of national significance are windfarm developments, for example, of over 10 MW. Compared with England, that's very, very small, because the threshold figure in England is 50 MW. What does this mean? It means that there's a presumption in favour of development for these kinds of schemes, and associated acceptance of landscape change. Well, that's a fine phrase, isn't it—'landscape change'. Well, it is a change, isn't it, from glorious countryside to massive wind turbine developments that could be up to 250m in height. You can't avoid seeing these things and it completely wrecks any enjoyment of the countryside and I think will be a dagger aimed at the heart of the tourism industry in mid and west Wales.

It overrides the importance of landscape, amenity, heritage, nature conservation and, indeed, the tourist industry itself. And, as the Campaign for the Protection of Rural Wales Brecon and Radnor branch, of which I'm a member, has pointed out, recent flagship legislation has committed Welsh public bodies to sustainable management of natural resources, sustainable development and the enhancement of resilient ecosystems, and also to work towards the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 goals, seven of them. Well, the promotion of industrial-scale renewable development, including wind turbines of up to 250m in height across much of rural Wales, coupled with a permissive policy that will reduce the weight to be given to local concerns isn't compatible with the objectives of the Environment (Wales) Act 2016 or indeed the well-being of future generations Act itself, or indeed the nature recovery plan. 

So, I believe that here, we've got a disaster in the making of a really colossal kind. And we've seen a gross abuse of the system already. There's another windfarm near Llangurig called Bryn Blaen, which Members, I'm sure, will be well familiar with. Planning permission for that was given in 2016 and it hasn't generated a watt of electricity, but the accounts of U and I Group PLC, the company that ultimately owns it, for 2019 show that they have generated £4.7 million-worth of cash—that's taxpayers' money, basically, that's gone into their pockets, out of Wales and into England, for no benefit in terms of saving the planet, either. It's pure rent-seeking abuse. And that's what disturbs me about this whole—

You will need to bring your comments to a close, now, Neil Hamilton.

Right, Llywydd. Thank you very much. 

And that's what disturbs me about this policy; there's no proportionality in it at all. You can believe that you're saving the planet by renewable energy, but you're not going to do it, I think, in an acceptable way, at the expense of many other desirable objectives—first and foremost, preserving and protecting the landscapes of wild Wales.

This motion has three parts. The first noting the national development framework being laid on 21 September 2020. The second notes that section 3 of the Planning (Wales) Act 2015 gives a 60-day period for Senedd consideration. So, today being 25 November, we're presumably outside that statutory period, or that's saying we don't note, or, if haven't wholly understood the situation, I hope Mike will inform us later what the situation is on this. And the third point about Welsh Ministers having to consider any resolution passed—I think, as this is only a 'take note' motion, I trust the Minister will listen to the debate and give proper consideration to what's been said.

Looking through this framework, I quite enjoy the quality of the document and some of the maps; it's quite interesting to read. But a few things struck me. One thing I'd quote. It says:

'Clear decisions should be made on the scale and location of growth through the preparation of a Strategic Development Plan'.

It's a very statist statement. It assumes that what we do, through this plan, is going to drive growth and determine where it is, whereas, actually, much, if not most, of that is going to reflect decisions made within the private sector. And I think a greater degree of humility in writing this and an understanding of how important private actors and their pursuit of profit are, compared to what we might like to put in a document such as this—ideally, the two should work together.

Within the section on south-east Wales, including the south central region for this purpose, we've got statements like:

'Cardiff will remain the primary settlement in the region, its future strategic growth shaped by its strong housing and employment markets and it will retain its capital city role'.

I'm not sure where that takes us. The next section, though, says:

'Strategic and Local Development Plans will need to consider the interdependence of Cardiff and the wider region.'

And that certainly is right. And what I was particularly struck with was with the local development plan, initially, at least, with Caerphilly and all that housing that was put up towards the boundary with Cardiff, and only road transport being available to take those people likely into jobs in Cardiff, and that wasn't joined up. We then have a statement:

'Cardiff relies on people from across the full region and ensuring communities around the Capital are vibrant, prosperous and connected helps to support Cardiff.'

Well, yes, perhaps, and, to the extent those areas are connected with Cardiff and we reinforce that further, clearly that will support Cardiff. But if those connections are elsewhere within the regions, they may not, and, if they're outside the region, not to Cardiff, then they may well not support Cardiff, or even take growth away. So, one example of that would be the Ebbw Vale line, and whether services on that should only come into Cardiff or we should also have at least one an hour to Newport. And if that then goes on to Cardiff, clearly, that—if you make one decision, it supports Cardiff growth more than another, where you may help in having more growth in Newport that might otherwise have been in Cardiff.

Similarly, the connections within the region outside the region also matter, and, to take Newport as an example, improving those connections to Bristol could have a really big benefit for Newport. But it's unlikely to support Cardiff to the same degree if it leads to a greater focus of the Newport economy towards Bristol rather than Cardiff, although, of course, we would prefer them to be complementary. We go on to say that investment should be

'located in the most accessible and sustainable locations within the context of the whole region',

but what about the other regions, what about areas across our border in England? I heard Siân Gwenllian complain earlier about how this was far too much focused on east-west links and cross-border agglomerations, and, actually, I don't see that much of that. And, certainly, in the south-east Wales section, it doesn't appear to be mentioned. For instance, we say,

'Cardiff is currently experiencing a period of growth in population and employment, but the city cannot continue to expand indefinitely without major consequences for the environment. It is a compact city nearing its physical limits',

and it's in that context that we then go on to say about Newport—or the Government does—in this document:

'The Welsh Government is determined to see development and growth in Newport, allowing the city to fulfil its potential as a second focal point for the region'.

So, of course, one reason Newport might grow is because of constraints on growth in Cardiff, but surely we need also to consider what are those constraints on growth in Bristol. And you see a much tighter green belt around Bristol, you see much higher levels of house prices and very significant constraints on development. So, at least for Newport and other areas near the border with England, we need to be focusing on how do we attract business from there in order to increase wealth and prosperity within the south-east region, and I don't think we are doing that sufficiently at the moment. However, I do give credit to the Welsh Government in the areas where—so, Help to Buy, about a quarter of the spend, at least, I think, has been on properties around Newport, many of which are being occupied by people who are then commuting to Bristol, albeit supporting the Welsh income tax base. Similarly, I think Ken Skates has worked very strongly on lobbying to improve services from Cardiff through Newport to Bristol, and, again, that would benefit the whole region.

So, although I think there are things Welsh Government are doing that are working cross border in supporting that growth, this document itself doesn't seem to do that to the same degree, and it seems very regionally focused within the sub bits, rather than looking for those opportunities to work across the border and drive prosperity for Wales. Thank you.

I call on the Minister for Housing and Local Government, Julie James.

Diolch, Llywydd. I very much welcome this debate and the contributions made by Members today. This is not the first time we have debated 'Future Wales' or the national development framework, so Members will know that I consider this plan to be vital in making our planning system focused on the big issues we face. This debate again proves that we all have ideas on how the planning system should operate, what its priorities should be and whether 'Future Wales' will achieve our ambitions.

Members have highlighted a breadth of issues addressed in 'Future Wales', including the climate emergency, social and affordable housing, transport, the economy, green infrastructure, the Welsh language, digital infrastructure and our energy supply. I will, of course, be spending the next couple of months reflecting in detail on the Senedd's recommendations, and, due to time constraints, I cannot cover them all here, but I will address just a few of the points raised so far.

Mike Hedges and a number of others raised concerns about the ability of the plan to respond to COVID, and whilst, of course, it's important not to be complacent, this is a plan committed to improving health and well-being throughout the planning system. The policies on green infrastructure, active travel and town centre first will be crucial to aiding the recovery. In terms of a number of contributions, it's also important to remember that 'Future Wales' is not the whole of Government policy. It does not replace our other major strategies, rather it works with them.

And, Llywydd, the Bill we passed only last week establishes CJCs as corporate bodies, so I can reassure Members that they are covered by all Welsh Government policies, including the Welsh language.

It's great to see the committee and Jenny Rathbone recognise the value of introducing the green belt, both in the south-east and the north-east. The green belts will, of course, help to achieve place-making objectives in places like Newport, Chepstow and Cwmbran, in Wrexham and Deeside, and they will ensure we avoid irresponsible, sprawling development on productive agricultural land. And, of course, 'Future Wales' has affordable and social housing provision at its core. Indeed, we commissioned new needs data specifically to support that element.

Llywydd, I will be opposing the Plaid Cymru amendments today. They seem not to have noticed that changes have been made following consultation on the draft plan, nor recognise the role of cross-party committees and their own Members in arguing for those changes. I agreed from the outset that any regional planning footprint should reflect an existing footprint, rather than creating a new one. My initial view was to use the economic action plan three-region footprint, but I agreed to change to the four-region footprint more favoured by Senedd committees and local authorities. If I may, Llywydd, I would like to draw attention to two consultation responses to the draft NDF. The Plaid Cymru-led Ceredigion council said, and I quote, 'The NDF must recognise mid Wales as a discrete region, drawing on the development of four growth deals across Wales'. Meanwhile, the Growing Mid Wales Partnership, which is, of course, a joint undertaking between Ceredigion council and Powys council, said, 'Strategic planning issues across mid Wales would be best addressed by collaborative work between Ceredigion and Powys local planning authorities.' So, Llywydd, we have listened closely to what the regions have told us. I fear that Plaid Cymru's amendments would contradict the views of the regions, and we will be opposing them for that reason.

