Senedd Cymru (Welsh Parliament), 15 July 2025

322 contributions from 46 members. The official report.

Statement by the Llywydd

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

Good afternoon and welcome to this afternoon's Plenary meeting. Before we begin, I wish to inform the Senedd, in accordance with Standing Order 26.75, that the Legislation, (Procedure, Publication and Repeals) (Wales) Act 2025 was given Royal Assent on 10 July.

1. Questions to the First Minister

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

The first item this afternoon will be questions to the First Minister, and the first question is from Natasha Asghar.

Natasha Asghar (Conservative, South Wales East)

1. What steps is the Welsh Government taking to improve the non-emergency patient transport service? OQ63017

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

The Welsh Government is committed to improving access to healthcare through real practical action. On top of the £22 million that we're spending on new vehicles to modernise the Welsh ambulance service's patient transport fleet, we're also putting £2.5 million into the non-emergency service, to help reinforce capacity during evenings and weekends, to help more people to get to their appointments on time.

Natasha Asghar (Conservative, South Wales East)

Thanks for your response, First Minister. Care homes, as I’m sure you can appreciate, rely on heavily on the service in getting residents to and from important medical appointments. I’ve been speaking to one care home in South Wales East about this service, which was absolutely essential for them. First Minister, in the last month alone, more than 60 per cent of journeys booked in advance by the care home have either been cancelled on the same day, not turned up at all or have arrived late, resulting in residents missing their appointments. With the care home not having its own transport, they are unable to pick this up when they have indeed been let down. I appreciate that the service may be struggling with demand at the present time. However, it’s becoming a quite frequent occurrence, and residents are missing out on crucial medical attention. There have been occasions where taxis have been provided by the service instead of an ambulance. So, First Minister, will the Welsh Government please look into this matter to ensure that residents aren’t being let down in the future? And will you please set out what contingency plans are indeed in place for health and social care settings like care homes if there are staffing shortfalls or vehicle issues meaning that a planned journey cannot go ahead? Thank you.

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Well, thanks very much. And you’re quite right—we’re aware of this, which is why we gave an additional £400,000 to ensure that we can address those kinds of issues. And what we’ve seen, as a result of that additional investment, is a cut in the declined transport requests due to capacity issues by 60 per cent. So, we are heading absolutely in the right direction. I think we’ve got to recognise also that the responsibility goes both ways, though. So, 70,000 journeys were cancelled on the day of travel by patients. Of course, I understand that it is unlikely to be the care homes, but the point is that those people were booked up and, all of a sudden, those slots are not available to be used by care homes. So, it is important, when people take advantage of the services that we give, that they give notice if they intend to cancel. The Welsh ambulance service aims to give patients at least 24 hours’ notice if they can’t fulfil their booking. So, there’s responsibility on all sides here. Clearly, we need to make sure that we get to as many people as possible.

Alun Davies (Labour, Blaenau Gwent)

The Welsh Government has centralised services in the Grange hospital in Gwent, and this is delivering a far higher level of care than was possible previously, and I think people appreciate the levels of care being provided in the new hospital. However, access to that hospital is difficult for people I represent in Blaenau Gwent. The Welsh Government has, on a number of occasions, given an undertaking that transport will be provided, either through buses or through other means, for people both visiting the hospital for care, or for visiting people receiving care in the hospital. But, five years later, we still do not have the access and the facilities, and the transport required for people to easily access services in the Grange. Would the Welsh Government now be able to give an undertaking that you will look at procuring services, such as a Fflecsi service, to ensure that the people I represent are able to access high levels of care and, also, take care of relatives who are receiving care themselves?

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Thanks very much. I think what we should all be interested in is making sure we get the best possible outcomes for people. And if that does mean sometimes having to travel to more specialised services, I think most people in Wales accept that. But I do think what’s important is that we then recognise there are people who find it difficult to get to them, and so we do need to make sure that we step in. I know there’s been a huge amount of work with bus services to make sure that we’re able to give better access to the Grange. That will be a lot easier once we get the bus Bill passed, so that we’ll have a bit more control on where those bus routes go. So, I think that is going to be an important change. But, also, I think it is probably worth pointing out that, because of the additional money we've had from the UK Labour Government, we've been able to say that we are going to deliver now an additional 200,000 out-patient appointments across Wales. But what we recognise is that some people may struggle to get there, which is why we've put this additional money in to support non-emergency transport, particularly at weekends and evenings, when, actually, this additional work will be taking place.

Lesley Griffiths (Labour, Wrexham)

2. How is the Welsh Government working with the National Eisteddfod to ensure that this year's event in Wrexham is environmentally sustainable? OQ63020

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Thanks very much. We're all looking forward to the Eisteddfod in Wrexham and we as a Government are very proud to be backing it, not just as a celebration of Welsh culture, but also as a model for a greener future. Now, the Welsh Government has invested, as you know, in new trains. We've spent £800 million on a rail upgrade, and we’re working closely with the Eisteddfod and local partners to make sure that they put on additional rail services to promote greener travel.

Lesley Griffiths (Labour, Wrexham)

Thank you for that answer, First Minister. It is very welcome that Transport for Wales have ensured National Eisteddfod attendees are able to travel by public transport not just in Wrexham itself, but those who are coming from further afield. It is absolutely vital that the many large events we will see over the summer, particularly across Wales, particularly those who receive Welsh Government support, are environmentally sustainable. So, can you assure me discussions have taken place between the Welsh Government and the Eisteddfod organisers to reduce waste, to source local and organic food, to choose sustainable and eco-friendly materials for their signage, to provide free water refill points, and to utilise renewable energy, amongst other initiatives?