Llywydd, this is likely to be the last debate on the plan before it is published, so it seems a good opportunity to reflect a little on my experience of developing 'Future Wales' and bringing it to this stage. I have found the process has been a blend of working within existing structures and of being able to introduce fresh ideas and new ambition. This plan does not set overarching Government policy, but rather it sets out how the planning system can help achieve it. For example, we want a healthy population and environment, so the plan will deliver more green spaces and places that get us out of our cars. We need to decarbonise, and therefore the plan focuses the biggest developments on the areas where public transport and active travel are or can be made most resilient. We want a fair and prosperous economy, so we have big growth areas and we are seeking to spread the development of jobs right across them, rather than concentrating on the biggest city centres.

Writing a national plan is a balancing act between taking action on every possible subject and remembering that local planning is often the best place to address the challenges. It is also a balance between repeating another document and not ignoring a topic. I've also found that people welcome the 20-year time frame for the plan, but expect immediate solutions as soon as the plan is published. Many people want a plan that is flexible, but are uncomfortable when outcomes are uncertain. Our energy policies are a great example of this. We have developed evidence-based policies that will help achieve national targets for electricity from clean sources that protect our designated landscapes. We have done this while working with communities and the development sector. We have considered our geography, thought about what will be needed in 20 years' time, and how society might be different by then. We looked at where existing infrastructure is, and where there is a skilled workforce ready to take advantage of new opportunities. We looked at where it is windy or sunny and we thought about what electric vehicles would mean for demand. We recognised that the planning system and its duty to act in the public interest raises unforeseen issues, so we've made sure that there are more options available to developers than will be needed. And yet I'm told that this plan should be more specific on where new wind turbines will go, more focused on offshore wind, on local and micro generation, and that projects will take too long to come to fruition.

Llywydd, the great potential of this plan is in the fact that the planning system looks at all our big issues—health, the economy, Welsh language, the environment, the climate emergency—and thinks it can do something to improve the situation in a holistic way. Whether or not you agree with the content of 'Future Wales', every decision we have taken has been tested through formal consultation in stakeholder engagement events and using impact assessments. We also have a monitoring framework that will help us to reflect and refine the plan over time. The public involvement in stakeholder engagement work has helped us to deliver a plan that we are confident will have a great and positive influence over our planning system.

I welcome the scrutiny this plan has received, and I'm looking forward to considering the Senedd's recommendations. In February I will publish a report setting out how I've responded to all the recommendations, as well as the final version of 'Future Wales'. Diolch yn fawr.

I call on Mike Hedges, the Chair of the committee, to respond to the debate. Mike Hedges.

Diolch, Llywydd. Can I thank Members who've taken part in the debate? And I'd also like to again thank the Minister.

I don't think anybody agrees with 100 per cent of it, but lots of us like bits of it, and I think that's what you end up with with a document this size. This is important to everyone in Wales.

To reply to Mark Reckless, we have one day left, because, when we're on recess, it doesn't count against the 60 days.

The vision of four regions in Wales is driven by the local authorities in Wales, not by Westminster. This includes, as Julie James said, Plaid Cymru-controlled Ceredigion. They see a community of interest in terms of their local development. The city deals and regional deals are aimed at improving the local economy and the strategic development plan has to support them. We want this to work. It's the jobs of our children and our grandchildren we're talking about.

Post-war Wales has seen growth in the north and south Wales coast. That has been driven by the private sector. The likelihood is that the private sector is going to drive any growth in the future. I'm disappointed that people who I would describe as Welsh unionists do not accept the regions of Wales—hugely disappointed in that, because I really believe in the importance of the south-west Wales region, which is not dissimilar to one of the ancient kingdoms. Green belts are hugely important, but I was going to say that green wedges, stopping communities merging, are more important in lots of areas where you don't want the different villages to merge together, or, within urban areas, you don't want the different communities to merge together.

The SSI protected against development; I think that's something that there is general agreement on. We need all plans to cover the same areas. We've had a history in Wales of every Minister developing their own footprint, and that has not necessarily worked for the benefit of anybody. I used to describe Swansea and Neath Port Talbot as Janus-like, because sometimes we looked to the east and sometimes we looked to the west.

I think Helen Mary Jones made some very good points on the Welsh language, and all these plans should fit together. We shouldn't have this plan here and that plan there, and, 'Well, they're nothing to do with each other because they come from different silos within Welsh Government.' They should all fit together.

We need the national development plan and strategic development plans to fit together as well, but there's something else that to me is really important—that we actually realise that the sea and the land meet. I know we've talked about that in our committee quite a lot, but it really is important that the marine plan fits in with the national development plan rather than being seen as something entirely different.

Energy is always controversial: onshore wind or offshore wind, nuclear or gas power—all have supporters and opponents, often in the same party. We need an energy debate, and I think sometimes parties could do with their own energy debates, but I think we need to see where we're going with energy. I think, generally, this is a good document and the four regions work, and I think it's going to work for the economic benefit of Wales. They might not fit into everybody's idea of how they would like things to be, but they fit into my view of how it's going to be. Thank you. 

Thank you. The proposal therefore is to agree amendment 1. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is an objection. So I defer all further voting under this item until voting time. 

Before we break for a break, can I just inform Members that it's been drawn to my attention that there were Members seeking to object in the previous debate on item 6, the legislative proposal? Given that there were many Members seeking to object, but I failed to see them all on Zoom, I will now be allowing a vote on item 6 during voting time. But, for now, we'll take a short break. 

Okay. So, we reconvene with item 8 on our agenda, which is the Welsh Conservatives' debate: the impact of COVID-19 on health services. And I call on Andrew R.T. Davies to move the motion.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and I welcome the opportunity to move the motion in the name of Darren Millar on the order paper this afternoon. For those who are not aware of the tabling arrangements of the National Assembly for Wales, or the Welsh Parliament as I should call it now, those people might wonder why we haven't put the waiting times that were published last Thursday in the motion. But, as people who know the tabling arrangements would know, they have to be in on the Wednesday afternoon.

So, I do think it is worth us reflecting on what those figures did tell us last Thursday. And these are figures across the UK as well—we do accept the point that all NHSs across the UK have seen a massive increase in the waiting times—but here, in Wales, the 36-week-plus waiting times went up by 597 per cent to 168,000 people, and 26 to 36 weeks went up by 250 per cent, from 54,000 people to 116,000. That's the scale of the challenge that we face here in Wales, irrespective of whatever Government forms after May next year. That's in excess of 0.5 million people who are on a waiting list here in Wales: 517,000 people are now on a waiting list. And, of course, that's for treatment.

When you look at the diagnostic and therapies waiting times as well, there's been a substantial jump in those waiting times, which have seen a spike of between 30,000 and 35,000 people between March and October. There are now 143,000 people waiting for diagnostic and therapy appointments in the Welsh NHS. And interestingly, on those sort of numbers, those numbers have grown significantly since June and July of this year. There was an actual decline in some of those numbers in the early part of the pandemic, because people weren't progressing through the health service to get those initial appointments.

So, that's the scale of the challenge we face, and that's why we've tabled the motion this afternoon, so that hopefully we can have a debate, discussion, and a sense of what the current Welsh Government are proposing to do to tackle these waiting times. It would be easy to spend the whole debate talking about numbers and percentage increases and actually just getting lost in those numbers, but it is important when we focus on the numbers that each and every one of those percentage points that I was talking about is an individual, an individual sitting on a waiting list that regrettably hasn't managed to progress through the system.

It is vital that we don't end up with a health service that ultimately just becomes a COVID service. It has to be the national health service that we treasure and love so much. And at this point, I think it is worthy for us all to pay tribute to the dedication and commitment and professionalism of the staff within our health service here in Wales, who have gone above and beyond the call of duty through the pandemic, and who themselves want to get back to the day job of treating people in the health discipline that they've trained for for so long, to achieve a community sense that the health service is delivering for every man, woman and child within the country of Wales, and that we are making progress in the waiting times.

It would be also wrong of me not to deal with the amendments that were tabled to the motion, because I had hoped that we could have got broader support for the motion that's before us, but I do welcome the point that there haven't been any 'delete all' amendments tabled this afternoon to the motion. But regrettably, we won't be able to accept amendment 1, tabled in the name of Rebecca Evans, because we do believe that point 1, which talks about the waiting times and the tenfold increase that BBC Wales highlighted, is a fact. It is a fact that there's been a tenfold increase in those waiting times, and we believe that needs to be at the front and centre of the motion.

Amendment 2, which again is tabled in the name of Rebecca Evans, seeks to delete point 4, and it is a fact that, regrettably, the health Minister did say that it would be foolish to have a plan in place to tackle the waiting list backlog. Well, as I've highlighted in the statistics that I've put in before us today, there is a desperate need for a plan to deal with the waiting times. I accept the point that we are still in the middle of the pandemic and the pandemic has many months, regrettably—even maybe years—for it to pan out, but we do need to plan and we do need to make sure that the NHS has the confidence, along with the care sector, that the centre is supporting the NHS in any part of Wales to make sure that services are turned back on and we can start to get on top of these waiting times.