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Thanks very much. We know that the Rhondda Cynon Taf Eisteddfod was the greenest Eisteddfod ever, and I know Wrexham have plans to build on that. Their long-term plan, in fact, by 2030, is to become the first net-zero festival in Wales. So, they will have to put in place the kinds of initiatives that they saw in Pontypridd. Those additional transport services—four additional train services, in each direction, for Wrexham—are going to be important. There are also going to be shuttle buses to make sure that people are able to get back and forth. But, also, there will be 400 bike-parking spaces. So, there's real encouragement here to make sure that people not just attend the Eisteddfod, but attend it in a way that won't harm the environment.

Gareth Davies (Conservative, Vale of Clwyd)

The National Eisteddfod is a vital cultural event and I welcome its return to Wrexham this year. It's an important celebration of the Welsh language, heritage and identity, and it draws visitors from across the country. Recent initiatives like the £900,000 grant to Margam castle for the Urdd Eisteddfod focus on improving energy efficiency and accessibility, which is commendable. The Llangollen International Eisteddfod, which I attended on Friday last week—and I had the pleasure of meeting the widow of Luciano Pavarotti, as she was there to mark 30 years since the legendary singer last sang there, in 1995—has secured Arts Council of Wales funding to support sustainable operations, ensuring cultural events don't burden taxpayers. These steps show a commitment to fiscal responsibility, while preserving our traditions. Whilst I support a sustainable transition in the culture sector, we don't want cultural events to be bogged down in bureaucracy. With many sports clubs and cultural institutions crying out for money, it's important to ensure it's being prioritised in the right way and they get the funding for the things they are actually asking for. So, how will the First Minister ensure efforts for the National Eisteddfod to become environmentally sustainable are balanced with their other financial needs and don't come at the cost of other things, such as its core ambition of preserving and celebrating our Welsh heritage?

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Diolch yn fawr iawn. I don't need to persuade the Eisteddfod to do this; they are very keen to do it as an ambition for themselves. What we do as a Government is to make sure that we put support in place, and that includes £1.25 million for the National Eisteddfod. We've seen this year a £250,000 increase on the last financial year, and the great news here is that £200,000 of that will enable the Eisteddfod to provide free access to low-income families, and that's something we're particularly proud of in the Welsh Labour Government.

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

Questions now from the party leaders. The leader of the Conservatives, Darren Millar.

Darren Millar (Conservative, Clwyd West)

First Minister, today your Government has published its revised sustainable farming scheme. It comes more than 18 months after the publication of the previous scheme, a scheme that was hatched by Labour and Plaid Cymru as part of your co-operation agreement, and a scheme that would have devastated our agricultural industry. By your own Government's estimates, that previous scheme would have led to 5,500 job losses, a £200 million hit to the rural economy, a reduction of hundreds of thousands of livestock, and a ridiculous, unrealistic per-farm tree-planting target. It is no wonder that that initial Labour and Plaid scheme resulted in the largest protest that this Senedd has ever seen. And rightly, you bowed to pressure and a review was announced. But what hasn't been published alongside the new scheme today is an economic impact assessment. So, can you tell us how many job losses will this new scheme cause? What will be the financial hit to the rural economy? And why are you waiting until September to publish a full economic impact assessment of the scheme?

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Well, I'm really proud that today we're announcing this new sustainable farming scheme. I'd like to pay tribute to the Deputy First Minister for the incredible work he's done over months and months and months, talking, and listening, more importantly, to all of the people involved. And what we will have is a world-class scheme that is unique in the world. We've got a whole-farm approach. It's the only one in Europe, certainly, where we will see the balance between the needs to make sure that we have quality food, high animal welfare standards, making sure that we address the nature and climate emergencies. That whole approach is exactly what we were looking for. We have listened to the agricultural community. We recognise the valuable contribution they make to our nation not just in terms of the economy, but in terms of those wider issues like the environment, like the contribution to our tourism economy.

When it comes to the impact assessments, there will be a ready-reckoner tool available, so that, prior to the Royal Welsh Show, people will be able to punch in their particular circumstances and they will be able to assess how it affects them. I think that's where the interest will be, and that will come up in the next week or so. So, there's an opportunity there for people to see the impact on them. I'm very proud that we've got to this point. We are very keen to make sure that people come on board after a significant amount of listening and learning. I'm not going to apologise for that, Darren. I think that's a good thing, but I think you should probably go back to your constituents and the people you represent and try and explain to them why you tried to block the additional money that we had put into this, because we're putting the same amount in as before. And I do think this is something that you need to explain to your constituents, because we're very proud of the offer we're putting on the table.

Darren Millar (Conservative, Clwyd West)

The farmers in my constituency and the constituencies represented in this Chamber don't want a ready-reckoner, they want to know if their jobs are on the line and whether they have still got the opportunity to make a decent living. You say that your scheme is unique in the world, and the truth of the matter is, it is, because it doesn't even mention the term 'food security' throughout the whole document. It's not mentioned one single time, because you do not give a hoot about food security, First Minister. In contrast, the word 'environment' is mentioned almost 80 times. Your scheme still wants to sacrifice an area half the size of the Vale of Glamorgan to tree planting. And recently, we saw the UK Climate Change Committee recommend a 19 per cent reduction in livestock numbers, something that my party rejects. Can you tell us why there is no mention of the term 'food security' in your new scheme's document? Why are you still prepared to sacrifice an area of 17,000 acres, half the size of the Vale of Glamorgan, to trees? And do you accept that appalling recommendation of the UK Climate Change Committee in respect of a reduction in livestock numbers of almost 20 per cent?

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

What I know is that we're in this situation because we left the European Union, and there were many people, including you, who argued for that point. This is a consequence. We had to create—[Interruption.] We had to create a new—

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

I do need to hear the First Minister's response, please. Can we show to some respect to the First Minister and listen to what she has to say?

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

We had to create a new regime because the people of Wales voted for a new regime, including many farmers, who were very keen to leave the European Union. We made it clear to them before that vote that there would be consequences, and this is a part of the renegotiation that has happened as a result of Brexit.