It is important that we get COVID-lite hospitals up and running, and in a secure and safe environment, surgeries can ultimately progress within the Welsh NHS, and that's why we are unable to support amendment 3 that seeks to delete that point from the motion this afternoon.

And above all, then, we do believe that there does need to be a cancer recovery plan, which other parts of the United Kingdom have made available to their NHS, so that there can be a clear route for cancer services here in Wales to progress and get back on that even keel. Because one thing we do know about cancer is that timely intervention is critical—is critical—to making a successful outcome for that cancer patient, to have the right result from the treatment they received. Macmillan's own evidence and news reports, recently, have highlighted that there's been about 2,900 people walking around with cancer today because they've gone undiagnosed, and up to 2,000 people regrettably will die prematurely because they haven't been able to get the treatment and get into the system to get that diagnosis and get on top of the condition that they might be facing. That in itself requires urgent action from the health Minister, and so that's why we will not be supporting amendment 4 in the name of the Government that seeks to delete point (d) of our motion.

We will be supporting the Plaid amendment, because we do think it adds to the motion and we do welcome that analysis of 10-year waiting times and the ability to understand what we need to do going forward to enhance the capability of the NHS to get on top of the waiting times that I've highlighted in my opening remarks. But it is about commissioning more capacity; it is about looking at new ways of working; it is about getting COVID-lite hospitals into place; and it is about making greater use of community services, rather than moving people into the acute sector, where we can address the issue at the earliest possible stage by increasing the community spend of health resources here in Wales.

There is always a debate and discussion to be had about what money is available for the NHS, and we do know that considerable consequentials—. And I accept those consequentials have come not because we're a special case and we're deserving, but because of spend that has gone on in other parts of the United Kingdom that has activated the Barnett formula. There's £1.6 billion worth of money sitting in the Welsh budget already, unspent and unallocated. And today, with the comprehensive spending review, additional moneys will be arriving in the finance Minister's hands, which, I hope, will be passed to the health Minister, so that extra capacity can be commissioned and can be created, and these new ways of working can be ingrained in the NHS to start addressing the terrible wait that many people across Wales face—the 0.5 million people across Wales that are on an NHS waiting list today. It is important that where that allocation is made, sufficient support staff support is put in place to make sure that the staff, whatever level they are within the NHS, whether they're the porters, the cleaners or the consultants and the neurologists, are there and thought of, because without the staff, you will not have an NHS that delivers. And what we want to see is an NHS that hasn't just been turned into a COVID recovery NHS and is an NHS for us all, whatever part of Wales we live in.

It is a fact that the recent Royal College of Nursing staff survey highlighted that 34 per cent of staff—nurses in particular—felt undervalued by the Welsh Government. That was the highest figure of any Government in the United Kingdom, I might add. And 75 per cent of staff believed that they'd seen an increase in the stress levels. So, a staff strategy to make sure that the retention of staff is at the heart of what our health boards do will be critical to making sure that we deliver a staffing structure that can respond to the COVID crisis, as well as the reopening and re-engineering of services across the whole of the Wales NHS. And building on that staff support, we need to make sure that we have the testing resources in place to make sure that where hospital infections—. Sadly, my own regional area, where the Cwm Taf health board covers, has seen a massive spike in hospital-acquired infections. We need a greater energy behind the testing regimes within our hospitals and with our care settings, so that we can get back to a functioning environment within those hospitals and within the care homes. And with the rapid testing that is now available, this really does seem to be a game changer in what we can be doing. I would urge the Minister to make sure that those tests are made available to the Welsh NHS.

But, above all, the central leadership that the Welsh Government can provide, with the civil service here in Cardiff, and the access to resource, has to be driven and engineered to make sure that the health boards are driven in their planning to make sure that the services are re-engineered and reopened. And it is only that central resource—that capacity of that central resource—that will allow this to happen. We need to make sure we have a strong public health messaging campaign so that people know that the NHS is open and ready for you should you need it. Because with the messaging and what we've gone through in the last six to seven months, it is a fact that many people are—to put it bluntly—frightened to engage with services, and that shouldn't be the case. We need to be constantly repeating the message that the NHS is there for you, to get that diagnosis, get that treatment and, ultimately, get back to a normal way of life. Regrettably, Macmillan have pointed out that, on cancer services, for example, other than a brief campaign in June, there hasn't been a joined-up and co-ordinated campaign here in Wales, unlike in other parts of the United Kingdom, when it comes to cancer services. So, there is work to be done in that particular area. Above all, what I'd also like to see is a cancer delivery plan delivered by the Welsh Government, which, regrettably, they've declined to do, according to a written answer to me. We do know that the current cancer plan is coming to an end at the end of December this year, and the answer that I received yesterday indicated that there's still not the formatting of its successor plan to be put in place.

So, when we're looking at developing a more central model to, ultimately, support the NHS here in Wales to deliver on waiting times, deliver on support staff support, deliver on resources, and then we look at one critical part of the health service—the cancer departments within our hospitals—their own delivery plan will be coming to an end in December, and there is no successor plan in place at the moment from the Welsh Government. The Government do need to step up to the plate and get on top of this, because, as I said, when it comes to cancer services, we know for a fact that time is of the essence. And that is why I call for support this afternoon for the motion as tabled. It is a fact that all parts of the NHS, in any part of the United Kingdom, are facing long waiting times. We are not disputing that, and we don't blame the Government for a moment for suspending those services back in March. But, reactivating those services has been slower here in Wales than in other parts of the United Kingdom, and it is that slowness that has exacerbated the waiting times, which the figures that I mentioned at the beginning of this debate have highlighted graphically—first of all last week, when they were first published, and again by repeating them here in the debate this afternoon. I hope that Members will be able to support the motion as tabled, unamended, so that it has the most potency and ultimately drives home the seriousness of the challenge that we face. Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer.

I have selected six amendments to the motion. Can I call on Vaughan Gething to move formally amendments 1 to 5, tabled in the name of Rebecca Evans?

Formally moved, Deputy Presiding Officer.

I call on Rhun ap Iorwerth to move amendment 6, tabled in the name of Siân Gwenllian—Rhun.

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. I'm pleased to have an opportunity to respond to this motion. It's a motion that we in Plaid Cymru agree with in general terms. I disagree with the wording in certain areas—COVID-lite areas rather than COVID-free are what the Royal College of Surgeons is calling for, and it's an important issue. We certainly agree with the underlying intention of the motion in general terms. We will be voting against the original motion to allow a vote on our own amendment, of course.

Long before the pandemic, we were concerned about lengthy waiting lists. As health spokesperson, it has been one of the hot topics of the past few years. As a constituency representative, I know of I don't know how many constituents who have been told that they will have to wait for way over 12 months for urgent treatment. It will be an experience common to each and every one of us in this Senedd, I'm sure.

The impact on patients is great—not only the direct impact of having to live with illness, often in pain or in discomfort, with the anxiety that the long waiting time is actually making things worse and that the treatment will ultimately be less successful—but also because the waiting itself leads to problems. We had a valuable report from the health councils back in 2018, 'Our lives on hold', looking at the impact of waiting times on quality of life. The title said it all, if truth be told. We are talking about the impact of the waiting, not only on physical health, but also on mental health, on isolation, on mobility, on the loss of dignity and the impact on family life, where older people have childcare responsibilities and can't undertake those responsibilities.

In that respect, I think that the Government has been a little disingenuous in its amendments. The Government needs to recognise that waiting times in Wales were far too long before this crisis. They shouldn't, in any way, try to avoid the reality of the situation—that performance against waiting time targets has been a long-term problem. But, the pandemic, of course, has exacerbated the situation. For many people who had been waiting before the beginning of this troubled year, things came to a stop. When some elective treatments restarted, we heard concerns of inconsistencies across Wales in terms of access to surgical services.

But, do bear in mind that it's not just waiting times for treatment that have been recognised as a problem. We have also seen great delays—and the complete suspension at times—in the diagnostic services that are so crucially important. In addition to that, of course, many people have chosen not to seek medical assistance because of nervousness about catching the virus or because they don't want to be a burden on our health service at a time of crisis.

The upshot of all of this? We have heard cancer organisations such as Macmillan tell us that they think that up to 3,000 people in Wales could be living with undiagnosed cancer because of the impact of coronavirus. So, it is crucial that the Welsh Government does look at how they deal with the backlogs in the system, and deal with the fact that many people feel that they have been forgotten. It's important not only for the sake of the patients, but also for our committed staff, and we once again have an opportunity to thank them for their service.

We need the COVID-lite sites as a matter of urgency, with regular testing for staff and patients and sufficient stocks of PPE to keep the elective capacity going through the crucial next few months. I use the term 'COVID-lite' deliberately, rather than 'COVID-free', as the Royal College of Surgeons does, because in reality you can give no guarantee that you can eradicate the virus entirely from sites. Regular testing is crucial in order to maintain surgical services, workforce planning, and safeguarding the COVID-lite sites is important. Staff must be tested regularly, even when they are asymptomatic.