What I can tell you is that we have listened, that there will be major environmental benefits. We know that farmers are very serious about the environment. We know that they are hyperaware of the very dry patch that we've been through recently and how that's affecting them, how they need to make these long-term investments. And they know, more than anyone, the impact of climate change. We're asking them to help us to make a contribution to addressing the issue of climate change, and I think planting trees has an important contribution. Farmers will choose the right tree in the right place, and we'll be providing incentives for early planting, the budget and the advice, and we will give guidance to farmers with that. But we're not going to apologise for the fact that we do want to see some tree planting. But it will be more flexible than what was initially suggested.

Darren Millar (Conservative, Clwyd West)

First Minister, Welsh farmers are more interested in food security and their job security, frankly, and it's a shame that neither of those things is mentioned in the document. Farmers deserve to know how many of their jobs your Government is prepared to sacrifice. If this was any other industry, you would quite rightly be up in arms, but it is simply a statement of fact that you do not appear to care about our farmers.

Let's talk about the budget announcement that you've made today. Last week, the Cabinet Secretary for finance announced that all departmental budgets would receive an inflationary uplift next year—every single department. Yet, today, your Deputy First Minister has announced that the new sustainable farming scheme will keep the universal farming payment budget at £238 million, exactly the same as it is this year—frozen, with no uplift—which, effectively, means that it's going to be a cut in real terms. You have money—[Interruption.] You have money to spend on planting trees in Uganda, but you don't seem to have money to invest in our farmers here in our own country. Why is it, First Minister, that farming is the only budget that is going to receive a real-terms cut, and why does your Labour Government hate farmers so much?

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Well, thanks very much. Look, we are putting the same amount of money in—in fact, more money than we were before. Let's remind everybody that you didn't support that additional money going in. I think it's really important that people understand that there's additional money there—no thanks to you. Let's be clear, that's not all of it: that's just the money for universal payment. There will be additional money for the optional and the collaborative approaches. So, it is important to recognise that that's one part of the programme.

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

Leader of Plaid Cymru, Rhun ap Iorwerth.

Rhun ap Iorwerth (Plaid Cymru, Ynys Môn)

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Llywydd. Now, is Wales a nation that could thrive running its own affairs like so many other similar nations? If you believe in the potential of Wales and its people as I do, the answer is an obvious 'yes'. Surely, it's a question to which every First Minister should answer 'yes'—how can any First Minister not believe in their nation's potential? Now, the last First Minister but one, now Secretary for finance, agreed it was perfectly viable for Wales to be independent; he just didn't think it was desirable, and I beg to differ with him on that. But how disheartening and yet sadly predictable it was when the current First Minister was asked the question, on the News Agents podcast, 'Could Wales manage?', and it was a 'no'. 'Wales would be extremely poor', she said. But, of course, Wales isn't somehow inevitably poor. Remember that our current position is a direct result of our place within the UK. Breaking out of those cycles of economic stagnation, of too many families living in poverty, is pretty difficult when successive Westminster Governments fail to address the issue of fair funding, underfund transport, as they did again recently with rail, deny us the powers over our natural resources and so on. It seems that, under Labour, as with the Conservatives, Westminster's answer to Wales is always 'no'. So, it's little wonder that more and more people are saying 'yes' to wanting more say over our own future, with enhanced devolution being the absolute minimum, like the devolution of justice—

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

I'm going to need a question from you, Rhun ap Iorwerth.

Rhun ap Iorwerth (Plaid Cymru, Ynys Môn)

—that we were told clearly yesterday was not a priority for UK Government. This is particularly true of young people, of course.

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

I'm going to need a question from you.

Rhun ap Iorwerth (Plaid Cymru, Ynys Môn)

Every indicator shows that the union is on borrowed time. So, why doesn't the First Minister believe in Wales?

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

I can tell you that there's nobody who believes in Wales more than I do. I have got a red dragon running through every little blood vessel in my body. But what I will tell you—what I will tell you—is that we are dead serious about being positive about this country and about talking it up, and that's what we don't get from Plaid Cymru. It is interesting, isn't it? I thought that you were going to go on to say, 'And that's why we believe in independence, that's why we'll be looking to do that in the next term.' You're not saying that, are you? So, you've got such faith that it's possible and viable, then you're not offering that. I think that it is important for us to recognise that a huge amount of money additionally comes from the UK Government. It is important that we recognise that. That has increased in the most recent budget—a budget, let me remind you once again, that you tried to block. But I am very keen to make sure that we look to the future with hope and ambition, which is why I was dead proud to be, yesterday, at Tata Steel, where we're seeing significant investment in the new electric arc furnace, giving hope to those communities. And that's what we want to give to the people of Wales today, hope for the future, and make sure that we're looking to the future, to build a stronger economy so that we can spend any additional taxation on providing the public services that we're very keen to do, to provide.

Rhun ap Iorwerth (Plaid Cymru, Ynys Môn)

This is a First Minister who believes that poverty is inevitable for Wales, and that's why she keeps on talking Wales down. The First Minister is actively choosing to be at the whim of Westminster, which works against Wales's interests, rather than showing some faith in our nation and its people's ability to decide matters for themselves.

Let's go back to one of those perpetual Westminster injustices, the matter of fair funding for Wales. It's something that Plaid Cymru has promoted for decades. It was disappointing to hear the First Minister's comments over the weekend when questioned on Radio 4, the James Naughtie interview. When pressed, she couldn't say when the Barnett formula will be reformed by the UK Labour Government, or indeed whether the Chancellor believes that Wales is unfairly funded. Now, all the First Minister could say was that she will keep on making the case, but she keeps on saying that and nothing happens. Her Westminster Labour colleagues ignore her day after day, week after week. Now, when I last asked the First Minister what her next move will be on fair funding, in a reply that appeared to embarrass all of her front bench, she said that she was going to the football. Can she come up with a better answer today?

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Look, I'm at the table and I'm getting things done, and we have had additional support from the UK Government, including £5 billion in additional funding that you and the Tories tried to block from coming in. I do think that it is worth making sure that people hear that again and again. We have been given a poor deal, when it comes to rail, for years on end, and we're getting to a better place. Is it far enough? No, we want to go further. But it's definitely in a much better place than it was before. That was because we put significant pressure on the UK Government. The same thing when it comes to the coal tips. When it comes to coal tips, we asked for years on end for support from the UK Tory Government; they didn't listen. The Labour Government has understood that this is a legacy from the past and there is a responsibility on the UK. I'm at the table, and I'm delivering. And when it comes to things like youth justice, for example, we are moving on in that area as well, edging things forward, as was the manifesto commitment. And it is important, I think, for people to recognise that the difference between us and them is that they shout from the sidelines and I'm sitting at the table. And it's lovely to hear that he's following every movement that I make on weekends. Lovely.

Rhun ap Iorwerth (Plaid Cymru, Ynys Môn)

All we had yesterday again was a sign on the devolution of justice that Labour was determined to block anything that gives Wales any more powers, and it's unbelievable that we have a First Minister continuing to defend the £445 million given to rail in Wales, when the rest of the UK, or Wales and England, is getting £35 billion. It's a drop in the ocean of what we're owed, and the people of Wales know that.

There was another Labour voice on that programme at the weekend, the Member of the Senedd for Llanelli. I agree with his take on things. He's right: there is a non-Tory alternative to Labour in Wales. That alternative is Plaid Cymru's positive vision for bringing down waiting lists, for supporting small businesses, for backing agriculture, for helping households with the cost of living, implementing a child payment to tackle the scourge of poverty, whilst also fighting for those powers that enable us to make decisions better suited to Wales's needs.

Now, whatever has been claimed about the benefits of two Labour Governments working together, Lee Waters added that signals coming from Labour colleagues at Westminster are disdainful. That's the reality. So, whether it's the refusal to reform Barnett, the injustice of HS2, the lack of devolution of the Crown Estate, does the First Minister agree with Lee Waters about the poor treatment of Wales from Labour colleagues at Westminster, or will she head into the summer recess continuing to defend their actions?

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

What I know is that the vision that you're trying to project is one that is uncosted and undeliverable. What's important for people to recognise, I think, is that there's very little experience in the Plaid Cymru benches, and, if that's true for you, that is certainly true for Reform, who are also being taken seriously in this country. What we need to do is to make sure that we present, that we look at what we're able to deliver and what we have delivered over the past few years. Let's not forget free prescriptions. Let's not forget free school meals. Let's not forget free transport for the over 65s. You voted against money going to all of those things. And the important thing for us to do is to look to the future with hope, for people to recognise what's at stake in the next election, and to make sure that there is an understanding that it's only Labour that is at the table and can speak to the UK Government, because we're the ones who are able to pick up the phone, to make a difference. We're not over yet. It's not over yet. And it is really important for us to recognise that there is a huge amount of opportunities for us to go further. If you look at what we're doing in relation to the longest waiting lists, for example, an 86 per cent drop in the number of people waiting—for the longest waits—since the pandemic. This is delivery in action, thanks to that additional money that's come from the UK Labour Government.

Jenny Rathbone (Labour, Cardiff Central)

3. What is the Welsh Government's strategy for enabling all citizens to have a healthy balanced diet? OQ63051

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

The Welsh Government is trying hard to encourage families across Wales to put healthy, affordable food on the table. We're delivering over 50 million free school meals and breakfasts every year, and we've invested more than £27 million to support those facing food poverty. Our community food strategy is boosting local food production, and our new 'Healthy Weight: Healthy Wales' plan will target action where it's needed most, starting with children.

Jenny Rathbone (Labour, Cardiff Central)

Thank you very much. I agree that there's great work going on in the education department, led by the Cabinet Secretary. It's fantastic to see that more and more pupils are learning how to cook in school, which is obviously going to help mend the deficit of six out of 10 households never cooking from scratch. It's great to see that food literacy developing in the way that pupils have analysed the food miles involved in a chicken curry in Monmouthshire and come up with an alternative chickpea curry when they realised that that chicken was coming from Thailand. Pupils in the region that the First Minister represents have devised a song to celebrate Mrs Robinson's famous vegetable cawl, and that's going to be performed at the Green Man festival. So, watch this space.

But, looking at how we can improve the quality of our school meals, the school food cross-party group has identified that not enough cooks in school have got any qualifications beyond a level 2 in food hygiene, which is good for opening up bags of food provided by big food, but not the skills required to expand this good practice I've just mentioned across the whole of our school estate. So, how can we ensure that nutritious meals are available to all pupils, where schools have the skills and the appetite to provide healthy, nutritious lunches made from food grown in Wales?

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Well, there are many challenges to recruitment in this sector, so what local authorities do is they try to make the roles as accessible as they can, so they recruit to the minimum level and then they undertake the further training. So, they have to get to level 2 basic hygiene qualifications, but then what they do is they get trained in things like nutrition, allergies, safeguarding, professional cooking, first aid—all of those things come on top once they have been recruited. Lots of local authority catering teams have development chefs now on their staff, and they are also playing a key role in front-line training. So, you’re quite right, we need to make sure that the people cooking the food for the people in our schools are qualified to the very best of our ability and their ability, but the key thing is that we need more people to be going into that sector, so you get them in at the lowest levels and then you train them up once they are in.

James Evans (Conservative, Brecon and Radnorshire)

I don't think, First Minister, you answered a part of Jenny Rathbone's question, because what we do have in Wales is a childhood obesity epidemic, and actually if we are going to address that epidemic we need to start by looking at what we feed our children in schools. I think we need healthy, locally sourced products given to our children to make sure that they are having the best food possible. So, I’d like to know what plans and what programmes the Welsh Government has in place to make sure that we are getting locally grown, home-sourced food into our children's diets, to make sure that we can address the obesity crisis that we are seeing across Wales.