We have tabled our amendment in the spirit of making progress, and in passing that, as I've suggested, we will be supporting the motion itself. We do think that we need a review of performance targets—

We appear to have lost Rhun. We've not got the Member back, and as he was running out of time anyway, I think I'll draw his conclusions to a close for him and I'll call Janet Finch-Saunders.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Just in starting this debate, I'd like to put on record again, myself, and on behalf of us as Welsh Conservatives, the immense thanks to all staff in the healthcare sector for the hard work, dedication and commitment that they continue to show to Welsh patients. Now, let's be honest, the health service here in Wales under this Welsh Labour Government did not enter the pandemic on its best footing. The 95 per cent target for patients spending less than four hours in A&E had never been met. Cancer waiting times had not been met for 10 years. Forty-two per cent of people in Wales had an unmet need for physiotherapy compared to 30 per cent in England, and Betsi Cadwaladr, my own health board, had some horrendous waiting times in February: 508 patient pathways waiting over 36 weeks to start ENT treatment, 903 for urology, and 3,192 for trauma and orthopaedic treatment. As Andrew R.T. Davies has quite correctly said, these are individuals. Their lives are being impacted daily. Sadly, despite these tireless efforts of our front-line workers, the impact of the pandemic on these individuals is devastating. Waiting times for those waiting more than 36 weeks have increased by eight times; 168,944 people have been waiting more than 36 weeks for treatment. In fact, the overall number of patient pathways waiting to start treatment by the end of September 2020 had topped 0.5 million people.

Now, as the Minister knows, I have written to him on several occasions with constituents who are now on record as having waited years for some orthopaedic surgery, and we must note the BBC Wales report, which shows a tenfold increase in patients waiting for all treatments in the Welsh NHS compared to September 2019. Now, these are not new findings, and we're not dismissing the impact of COVID-19, but in fact, warnings of backlogs were made during the first lockdown. The Royal College of General Practitioners commented that in 2009, during the flu epidemic in the UK, there was a significant increase in deaths from strokes. So, there is a risk that the obvious emphasis on COVID patients will result in treatment for other health conditions being delayed if patients are not allowed to present in primary care. Asthma UK and the British Lung Foundation highlighted severe concerns about people with chronic lung disease being at greater risk of preventable exacerbation and worsening of health.

The British Heart Foundation indicated that the drop of 20 per cent in the number of people seen in hospitals across Wales with a suspected heart attack since lockdown may partly explain the increase in deaths that are not currently attributable to COVID-19. Now, while I agree that many treatments were closed at the start of lockdown, obviously, to ensure the safety of patients, urgent action is needed now to resume some of these services. Unlike the Minister, I think it would be sensible to put a plan in place to tackle the waiting list backlog. You should immediately boost the use of COVID-free hospitals. As recommended by the Royal College of Surgeons and the Royal College of Emergency Medicine, across the UK, setting up COVID-19-free hospital areas could prevent 6,000 unnecessary COVID-19-related deaths—this is after cancer surgery—over the next year.

On 31 July, NHS England published the third phase of its COVID-19 response, which had a particular focus on the capacity available to ensure the return of near normal levels of non-COVID health services. But in comparison here, we've seen the Welsh Government struggle to act quickly. So, by 28 August, no general and acute beds were available in field hospitals. This was the case for nearly two months until 15 October, when 115 beds had been made available. That's less than half of the capacity seen at the peak of the pandemic. That failure to not use the independent and field hospital capacity consistently, before the second wave, has driven pressure on to our existing hospitals during the second wave. The seriousness of this situation is clear, when considering that 2,000 people could die because of COVID-related delays in the Welsh NHS. Scotland and England have had cancer recovery plans in place for several months, yet not here. So, I wholeheartedly support the calls for a plan and a nationwide campaign to ensure that people who suspect that they have cancer and need to go to hospital do so. Even Macmillan Cancer Support recommended last month that you must commit a clear plan and resources to support the delivery of surge capacity.

I will close by noting that the urgent action that we are requesting is feasible. This is constructive opposition. Not only is it supported by health organisations, but we can feasibly boost the use of COVID-free hospitals across Wales by ensuring that health boards have clear policies on addressing testing requirements and frequency for staff and patients; adequate PPE and surgical supplies and clear policies on when and how to use them; local co-ordination to ensure that patients' care pathways are appropriately managed; the use of hospitals from the independent sector to boost capacity; and Nightingale hospitals to remain in operation. Please, Minister, let us all work together now across the board and deal with the situation that faces us now with COVID, but let normal hospital treatments that are required by the Welsh public continue and let them have their much-needed treatment. Thank you. Diolch.

I welcome, Dirprwy Lywydd, the constructive and serious way in which the Conservatives have approached this debate today. I'll say to those Members on the opposition benches that when a debate is approached in this way, it puts the pressure on the backbench Members of the Government benches to justify, then, supporting the Government amendments. And it's that much more important that we put forward a strong argument when a debate is conducted in this way, and it's a good way to conduct scrutiny.

But I have to say that at the very heart of this debate is the need to control the virus and to prevent the spread of the virus into hospital settings, which, clearly, the SAGE advice given to UK Government and devolved Governments prior to the firebreak lockdown that took place at the beginning of November, was for that purpose. Looking at point No. 4 in the motion, mentioning the health Minister's very clear and honest answer about the problem facing waiting lists as a result of COVID, the purpose of that advice from SAGE to introduce a firebreak lockdown was to tackle exactly that problem. And I think the Conservatives would recognise that now, with hindsight, they were mistaken not to support that firebreak lockdown at the time, because, as we saw in England, a longer and harsher lockdown was introduced in order to tackle that problem. And this is at the heart of this debate—taking those measures and taking those strategies that will allow the control of the virus. And I'm sorry to Andrew R.T. Davies, if I was allowed to let you intervene, I would—you know I would—but the rules aren't allowing it at the moment.

So, in looking at the situation, what has the Welsh Government done? Well, just last week, we had a written statement from the health Minister about the single cancer pathway that was introduced in November 2018. And what it does is make sure that all patients, regardless of the degree of suspicion, all patients who are presenting with potential cancer cases are dealt with on a single cancer pathway. It's therefore, as the health Minister said in his statement,

'a much more accurate way of measuring the times to treatment our patients are experiencing in the health system.'

But one of the things he said in his statement was that,

'The Single Cancer Pathway will enable us to tackle variation, improve outcomes and deliver better experience for patients.'

I think it's the duty now on the health Minister to elaborate on that and to provide us with more information on how those things are being achieved, and that's a key point that I'd like the health Minister to address.

And with regard to cancer support and treatment, I have to say, in 2016, when I was first elected, I met with the chief executive of the Aneurin Bevan health board, and her ambition was to introduce a breast cancer centre of excellence at Ysbyty Ystrad Fawr. I'm very pleased to say now that we are going to see that open next year, and that in itself—this centre of excellence—will provide evidence-based services, providing the best clinical outcomes, comprising of dedicated diagnostic treatment and counselling rooms that will enable faster diagnosis. And, indeed, the business case put together by Aneurin Bevan health board says the new centre will increase the range of breast surgery that can be performed as day cases from 30 per cent to 70 per cent. That's happening in Ysbyty Ystrad Fawr—they're having to extend the hospital to do it. That's Welsh Government funding that's supporting those patients with breast cancer. And, I think, therefore, I'd like to dedicate my contribution today to a constituent, Dawn Wilson.

Dawn Wilson lived in Ystrad Mynach and was diagnosed with terminal breast cancer in 2017. Dawn passed away at the beginning of Breast Cancer Awareness Month on 1 October this year, and she spent the years in which she was diagnosed as terminal campaigning for others to avoid them getting in her position. In support, I'm wearing my pink tie today. She took the Know Your Lemons campaign, which originated from the work of Corrine Beaumont in America—she took that campaign as an awareness campaign and brought it to Wales. The idea is, there's a poster with a series of lemons and you can look at the lemons and they show the kind of breast cancer that may be diagnosed from looking at the shape of the lemon. And it's a very clear visual guide. Dawn got the Welsh NHS to pick that up. It was Dawn's campaigning in the last years of her life that got the Welsh NHS to pick up that campaign, and it was the Welsh Government that launched that campaign because of Dawn Wilson. Therefore, to close my remarks, I'd like us to recognise that contribution she made, and what selfless contribution too, in the last years of her life. I met her here in the Senedd two years ago, and I went to her house in Ystrad Mynach to talk to her about that campaign. So, it's a pleasure to dedicate this contribution to her today.

The pandemic has highlighted many things about our NHS—the resilience of our staff, their commitment to patients in the many additional hours that they have worked, and the flexibility that so many staff have demonstrated to help put in place the response to the pandemic. The pandemic has also highlighted some weaknesses of a system that has been creaking for some time. In her contribution, Janet Finch-Saunders said that waiting lists were on the rise before this public health crisis started, and we know that the backlog is now so big that it will take action for years to get it back to normal. In fact, the chief executive of NHS Wales admitted that point last week.

I'm concerned that, as we approach winter, waiting lists will inexorably grow longer, as they always do at this time of year, particularly as the NHS focuses on COVID-19 and winter pressures. Nowhere is this more stark than in my area in south-east Wales. The people will now need to know when they can expect treatment for not just routine matters but also access to life-saving treatments. In September this year, there were 26,974 people waiting for more than 36 weeks to start their treatment in south-east Wales, when the target is zero, compared to only 1,313 a year ago. This is clearly a colossal increase. The Royal College of Surgeons, in their recent evidence to the inquiry undertaken by the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee, outlined that a significant elective surgery backlog existed in Wales, prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, and that this will only have increased. In January 2020, the last waiting-time statistics before the pandemic showed nearly half a million people waiting to start treatment, with 76,862 waiting more than 26 weeks. The risk is that many patients will require complex surgery if their treatment doesn't occur in a timely fashion, resulting, as we know, too often in worsening symptoms and deterioration in their condition.

Dirprwy Lywydd, I have, on several occasions in this Chamber, welcomed the building and the recent opening of the new Grange University Hospital in Cwmbran. We should all be ambitious about reforming the delivery of services to better suit patient needs, with new facilities, a focus on innovative models of care and the latest in technology and equipment. That project has been in development now for well over 10 years—I think, before I was elected to this place, I remember taking part in the Gwent clinical futures meetings then—and we finally have that excellent facility. But if new facilities are to be effective, they have to be properly resourced with the right level of staff. Any risk of shortages needs to be avoided, and people need to know that the hospital is accessible by both car and public transport, because these issues have been raised with me in recent weeks. The problem is, welcoming new capacity is too rare, and the problem of waiting times and growing waiting lists is the opposite—it's not rare, and something that the Welsh Government have had to respond to in the past.

In the second Assembly, the then health Minister introduced the second-offer scheme to bring the waiting list and waiting times down by offering treatment elsewhere in the NHS and outside Wales in the independent sector. At that point, many people were then treated more quickly. In fact, between April and September 2005, a total of 495 people from Gwent were offered alternative hospitals in the private sector to get their operations done. In all fairness to the Government at that time, it demonstrated a willingness to look beyond narrow political standpoints about treating people outside of Wales and outside the NHS, and secured a workable solution for patients at that time. In light of the fact that theatre capacity across Wales has been below optimal for some time, has the Welsh Government explored the option of increasing short-term capacity, perhaps working with providers outside Wales who might have capacity to address this?

Whilst all NHS bodies across the UK will be managing the response to the pandemic, I would ask that the Minister sets out whether capacity exists elsewhere and, if it is possible, to perhaps scope out some kind of second second-offer scheme—a phase 2, if you like—to address this important crisis. If not, then what else can be done to examine the flexing up of the previous surge capacity that was introduced during the UK-wide lockdown to protect the NHS in case the COVID-19 numbers start to really undermine the NHS capacity? Additional capacity is now needed to address the consequences of the pandemic for thousands of people whose need of NHS care is equally important as it has been in the past.

The COVID pandemic has had an absolutely cataclysmic effect on very many people. Lives have been lost from COVID and for non-COVID reasons, and other lives have been changed forever, touched by grief, loss and tragedy. Others continue to suffer the debilitating effect of long COVID, and all this applies, yes, to patients and people everywhere, but also to NHS and care staff. Some staff have lost their lives by going to work.

The motion recognises the hard work, dedication and commitment of staff in the healthcare sector, but, sometimes, these words just slip out without pausing. The reality that is COVID: the terror on the wards in the early days with inadequate PPE and inadequate testing and just not knowing, fear stalked wards, staff felt exposed and in danger. We had an already overstretched health service going above and beyond, an exhausted workforce trying to catch up on routine demand during the so-called quiet summer months, before being stretched again now as the case numbers rise, hospital occupancy rises and beds in intensive care become full again. This time, both COVID and non-COVID cases are being dealt with, but the capacity is not there. Asymptomatic viral transfer means striving for COVID-free wards, but COVID-free wards are a huge ask and currently probably unachievable. COVID-lite is as good as it gets. Courtesy of changing all the PPE kit all the time, between every patient, the throughput of patients has taken a huge hit now.

So, there is a long list of things to do, and the various royal colleges are telling us what to do. We still need to get on top of COVID, and many doctors still have huge concerns about the UK Government's privatised test and trace service, with some doctors calling it a lethal mistake. Creating a testing and tracing system from scratch using private companies, none with any public health experience, in the middle of a pandemic, separate from the existing public health NHS testing and tracing system—I mean, what could possibly go wrong?

A highly efficient contact system is vital, and supported isolation is key. Paying people £800 to isolate, contacting people in isolation regularly every day, arranging hotel accommodation where appropriate—it works in other countries. This isolation has to be supported and enabled for the good of us all. Local NHS and public health testing and contact tracing works brilliantly well. We need to strive to only do that, and phase out the private UK system dogged by delays, inaccuracies and failure, resulting in only around 20 to 30 per cent of people that are contacts, that should be isolating, actually isolating. The rest are merrily spreading the virus around without knowing. We need to redirect resources to our public health NHS and GPs, testing and contact tracing as we've always done for any other notifiable infectious disease down the years—TB, malaria, salmonella, measles and so on and so on. Involve GPs in testing and tracing, supply pulse oximeters to people and primary care. Community COVID can be tackled safely outside hospitals, testing and tracing is here for the long term, so let's plan properly long term.

Finally, the calamitous effect of COVID is common to all health services. We know the lengthening waiting times here in Wales. Over the border, the situation in Conservative-run England is no better—worse, if anything. The number of people in England waiting more than 52 weeks for elective treatment reached 139,545 in September 2020. That is not 10 times more than the previous year, not 20 times more than the previous year, not 50 times more than the previous year, but 107 times more than the number in September 2019.

Vaccines are a superb discovery, absolutely game changing, but not here yet. We still have a winter illness season and a rampant COVID pandemic to tackle first, with exhausted overstretched staff everywhere. We can all do our bit. Welsh Government needs to sort out testing and tracing contacts now, and get supported isolation up and running as soon as possible.

Although I'm receiving a high volume of e-mails regarding COVID-related delays in the Welsh NHS, all recognise the hard work, dedication and commitment of staff in the healthcare sector. The Labour Welsh Government describes the increase in patients waiting for all treatments in the Welsh NHS compared to September 2019 as a trend that has been seen in all areas of the UK. This is of course both true and inevitable. However, despite the magnificent job done by the Welsh NHS in caring for people who have contracted COVID-19, the pandemic has shone a spotlight on issues within our Welsh NHS resulting from over two decades of Labour Welsh Government policies.

Neurology was already chronically underfunded in Wales before the pandemic, with large gaps in service provision resulting in delays to diagnosis of months and sometimes years, lack of follow-up and community support, as well as low levels of access to specialist and end-of-life care. In terms of access to services and treatments, an MS Society survey in 2019 showed that Wales was already lagging behind the rest of the UK before the pandemic, with 42 per cent of people in Wales having unmet need for physiotherapy compared to 30 per cent in England, and 70 per cent of people in Wales living with MS not having received any emotional or psychological support, compared to 13 per cent across the UK. The Wales Neurological Alliance survey on the impact of the coronavirus pandemic revealed that it had had major ramifications on the provision of health and social care services for people living with neurological conditions, with services and treatment delayed or stopped. After I asked the First Minister when essential surgery will resume for highly vulnerable children or adults with epilepsy earlier this month he wrote stating that epilepsy surgery has not stopped. However, hospital episode statistics show far lower numbers and longer waits for both respective surgery and vagus nerve stimulation surgery in Wales, compared to England. I am advised that there have been no adult VNS surgeries, either new implantations or battery replacements, since the pandemic started in March, resulting in people not getting the essential surgery and therapy they need.

In August, I met campaigners from Macmillan Cancer Support online to discuss their lived experience of the worrying impact the coronavirus pandemic is having on cancer services in Wales. Macmillan Cancer Support has noted that England's backlog of cancer patients will take less time to get through than in Wales, where the median waiting time for patients waiting to start treatment at the end of September in England was less than half that of Wales. By 29 April, 21 COVID-free cancer hubs were set up in England, run by cancer alliances. The Scottish and Northern Irish NHS have also used independent hospital capacity to set up COVID-free cancer hubs. However, as Macmillan Cancer Support stated, Wales is lagging behind England when it comes to setting up COVID-19-free hubs to treat cancer patients in Wales. 

Both Scotland and England have had plans in place for several months to ensure that cancer patients are seen and operated on swiftly. However, as Macmillan Cancer Support stated, we need the Welsh Government to put in place a fully fledged COVID-19 recovery plan for cancer services and to tackle a cancer care backlog that will only continue to grow with every disruption in Wales to cancer services caused by this pandemic. Their research shows an estimated 2,900 people in Wales could be living with undiagnosed cancer because of the pandemic. As they said, it is a wholly inappropriate for the Welsh Government to suggest that a plan for clearing the already substantial cancer backlog would be, quote, 'foolish'. Cancer, they said, cannot wait for the pandemic to end, and Macmillan wants to make sure cancer is not the forgotten 'c' of the pandemic. 

Cancer Research Wales has warned that many of the people who did not receive their invitation due to the pause in cancer screening services, who put off seeing their GP for fear of COVID-19 or concern about adding to NHS pressures, could have cancer. They said that, unless it is addressed quickly, the outcomes for patients in Wales will be less positive, that Wales already had a low reputation for cancer outcomes, and this will experience significant damage in the coming years and that it is through a COVID-19 recovery plan for cancer services that Wales will be able to understand the scale of the challenge and be able to coherently draw all approaches from across Wales together. As our motion, therefore, states, Wales needs a cancer recovery plan, as seen elsewhere across the UK. 

Thank you. Can I now call the Minister for Health and Social Services, Vaughan Gething?