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Thanks very much. I do hope there is an opportunity that we have already started on through the free school meals programme that we offer in primary schools to make sure that they become more nutritious. So, there is a lot of work being done on that at the moment, and on top of that I know that the Deputy First Minister has championed the community food strategy, and there is an opportunity there to make sure that we improve the production and supply of locally sourced food. There’s a working group going on at the moment on that and a consultation that is taking place, so I would encourage people to respond to that consultation.

Jane Dodds (Liberal Democrat, Mid and West Wales)

Good afternoon, First Minister. A healthy balanced diet for children in Wales is only an option if you are not a child that is living in poverty, and we are currently at the rate still of 29 per cent, rising to 30 per cent, sadly, of our children here in Wales living in poverty. Many of us continue to raise this across the Siambr because it is such a shameful issue, if you live in Wales, to have that high level of children who are living in poverty. The Bevan Foundation said that devolution has not done anything to help those children living in poverty. That is our chance to do something different. So, I am asking you again: could you consider looking at targets to reduce the children living in poverty? New Zealand and Finland have done this, and it has affected the number of children living in poverty. So, I say again to you, please, that we need to take action here to reduce the number of children living in poverty in Wales. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Thanks very much. We take our responsibility to reduce child poverty very seriously, but it is also something that the UK Government has to step in with. I am really pleased that, when it comes to the UK Government's 10-year health plan, one of the things they have done is they have increased the amount of money that is provided through Healthy Start. So, pregnant women and children aged one or older, but under four, are now going to be receiving £4.65 a week, and children under one will receive £9.30 every week. So, there’s an increasing amount of money that is going in via the UK Government. Since 2019, we as the Welsh Government have provided over £27 million, including more than £2 million this financial year, to tackle food insecurity, and that clearly goes to help many families with children as well.

Hannah Blythyn (Labour, Delyn)

4. How is the Welsh Government investing in towns in north Wales? OQ63045

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

We're investing in the future of north Wales, and we are doing it with purpose and we are doing it with ambition. Since 2020, over £47 million has been delivered through our Transforming Towns programme across the region, bringing empty buildings back to life, creating jobs and putting culture and the community at the heart of regeneration. In Rhyl, we have supported the brand-new Queen's Market. In Wrexham, we are backing a £4 million creative hub right in the city centre. And let's not forget Theatr Clwyd, a national treasure for north Wales, rebuilt with £23.5 million of Welsh Labour Government support.

Hannah Blythyn (Labour, Delyn)

Thank you for that response, First Minister.

Hannah Blythyn (Labour, Delyn)

Our towns matter. They're more than places; they are part of who we are. As somebody that grew up in a small town and now lives in a town—it's a constituency made up of many small towns—it's not just important to me politically, but personally as well. You referenced the transformation of Theatr Clwyd, which will not only improve that facility as a jewel in our cultural crown in north-east Wales, but boost the local economy in the town and the surrounding area as well. Rhyl market opened, as you said, just last week, and I'm proud just to have played a part in establishing the Transforming Towns fund and starting that project that has come to fruition in the Queen's Market now.

As you said, Transforming Towns has delivered a significant amount of funding across Wales and across north Wales, with nearly £5.5 million in Flintshire and Denbighshire alone. So, First Minister, can I ask if you can confirm that the Welsh Government will continue to back our towns in this way? And can I ask for consideration of a commitment to seek ways to involve the community more, to give them more of a say and a stake in the decisions and influence their own communities and towns, not just to survive, but to thrive well into the future? Diolch.

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Thanks very much, and it's been a great pleasure to go and visit many of the towns that have benefited from our Transforming Towns fund. It was great to go with you to The Dolphin, the vacant pub that's in Flintshire. They've received a £0.25 million grant to transform that venue right in the middle of the town. I think there are many, many examples of that all over Wales, including, for example, another one I visited recently in Gwynedd, the Nyth project, the conversion of an empty church in the town centre in Bangor. It was a fantastic, vibrant area. Also, I think it probably is worth putting on record the fact that we now have the renovation of Theatr Clwyd, and it was great to see that you were there. Jack Sargeant was there for the opening, and it's something that truly should be celebrated and a jewel in the crown of culture in north Wales.

Mark Isherwood (Conservative, North Wales)

The previous UK Conservative Government allocated £126.46 million of UK shared prosperity funding to north Wales, which incorporated investment for towns across the region, including better open spaces in Conwy, a placemaking programme for Anglesey's town centres and larger villages, electric car charging points and improvements to community centres in Gwynedd, new village community facilities and improvements to the townscape of Ruthin in Denbighshire, the town centre investment programme in Flintshire, and funding for community infrastructure and development within Wrexham. Wrexham's Gateway project also received £9 million from the north Wales growth deal, initiated and 50 per cent funded by the previous UK Conservative Government.

However, although the current UK Labour Government has extended shared prosperity funding to 2026, it is understood they will then move the distribution of funding from a needs-based to a population-based formula, which will generate a huge funding cut for Wales, and that devolved decision making by local authorities and regions will then be scrapped and recentralised in the Welsh Government. What assurance can you therefore provide that towns and communities across north Wales will not then lose out once again?

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

I'm really pleased to see that the UK Government has listened to our concerns about the potential for the replacement of EU funds, which could have been distributed on a Barnett formula. That hasn't happened, so we retain about 22 per cent of the entire budget that's in the UK. So, we're not in the situation that we feared, and that additional money that previously came to Wales that we were promised would continue to come by people like you, when people in Wales were told that they wouldn't lose out as a result of Brexit—. There was a real threat that that might happen. I'm really pleased to see that we've managed to convince the UK Government that that would have been totally unfair, and that money continues to benefit our communities.