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I'd like to thank Members for their contributions to today's debate and deal with the Government amendments and comments made during the debate. It's a fact that, before the COVID pandemic, we had made four years of continuous improvement in waiting times across Wales. The last year, the pace of improvement scaled as a direct result of the tax and pension issues across the UK. Like all countries, the pandemic has impacted and continues to impact upon our ability to treat all patients as efficiently as we would like—points that were well recognised and noted in the contribution by Dai Lloyd. 

As the September statistics show, many patients are now waiting much longer. Those statistics show that the over-36-week waits have increased sixfold from February to September within this year. Like other parts of the UK, we will see further increases as we respond to coronavirus during this public health emergency. I should, perhaps, at this point address some of the comments about capacity in England or the independent sector. We already have arrangements in place with the independent sector through the pandemic. We already make use, from time to time, of independent sector activity to deal with waiting list initiatives. There's nothing new in that. However, the capacity that is regularly made use of in the English system is unlikely to be available to us because of the significant scale of the backlog that they will have to deal with. 

Sadly, as was recently highlighted in the community health council report yesterday, the condition of some patients will worsen whilst they are waiting. This reinforces the need to control the spread of coronavirus and to increase the number of planned operations as safely and as quickly as possible. Coronavirus has affected almost every aspect of healthcare, from learning how to treat and care for people who are seriously ill with COVID, the long COVID treatment—we're still learning more about the condition—to making physical changes to clinics, surgeries and operating theatres to both protect staff and patients from the risk of contracting this highly infectious virus. And I remain incredibly grateful to our dedicated NHS and social care staff for their commitment and their compassion during these unprecedented times. 

In the recent BBC Wales Investigates interview, I clearly described why our priority must be to respond to the pandemic in a structured and measured way. This involves developing approaches to support patients most in need of planned treatment, and I also indicated that we are already looking at broader steps to plan for the future. We do have an agreed way forward at health board level to treat COVID-19 and maintain essential services such as cancer, which is certainly not the forgotten 'c' during this pandemic. Those expectations are set out in the quarterly planning framework that we discussed again in the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee today. There's detailed guidance within that on cancer and other related services, such as endoscopy. So, health boards have plans in place in response to this, and we continue to work closely with them as we understand and monitor delivery. 

The pandemic has, though, had a heartbreaking impact on services that care for people with cancer and other life-affecting treatments, and our chief medical officer has been very clear that there are several ways that the pandemic will cause harm, both directly and indirectly. And I should at this point note Hefin David's comments about his constituent, Dawn Wilson. I met Dawn before endorsing and supporting the Know Your Lemons campaign, and I recognise the impact that she had, and it was an entirely selfless act on her part to take up the end of her life to campaign for others. A key message in our forthcoming national communication will be to continue to highlight and to reinforce the need for patients to contact our NHS with any signs or symptoms of cancer. This will continue in the new campaign, Help us, Help You. We're working with a range of partners, such as the Football Association of Wales and the Wales Rugby Union to support our messages, with focus videos, including some from football figures and real NHS staff. 

Health boards are having to deal with an unprecedented situation, and there are no simple operational or ethical answers to this. Everything that can be done is being done. Everything that can be provided is being provided. And we're still learning and needing to adapt as our evidence base changes, as our knowledge changes. So, the Government does remain focused on addressing this important area. My officials continue to work with clinicians on identifying options for how additional moneys recently announced by the UK Government can help us to address the significant challenges that delayed treatment will present, not just for the next few months, but for an entire Welsh Parliament term. Our priority will be to reduce risk from delay and to support clinical prioritisation. As the chief executive of NHS Wales highlighted last week, additional safety measures are necessary to protect patients and staff, and they remain a priority as the number of patients presenting with COVID remains high in all of our healthcare settings in primary and secondary care. This affects both the type and the volume of services available to treat other patients. So, we continue to explore ways to maximise the flow of patients in and out of treatment. That includes reviewing safe discharge arrangements and how best to use our hospital and primary care estate, including field hospitals.

I want to deal with the option of green hospitals, or, as the motion says—a different phrase—COVID-free hospitals. It sounds an attractive idea, but it's not easy to do, and I agree with Dai Lloyd that I don't think it's actually a practical answer. For example, we need to know what impact this would have on local access to emergency services, including minor injury services, travel times and strain on ambulance resources during winter. The so-called COVID-free hospitals that the Tories advocate—. And if they're serious about doing so, we need to be clear about what that means: so, which hospital in north Wales would no longer have an A&E department? Would Withybush or Glangwili no longer have A&E or minor injuries, or emergency surgery, and how would maternity access be organised? Because, in all of these areas, they're not compatible with a COVID-free hospital. I'm afraid that the slogan of 'COVID free' isn't actually a serious and practical answer for NHS Wales now, and, actually, the Royal College of Surgeons in Wales have made clear that they're interested in COVID-lite zones within our estate as a practical answer, as Richard Johnson recently set out. And I should make it clear of course that, in terms of Dr Lloyd's comments about contact tracing, TTP in Wales is public and is delivering to a high standard.

Our field hospitals have a role to play in supporting capacity and flow, but it's not possible to deliver elective pathways in a field hospital. And I think remarks on this area from Janet Finch-Saunders didn't perhaps take in and fully understand the role that they can play and will play in this phase of the pandemic. For example, many treatments require post-surgical care and additional back-up facilities, including intensive care. Operating theatres are, of course, not available in field hospital environments.

The NHS has responded magnificently to this major and unprecedented public health emergency. Our staff have shown tremendous adaptability to deliver services, to both COVID and non-COVID patients. And I believe that our NHS staff and their colleagues across the public sector deserve a proper pay rise to reflect this. That means teachers, teaching assistants, cleaners, cooks, environmental health officers, and their colleagues across local government, the police, and the armed forces, who have helped so much in our COVID response here in Wales and across the UK. All of these public servants, and their colleagues, deserve so much better than the kick in the teeth they got today from the Chancellor. We here in Wales will continue to work with and to value our NHS and their partners, as we continue to face the unprecedented challenges of this pandemic, in the months ahead, and in the years ahead, and the recovery that will take place once the pandemic is finally over.

Thank you. I now intend to call those Members who have requested to make an intervention. Rhun ap Iorwerth, I notice that you're back with us now; do you want to do a minute's worth of your intervention?

Thank you very much. It's incredible that it's taken seven or eight months to lose electricity in the house at some point during a Senedd session, but I'm pleased to be able to return.

All I had left as my contribution was to refer to what we were seeking to achieve through our amendment. We do think that we need to review the targets used to see how they encourage behavioural change in the health boards, and whether they are measuring the right things. I also wanted to say that we also believe that, as we do have the Nightingale hospitals to provide capacity, we should use that to increase flow through the system. And just to make the point in conclusion that COVID is a crisis in and of itself, but it's created another crisis from the pressures that already existed in the system. And that's something that we need to see more urgency on and a more meaningful response to. But, Deputy Presiding Officer, thank you for the opportunity to conclude my contribution in that way.

Thank you. And Andrew R.T. Davies.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I just wanted to reiterate that I think the Conservative position on the firebreak lockdown was a consistent position, and if that vote came today, we would stand by that vote and vote the same way. Because SAGE's advice at the end of September also pointed to the fact that the effectiveness and outcomes of such a firebreak, or lockdown—call it what you will—were unknown, and actually those harms are far greater. We do support restrictions to suppress the virus—we're not saying there shouldn't be restrictions; we do support that. And we support the localised restrictions, which would have a greater effect than some of the measures the Welsh Government have brought to date. So I just wanted to put that on the record, because sadly our terms of engagement don't allow the intervention. [Interruption.]

No, you cannot, I'm afraid; nobody can respond to any intervention, I'm afraid. I'm going to call Angela Burns to reply to the debate. Angela.

Diolch, Deputy Presiding Officer. I do not have very much time, so I'm not going to be able to touch on everybody's individual contributions. I would just like to say that I'm very grateful for the tone in which most of this debate was mostly conducted—sadly not all of it.

This isn't about having a knock at the NHS and the people who work so incredibly hard in it, or the doctors and the nurses. In fact, it's not even particularly a knock at the Government, because, let's be clear, this pandemic was something that none of us ever saw coming, and many people in many organisations, both public and private, have stepped up to the plate in a way that is unprecedented. And to each and every one of them, I say an enormous 'thank you'.

But the real concern behind all of this is we don't just have COVID in our lives, we have many other illnesses, many other diseases. And we don't seem to have a plan, and that's what we're calling for, and we've called for very clearly in our amendment today. Different health boards have different ways of dealing with their bit. Patients aren't clear. So, I just want to, very quickly, run through why I think we need a plan.

We need a plan to give hope to patients. Too many people are writing to too many of us, too often, to say they can't get access to treatment, they're really worried, they can't get the diagnoses they need, they've been told that they could conceivably have cancer, their heart's not in great shape, they had a bowel test a year ago and they're supposed to have a follow-up. People are frightened, they need to know that the Government has got a clear plan.

We need to have a plan to support the dedicated and, frankly, exhausted staff. They need to know that there's a way forward, that it's not just going to be COVID, COVID, COVID. We need to have a plan to ensure that all the health boards are in the right place at the right time—that we don't have a postcode lottery. Some health boards have performed extremely well during this pandemic, others have done less so. A clear plan on how we're going to catch up with these waiting times, with this backlog, will really help to bring everybody up and level that playing field. We need a plan to maximise the skills and the commitment of the specialist teams, to give confidence to the professionals.