Russell George (Conservative, Montgomeryshire)

5. How is the Welsh Government working to ensure that public sector jobs are accessible across all regions of Wales? OQ63040

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

We're committed to ensuring public sector jobs are accessible in every part of Wales, not just in our cities, but in areas like Montgomeryshire. Representing the Mid and West Wales region, I see first-hand how vital it is that people in rural communities have the chance to build a career close to home, and to stay and thrive in the places they know and love. Our roles are advertised pan Wales, and Welsh Government has staff working across 20 different sites.

Russell George (Conservative, Montgomeryshire)

First Minister, I'm delighted with that answer. I fully agree with you. It is, of course, really important that people across Wales have the opportunity to work for the Welsh Government from every region, and the civil service would be all the richer for it, if it were to employ people from all communities, not just those who live in the Cardiff area.

Now, recently, I asked a written question about Welsh Government offices, First Minister, and you responded to me that the Welsh Government is undertaking a review of its business accommodation in the Powys region, including Ladywell House, indeed, in Montgomeryshire. Now, of course, Ladywell House has been a Welsh Government office since the very first Welsh Government, and prior to that, with predecessor organisations as well. It employs 80 people, and those 80 people are attracted from across different Government departments. I wonder would you agree with me that it is important to have Welsh Government offices across Wales, including in Newtown, because those offices and the staff who work there support shops and services in towns as well. And would you agree with me that it is important to employ and retain people who live in mid Wales to make the Welsh Government more reflective of the needs and requirements of all people, from all communities across Wales?

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Well, thanks very much. Yes, we do have an office in Newtown that is able to accommodate 82 people. We've got a centre in Aberystwyth that is able to accommodate 275 staff plus 137 tenants. We are having a review at the moment, partly because of the change in the way that people work. We can't justify continuing to hold offices open if people don't turn up. It is important that we encourage people to come into work; we are encouraging them to come in. But, clearly, there will come a point where you have to say, 'If you don't turn up, we cannot justify keeping this particular office open.' So, it is incumbent on those people to understand that if they don't go into the offices, there is a danger that we will be in a situation where it'll be difficult for us to continue, if they don't turn up.

Carolyn Thomas (Labour, North Wales)

Well, 14 years of Tory austerity saw local authority jobs cut by 40 per cent, yet councils and health are still the biggest employers across Wales, or one of the biggest employers across Wales. At jobs fairs, we often see that they promote jobs in businesses, but how is the Welsh Government promoting jobs in the public sector, such as nursing jobs, teaching, planning, public protection, all these really important jobs helping keep our communities safe and vibrant, and looking after people, basically? How are you working with the UK Government to ensure that these jobs are properly funded again, after 14 years of cuts and austerity? Thank you.

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Well, thanks very much. What we've been able to do with that additional funding that, of course, the Tories and Plaid tried to block, is that we have been able to give an above-inflation pay rise to public sector workers in Wales for the second year in a row. We never got rid of things like the nurse bursary, like they did in England. We have done significant work to try and promote people coming to work in the care sector, with the WeCare Wales website, and to try to encourage that, and we pay the real living wage for care workers. So, there are areas where we are still very challenged, but as a Labour Government, we are trying to make sure that we lead with our values, that we make sure that people understand that, actually, it is very often the people who are paid the lowest who are holding our communities together and deserve that reward.

Altaf Hussain (Conservative, South Wales West)

6. What is the Welsh Government doing to address shortfalls in the anaesthetist workforce? OQ63038

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Welsh Government is spending more than £294 million this year to train the NHS workforce of the future. Record numbers of people are employed in the NHS, including doctors, and since 2020, we've increased anaesthetics training places at all levels.

Altaf Hussain (Conservative, South Wales West)

Diolch, First Minister. As highlighted in the health questions last week, a shortage in anaesthetists will have a significant impact on our ability to conduct surgical operations and tackle waiting times. According to the Royal College of Anaesthetists, Wales has 17 per cent fewer anaesthetists than needed to meet demand. First Minister, we need to increase the number of training places if we are to have any hope of addressing the shortfall of 90,000 operations and procedures each year. With this in mind, will your Government fund additional anaesthetist training places for 2026?

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Thanks very much. The number of consultants in Wales has increased by 16 per cent in the last five years. We have 467 who specialise in anaesthetics, and that's risen by 5.6 per cent over the past five years. We're very confident that we have a situation where we're injecting money into the NHS. We're keen to take 200,000 patients off our waiting lists, and we're confident that those plans are deliverable with the configuration of the workforce that we have in place at the moment. But I do think it's probably worth emphasising that the number of people working in the NHS today is at record levels, and the number of medical and dental staff has increased by—listen to this—45 per cent in the past 10 years. I think it's worth people recognising that that is a significant increase. Clearly, there is demand upon demand upon demand, but we're working really hard to keep up with that demand, and I hope those statistics tell their own story.

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

Question 7 [OQ63043] is withdrawn.

Mike Hedges (Labour, Swansea East)

8. Will the First Minister provide an update on Welsh Government action to reduce river and sea pollution in Swansea? OQ63015

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Our rivers and coastlines must be clean, safe and protected for future generations in Swansea, and this Welsh Labour Government is taking real action to make that happen. Through the Swansea Bay opportunity catchment, we're working with Natural Resources Wales and the council to tackle pollution from source to sea, cleaning up the River Clyne, investing in green drainage, and doubling tree cover by 2044. We've worked to ensure over £56 million has already gone into improving water quality, and we're proud that Wales now leads the UK on clean bathing waters, with 103 out of 110 rated good or excellent.

Mike Hedges (Labour, Swansea East)

Thank you for that very positive response, First Minister. We, however, know that water quality is under attack. Sewage and urban pollution, agricultural pollution and industrial pollution all contribute to this problem. What is the Welsh Government doing on further solutions, like improving agricultural practices and farm infrastructure to address chemicals, surface run-off and the erosion of soil, restoring natural features, such as wetlands and woodlands, which act as natural filters for pollutants, creating green infrastructure to slow the flow of surface run-off and reduce the risk of sewer systems overflowing, stopping sewage overflows from Trebanos pumping works, which pollutes both the Tawe and then finally the sea in Swansea, dealing with microplastics in the River Tawe and the sea? My major concern is both sewage and agricultural pollution in the River Tawe going into the sea. How are we going to stop that happening?

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Thanks very much. I think it is important to recognise that we've got work to do, but actually, if you compare us to England, 44 per cent of our rivers have achieved good or better ecological status. That's three times higher than the situation in England. What we've done here is we've introduced the Water Resources (Control of Agricultural Pollution) (Wales) Regulations 2021 to improve nutrient management, and that's been backed by £52 million in infrastructure grants.

But I think it's probably also worth underlining that we've got other legislation in place, including world-leading sustainable drainage systems, to make sure that all new developments manage surface water sustainably. That reduces pollution and flood risk, and that is now an example, I think, for others to follow.

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

Finally, question 9, Delyth Jewell.

Delyth Jewell (Plaid Cymru, South Wales East)

9. What discussions has the First Minister had with the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care about targets to reduce baby deaths? OQ63037

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

We know that every baby lost is a heartbreak, and reducing baby deaths is an absolute priority. We've already seen a long-term decline in rates of stillbirth and neonatal mortality, but we are demanding further change. That's why we've published a new national quality statement and we have invested in the maternity and neonatal safety support programme. Now, every health board is delivering targeted action to improve outcomes and to learn from harm. We are listening, we're learning, and we're committed to ongoing change.

Delyth Jewell (Plaid Cymru, South Wales East)

Thank you very much for that response. This is quite clearly something that is having an impact on many families. As well as the important steps that you’ve just outlined, I'd like to ask you about the support that exists for parents.

Delyth Jewell (Plaid Cymru, South Wales East)

Every year, thousands of parents will face pregnancy loss or the death of a baby. The charity Sands has found that only one in six bereaved parents gain access to psychological support from the NHS. I've been contacted by constituents who've gone through this horrific ordeal who, to their credit, are campaigning to make sure other parents do not have to face what they've had to go through, either alone or without all of the support that they could have benefited from.

Bereaved parents are more likely to experience family strain, financial difficulties because of sick leave, and they also face an increased risk to their lives. I know no words of comfort can make that right, but surely having specialist pathways for psychological support would lessen the burden on them. There are many things that need to change, including baby loss certificates, but this emotional support is of urgent importance. So, please could you update the Senedd? And would you meet me with Sands and campaigners to talk about what needs to change?

Mair Eluned (Labour, Mid and West Wales)

Losing a baby is obviously a really devastating experience for the families, and it is important that the state is there to give them the support at that really challenging time in their lives. That's why all families who experience late pregnancy loss at maternity units in Wales are supported by bereavement midwives. There's always more we can do. I know that Sands does a terrific job in terms of speaking up for those families and pulling together the concerns. I think it's really important that we listen to feedback from people who've been through this trauma. I know that the Cabinet Secretary for health is listening very carefully and is very much in this space, particularly at the moment when we know many people have that acute awareness of the difficult situations in some parts of Wales.

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

Thank you, First Minister.

2. Questions to the Counsel General and Minister for Delivery

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

The next item will be questions to the Counsel General and Minister for Delivery, and the first question is from Peredur Owen Griffiths.

Peredur Owen Griffiths (Plaid Cymru, South Wales East)

1. What legal advice has the Counsel General provided to the Welsh Government regarding the implementation timetable for the Environment (Air Quality and Soundscapes) (Wales) Act 2024? OQ63027

Julie James (Labour, Swansea West)

The Welsh Government continues to implement the Environment (Air Quality and Soundscapes) (Wales) Act 2024 following Royal Assent in February 2024. Most provisions within the Act are currently in force, and we continue to work to improve air quality and reduce the impacts of air and noise pollution.

Peredur Owen Griffiths (Plaid Cymru, South Wales East)

Thank you for that answer.

Peredur Owen Griffiths (Plaid Cymru, South Wales East)

Counsel General, the passing of the Environment (Air Quality and Soundscapes) (Wales) Act 2024 was an important moment in the fight against air pollution, but 17 months on we've still not seen the draft regulations needed to deliver the Act and protect people from toxic air. When will the Government bring forward regulations on stationary idling and solid fuel? Why have these regulations not been brought forward to date? Is there a risk, as we get closer to the election and the pressure on the legislative programme, that these might be delayed even further?

Julie James (Labour, Swansea West)

Thank you very much for that. I run a programme of looking at the implementation of all Acts that the Senedd has undertaken. I undertake regular meetings with the various Cabinet Secretaries responsible for this. I very recently met with the Cabinet Secretary for climate change and the Cabinet Secretary for transport to discuss those two issues. We remain on track to develop the new air quality targets for Wales in line with the statutory duties under the Act. We expect the public consultation on targets for PM2.5 will be launched during autumn 2025.

We're also consulting shortly on regulations to introduce a new fixed penalty range for engine idling, allowing for higher fines. I'm sure the Member remembers, as all Members of the Senedd do, that it's already an offence, but the penalties for that offence were thought to be insufficient to enable behaviour change, which is what we're looking for. It isn't a revenue-raising point at all; it's about making people aware of the implications of idling. Of course, many new cars automatically do it, so it's just about reminding people. This will strengthen the framework to tackle idling vehicles, to be applied specifically in high-risk areas like schools, hospitals, and outside care homes. We're very keen indeed to do that.