We need a plan to answer the concerns and the fears of the many organisations. I can't run through them all, but we've got the Wales Cancer Alliance, we've got the Royal College of General Practitioners, Asthma UK, the British Lung Foundation, the Chartered Society of Physiotherapy, the British Heart Foundation, the Royal College of Surgeons, the Multiple Sclerosis Society and the Royal College of Psychiatrists. These guys know their business, and they are raising concerns about the lack of plan.

We need to have a plan to keep pace with other home nations. And we need a plan to ensure that the regional collaboration really works effectively—that if you can't get your treatment in Hywel Dda, you can go just up the road. If you can't get your treatment in Betsi Cadwaladr, you can go to another health board. And even more importantly, Minister, if you can't get your treatment in Wales, your gatekeepers will stand down and will allow you to go to other nations where some of this specialist treatment may still be available.

I've run out of time, Minister, as my timer—which you can probably all hear, and I can't work out how to switch off—is saying. I just want to say, this is not about saying to the NHS, 'You aren't doing it well.' You've been phenomenal. But it is about saying, 'It is now our duty to not just keep our eyes on the big fire that is COVID', because if we don't look at all the other small fires that are continuing to burn, then they will be the ones that will eventually burn down our building, and we cannot afford that, and our citizens do not deserve that. So, I ask you, please support the motion today.

Thank you very much. The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Thank you. I heard that, thank you. I defer voting under this item until voting time. And in accordance with Standing Order 12.18, I will suspend the meeting for five minutes before proceeding to voting time, during which time IT support will be on hand to help with any issues.

We are now at voting time, and the first vote this evening is on the debate on the Member's legislative proposal, a deposit-return scheme and a waste reduction Bill. I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Janet Finch-Saunders. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 34, 18 abstentions, one against. Therefore the motion is agreed.

We now move to vote on the Climate Change, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee debate on the national development framework. I call for a vote on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Siân Gwenllian. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the amendment nine, one abstention, 43 against. Therefore amendment 1 is not agreed.

I now call for a vote on amendment 2, tabled in the name of Siân Gwenllian. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the amendment nine, 10 abstentions, 34 against. Therefore amendment 2 is not agreed.

I now call for a vote on the motion. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 41, three abstentions, nine against. So, therefore the motion is agreed.

We now turn to vote on the Welsh Conservative debate on the impact of COVID-19 on health services, and I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Darren Millar. If the proposal is not agreed to, we vote on the amendments tabled to the motion. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 13, no abstentions, 40 against. Therefore the motion is not agreed.

We vote on the amendments and I call for a vote on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Rebecca Evans. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the amendment 29, three abstentions, 21 against. Therefore amendment 1 is agreed.

I call for a vote on amendment 2, tabled in the name of Rebecca Evans. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the amendment 29, two abstentions, 22 against. Therefore amendment 2 is agreed.

I call for a vote on amendment 3, tabled in the name of Rebecca Evans. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the amendment 29, three abstentions, 21 against. Therefore, amendment 3 is agreed.

I call for a vote on amendment 4, tabled in the name of Rebecca Evans. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the amendment 28, one abstention, 24 against. Therefore, amendment 4 is agreed.

I call for a vote on amendment 5, tabled in the name Rebecca Evans. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the amendment 29, three abstentions, 21 against. Therefore, amendment 5 is agreed.

I now call for a vote on amendment 6, tabled in the name of Siân Gwenllian. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the amendment 19, four abstentions, 30 against. Therefore, amendment 6 is not agreed.

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

Open the vote. Close the vote. For the amended motion 29, two abstentions, 22 against. Therefore, the amended motion is agreed.

We now move to the short debate. I call on David Rees to speak to the topic he has chosen. David.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Thank you for that. Clearly, this debate comes at a time when we've just finished a debate talking on a very similar topic, but I do not apologise for that. I did hear the Minister and I'm sure I'll hear some of the same answers again, but I think it's important we address this particular issue.

Every single one of us has been touched by cancer in some way, either ourselves or a loved one. It's hardly surprising when you consider that one in two of us is likely to develop cancer at some point in our lives. Every year around 19,300 people are diagnosed with cancer in Wales, and sadly there are around 8,800 cancer deaths. It's Wales's biggest killer, and continues to have a tremendous impact upon many people. However—. Sorry. When I spoke to the Minister—. My apologies, Dirprwy Lywydd. There is reason for optimism, however, because cancer survival has doubled since the 1970s, so that today, around half of us survive our cancer for 10 years or more, but we know that we can, and must, do better. International studies like the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership continue to see Wales perform poorly in comparison to similar nations. If we could catch up with the best countries, many more lives could be saved.

When I spoke last in the Senedd about cancer, the world was very different. I spoke in person, rather than via technology; I was able to sit in close proximity to friends and colleagues when having a meal. Now, in a post-pandemic world, we have seen many changes to our daily lives to that we would have been doing only months ago; now no longer a responsible action to take. However, cancer hasn't gone into hiding during this pandemic. Just like the virus, it remains a threat to our health. Likewise, the approaches we take to treat cancer haven't changed, and the importance of early diagnosis hasn't changed either. The impact of COVID-19 has had a very serious, very real impact on thousands of people's cancer, and they may not even know it. Last month, Macmillan Cancer Support released a very stark report on the impact of COVID-19 on cancer care. It highlighted that during the peak of the pandemic, there were 31 per cent fewer patients than usual entering the single cancer pathway. Data from Cancer Research UK shows that for March 2020 to August 2020, there were around 18,200 fewer urgent referrals for suspected cancer from GPs in Wales, with the biggest fall in urgent referrals occurring in April—the height of the lockdown—when the number of referrals was 63 per cent lower than in April 2019. 

The latest cancer waiting times released from 19 November show that around 7,100 people diagnosed with cancer started treatment between April and September in Wales—a figure showing approximately 1,500 fewer people than in the same period the previous year. The same data identified that only 74 per cent of patients with an urgent referral for suspicion of cancer received a test and started treatment within 62 days in September, the target being 95 per cent. This compares to 80 per cent of patients with an urgent referral for suspected cancer starting the treatment at the same time last year. And lung cancer has been the slowest to recover, with regard to the number of urgent suspected cancer referrals—an almost 72 per cent drop in April, still down to a 26 per cent drop in August. Between March and August, the pausing of cancer screening programmes across the UK meant that 3 million people weren't invited to one of the three cancer screening programmes—bowel, breast, cervical. Modelling by Cancer Research UK suggests that every month, 55,600 people would normally be invited to take part in one of these three cancer screening programmes in Wales, leading to the diagnosis of at least 80 cancers, plus additional pre-cancerous changes detected and treated. Now, 40 per cent of Welsh respondents reported that cancer testing they would usually expect was delayed, cancelled or altered. About 27 per cent said that their cancer treatment was affected.

Like other Members, I have heard many experiences of people whose cancer tests and treatments were in some way affected by COVID-19. It has caused considerable anxiety and, most worryingly, concerns that cancer survival could be negatively affected. During the first wave of the pandemic, the number of people waiting for a diagnostic endoscopy increased from around 11,900 by the end of March to around 15,700 at the end of July. As we all know, early diagnosis is critical to improving cancer survival in Wales. For example, when bowel cancer is diagnosed at stage 1, over nine in 10 patients survive, but this drops to fewer than one in 10 if it is diagnosed at stage 4. It is estimated that this will lead to a backlog of approximately 2,900 missing diagnoses over this six-month period. It is vital that we increase cancer diagnostic capacity to at least the level it was pre-pandemic, in order to avoid too many patients entering the pathway but having to wait for diagnostics, which will—[Inaudible.]

I think we're having some problems with your connection.

[Inaudible.]—will still have those symptoms, which could be cancer. The worry is that when they do present, if identified as cancer, their diagnosis would be for a later stage, and a less treatable cancer. Reducing this backlog as quickly and safely as possible will add further strain to the diagnostic services. Additional capacity and plugging the workforce gaps is urgently needed.

Dirprwy Llywydd, last week the cross-party group on cancer here at the Senedd published a report on cancer waiting times that it initiated prior to the pandemic. Following the first pandemic peak, the initial inquiry terms of reference were expanded to include an understanding of the impact of the pandemic on cancer diagnosis and treatment. The report initially sought an assessment on the single cancer pathway, and it is still important to keep sight of the single cancer pathway as an intrinsically positive measure. Resuming the single cancer pathway reporting would present an opportunity to restart and reset, particularly for those conversations on where improvements for diagnostic pathways can and should be made.

I very much welcome last week's announcement by the Minister to reintroduce the single cancer pathway, along with a target figure that health boards must achieve. This is clearly a positive step in the right direction. However, I am calling for the Welsh Government to accept all the recommendations from the report, and in particular prioritise cancer care and treatment by providing additional resources to cope with the backlog. The report calls for a COVID-19 cancer recovery plan to be published, detailing how the Welsh Government will support improved delivery of cancer services, and, in particular, how diagnostic services would be supported to reduce the cancer backlog that does exist. This could require COVID-secure green sites to shore up capacity and maintain services, although I do recognise the comments that the Minister made in the previous debate that there is no guarantee of COVID-free sites due to the nature of this virus.

Adequate COVID testing for staff and patients is necessary to sustain such sites and keep them as COVID lite as possible, and to give confidence to patients. Alongside this, a wide-ranging mass media communications campaign is needed to encourage people with concerning symptoms to seek help from a GP. And I know, again, that the Minister has indicated that they'll do that and they've agreed on it. It is needed to encourage people with those symptoms to continue seeking help from their GPs, as well as to provide reassurance that people can be seen and treated safely. A post-COVID recovery plan for cancer services is essential to tackle the short-term situation, but it is also critical that this acts as a forerunner for the longer term transformation that is required for cancer diagnostics.

The cancer delivery plan for 2016 was meant to end this year, and while Welsh Government have announced their intention to develop a successor to this plan, no further detail has yet been forthcoming. Now, I do appreciate that the pandemic has taken priority for officials and that a new delivery plan must now also consider how it would build upon both the existing delivery plan and the recovery plan. However, we urgently need a new comprehensive cancer strategy, with the single cancer pathway as a central component, which will be essential to drive the transformation agenda forward at a time when it's been recognised by the Minister that we are unlikely to see waiting times for many services return to pre-COVID levels for many years. 

I do not hide from the fact that the challenge facing cancer services is immense. There was a clear need to improve cancer diagnosis, treatment and cases before the pandemic hit. No-one will dispute that COVID-19 has set us back further. Therefore, a new cancer strategy needs to be bold and ambitious in tackling these challenges. Minister, like all my colleagues, I want to ensure that the NHS and local health boards are supported by the Welsh Government in meeting these challenges. The coronavirus has gripped the country and caused strain on our front-line health workers, but unfortunately, diseases like cancer continue to appear through a wide variety of symptoms.

We must all remember that patients suffering from cancer or the possibility of a cancer diagnosis require emotional support also, as treatment of the disease. We need to support our local health boards to take steps to ensure that these personalised principles remain at the heart of cancer care. All cancer care, both of the physical and mental health agendas, needs to be ring-fenced and remain untouched when considering workflow and staffing arrangements.

Finding cancer early means treating cancer early. To everyone across Wales, do not ignore your symptoms, please; do not fear visiting your GP; do not hesitate in seeking help. I wish to remind you that there are many resources, both online through the NHS website and others, to aid you in your decision to go to the doctor. You will not be wasting the NHS's time by having your symptoms diagnosed. The NHS is there to support you through diagnosis, right through to treatment. If your new symptoms do not go away, you do need to see your doctor, and write down changes that have occurred or questions you might have so that you are clear in the position.

I'll conclude my contribution today by expressing my everlasting gratitude to those staff across the NHS in Wales whose tremendous efforts have sought to maintain cancer services as much as possible in the most difficult of circumstances that they've probably ever faced. The past eight months have been like no other for them, and without their hard work, their dedication to their patients and their continued commitment to delivering positive outcomes for those patients, the adverse impact on cancer patients would have been even greater. So, together, let's ensure that our NHS is supported; let's ensure that our cancer support services are supported; and let's ensure that we support each other in getting that early diagnosis. Diolch.

Thank you. Can I call on the Minister for Health and Social Services to reply to the debate? Vaughan Gething.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and thank you to David Rees for tabling this short debate.

I welcome the work of the cross-party group and its report that was published last week. The report sets out the challenges facing cancer care and outcomes in the context of the pandemic. I'm pleased to see that there's much commonality between the recommendations of the report and our own intentions for cancer services. For instance, last week, we resumed reporting of the single cancer pathway, as called for in the report and as mentioned by David Rees in his debate introduction.

The commitments that we set out in 2013 and 2017 in our cancer delivery plans to improve cancer services and outcomes still stand today. We are not stepping back from that commitment. Our new approach will be published by March, given the impact of the pandemic. A significant amount of progress has been made in recent years, and I'd like to highlight the steady improvement in outcomes. Again, David Rees acknowledged that there has been an improvement in outcomes here in Wales. There are very high levels of positive patient experience. We have the introduction of the UK's first single cancer pathway and the emergence of rapid diagnostic centres. But there remains much more to do. The scale of the challenge and complexity of the changes that we need are significant.

In normal years, we diagnose around 19,000 new cases in Wales, more than 450,000 people are screened, and we investigate more than 120,000 suspected cancer referrals. We rely on our primary care providers to identify symptoms; our radiology, endoscopy and pathology services to diagnose; our surgical, radiotherapy and chemotherapy teams to treat the disease; and our specialist nurse palliative care teams and third sector partners to support and care for people during the most difficult time in their lives.

Delivering cancer services involves multiple specialities and interventions, with patient pathways across and recross organisational boundaries. This requires close working relationships, integrated pathways of care and particular attention to maintaining person-centred care. It's important that we have a shared understanding of how to improve cancer services and outcomes. We know that we need to drive down the rates of smoking and obesity to detect cancer at an earlier and more treatable stage, to consistently provide the latest evidence-based interventions and therapies, and to support people properly throughout the treatment pathway. These are fundamental aspects of our approach. They're supported or enabled by changing service models, developing a sustainable workforce and, of course, the best use of digital systems and data.

There's been genuine and close work around this agenda from stakeholders for many years in Wales, and there is much consensus about the best way forward. The challenge now is to capitalise on that in the years ahead and to make the significant improvement in outcomes that we all want to see. There is, though—and again, to be fair, David Rees acknowledges—no escaping the impact of the pandemic. The chief medical officer has been clear that the pandemic causes harm in several ways. Access to normal healthcare, including in this instance cancer care, is one of those ways where indirect harm is caused. From the very beginning, our approach has been to try to protect as much cancer care as possible. NHS Wales worked incredibly hard to do so and provide as many people as possible with the urgent care that they need. However, we have seen capacity and productivity in cancer diagnostics and treatment significantly reduced. This has meant that the number of people waiting for treatment is rising and there is likely to be an impact in terms of outcomes in the years ahead.

Among the recommendations in the report is the development of a cancer recovery plan for the rest of the pandemic. I understand the desire for clarity on a national level, setting out how many procedures need to be done, how many will be done, and how long it will take to treat those who are waiting. The reality is, though, that as soon we put those figures to paper, the pandemic changes what is possible. The difference between a well-controlled and a poorly controlled pandemic in terms of how many people it's possible to treat is a significant one. It goes to highlight where effective control of the pandemic is just as important to cancer and other urgent life-threatening conditions.

I know some have called for ring-fenced capacity for cancer care, and I do understand that, but, as we all know, and I certainly recognise, I'm the Minister for Health and Social Services and not exclusively the Minister for cancer care. I do not wish to oversee or live in a health system where the Government says, 'If your life-threatening illness is cancer, then you will be treated, but if your life-threatening illness is heart disease or something else, then your life is of less value.' That's exactly the same ethical dilemma that meant that we rejected the previous attempts to have a specific cancer guarantee that would have trumped other conditions. I do not believe that this is what cancer clinicians themselves would want to see either. So, I do want to be clear, health boards have detailed plans for the winter on how they'll balance the competing needs that they have to manage. They'll prioritise patients according to their clinical need, whether that is COVID or non COVID, cancer or non cancer. We must and will remain fair and equitable in how we use the available capacity we have to care for people right across Wales.

This Government committed, in March of this year, to replace the cancer delivery plan, as well as the heart and stroke plans, with a successor approach by December. Now, clearly, the pandemic has made that impossible. Whilst it has not been possible to develop such a detailed approach as set out in our existing cancer plan, we have continued to work with stakeholders to set out our aspirations for the next phase of service development and improvements.

I'm keen that we learn the lessons of the delivery plan approach and the pace of implementation in particular. We need to continue to evolve and build on our previous approach, rather than necessarily stick to exactly the same model. The commitment made in 'A Healthier Wales' to a national clinical framework and to quality statements presents us with new opportunities that can push the cancer agenda further and faster, and an approach embedded in these commitments would allow cancer services to benefit from wider developments and improve relative performance of disease pathways in NHS planning.

This is not a step back in approach, but, in my view, a leap forward in ambition. This would include exciting new developments around the cancer workforce and the planning of cancer services, to be underpinned by the development of the new cancer information system and the continued embedding of the single cancer pathway.

We want to double down on our work with primary care, and, more broadly, on earlier detection. There is vital work to be done through our endoscopy and imaging programmes. I want to bring forward our approach to cancer research, and realise our ambitions around holistic support, and these are all, of course, consistent with the recommendations in the cross-party report.

But it did take nine months to refresh the previous cancer delivery plan last time, and we can't afford to wait a similar length of time now before we give direction and to continue the pace of improvement. It's vital that we set out these ambitions and move quickly into determining how they'll be delivered. The scale of the challenge facing us before the pandemic was significant enough, and the case for greater pace and focus on implementation is where we now need to focus our attention.

So, once again, I want to thank those who worked so hard on the report, and, as ever, my thanks to all those people who are working right across our health and care system, in our NHS, in social care and in our third sector partners too, for all that they continue to do to meet the needs of people affected by cancer. I will give careful consideration to the recommendations in the report, and I will be happy to write and provide a full response to the cross-party group regarding its recommendations. Thank you very much for the opportunity to respond tonight, and thank you for your time tonight, Deputy Llywydd.

Thank you very much, and that brings today's proceedings to a close. Thank you.