On domestic solid fuels, in the clean air plan for Wales, 'Healthy Air, Healthy Wales', which was put forward in 2020, the Welsh Government committed to prohibiting the sale of the most polluting forms of solid fuels for domestic use in Wales, subject to the consultation. We consulted on reducing emissions from domestic burning of solid fuels in 2021, and the summary of responses was published in October 2023. Following this, we've been considering the scope for introducing regulations in the current Senedd term to restrict the sale of bituminous and traditional house coal, wet wood, and manufactured solid fuels with high sulphur and smoke emissions. I've discussed this with Huw on a number of occasions, and we are looking to bring forward those regulations shortly. I do run the legislation programme for Wales as part of my remit as well, and I have a Cabinet sub-committee to discuss the schedule of various secondary legislation that we want to make sure is implemented before the end of the Senedd term. That's very firmly on the agenda. So, I can assure you, as the Member who actually took the Act through, that I'm very keen on making sure it's implemented.

Carolyn Thomas (Labour, North Wales)

Thank you. At last week's climate change committee, we were taking evidence from Dr Robert Lee. He is the director of education for the Centre for Environmental Research and Justice at the University of Birmingham. We were taking evidence on the environment Bill. Dr Lee explained that pollution globally is the single largest cause of premature death. I was really shocked by it. It runs at 15 per cent on average of the population, and it's far bigger than the combined effect of malaria, tuberculosis, AIDS, and all those infectious diseases. Do you agree with me, Cabinet Secretary, that reopening coal mines is a retrograde step that would exacerbate dangerous air pollution, and that renewable energy, using wind, wave, and solar, is the way forward?

Julie James (Labour, Swansea West)

Thank you very much, Carolyn, for that. It is a shocking statistic, isn't it, that pollution is one of the main killers. It's something that I think most people don't really quite realise, and when it's brought home to us, it does make it really obvious why we've got to make efforts to make sure that we clean up our air and our land and water, of course. In order to meet our ambitious net-zero targets, we absolutely have to reduce emissions from energy generation by reducing fossil fuel generation and increasing generation from renewable sources. The extraction and use of fossil fuels for energy is not compatible with a pathway to reach net zero at a pace that even remotely addresses the climate emergency.

Our vision for the future of industry and energy generation in Wales is one in which sustainable industries are retained in Wales and continue to generate high-quality jobs and the other benefits for the communities they serve. We want that industry to substantially reduce its reliance on fossil fuels and its generation of greenhouse gases, which cause the pollution that we're discussing. It's absolutely the established policy of the Welsh Government to bring to a managed end the extraction and use of all coal. We do not intend to authorise any new mining operation licences or variations to existing licences. In November 2024, the UK Government confirmed it would legislate to restrict future licensing of new coal mines by the Mining Remediation Authority, except for safety and restoration purposes. This prohibition will apply across the UK, so that should see applications for new or extended coal mining operations come to an end across the whole of the UK.

Jenny Rathbone (Labour, Cardiff Central)

I just want to come back to the issue of the delay on implementing the idling regulations. Unfortunately, far too many drivers in my constituency do not understand that they are breaking the law at the moment. I'm sure many headteachers would really value ensuring that the fines for this offensive behaviour are increased in order to protect their pupils. I appreciate that this is now out for consultation, but when do we expect to get this made enforceable in law, so that we've got more people like the parking attendants being able to enforce this?

Julie James (Labour, Swansea West)

Of course, they can already enforce it. It's just that the penalties for enforcement are not particularly severe, and so it's not thought to change behaviour in any particular way.

So, just to be really clear: it is already an offence. It was an offence before the Act was taken through. What the Act does is it allows local authorities to put a range of penalties in place, and they are accumulating penalties, so a smaller amount for a first offence, and then rising. And the idea for that is to affect behaviour change. It’s not, in any way, intended to be a revenue raising tax; it would be most effective if it was never used. The local authorities are enabled to enact that once the regulations have been put through the Senedd, and they will be brought forward to the Senedd through the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee.

Just to be clear, they’re not delayed. The Act always envisaged a consultation before them being brought forward, and the consultation, of course, is with local authorities about the manner and implementation of that. But just to be really clear: it is already an offence.

Rhys ab Owen (Plaid Cymru, South Wales Central)

2. What discussions has the Counsel General had with Welsh Government colleagues regarding the implementation of UK Parliament legislation in Wales where the Senedd did not provide legislative consent? OQ63023

Julie James (Labour, Swansea West)

The Welsh Government is committed to the sound operation of the Sewel convention. Implementation powers, processes and timescales are different for every piece of legislation, and we therefore consider them on a case-by-case basis.

Rhys ab Owen (Plaid Cymru, South Wales Central)

Diolch, Cwnsler Cyffredinol. It’s the Sewel convention that I want to discuss with you this afternoon. In my view, the Sewel convention is dead and buried. You will remember a time when the Sewel convention was respected by UK Government, but the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 changed all that. At the time, Michael Gove said that the withdrawal Act was unique, and therefore allowed the UK Government to ignore the views of this Parliament and other devolved Parliaments. But we’ve seen several examples since then of the UK Government ignoring the will of this Senedd. A perfect example would be the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill, which was debated in this Parliament—I remember the Trefnydd quite clearly saying it fell within competency. And now we are seeing people being arrested, in Cardiff, over the weekend, in an area that the Trefnydd here said fell within devolved competency—being arrested under protest law, in an area that we didn’t agree to, an area that we wouldn’t allow consent for.

So, what discussions are you having with your colleagues in the UK Government on how to resolve issues that fall under the Sewel convention when there’s a dispute with regard to legislation? Diolch yn fawr.

Julie James (Labour, Swansea West)

So, I know the Member already knows this, but the way the law works, of course, is that we objected to it, and the previous Conservative Government largely ignored those objections twice in the dying days of the Parliament. We haven’t had that situation with the current UK Government; we’ve had good conversations with them about upholding Sewel, and I would very much hope that that Government continues to respect them.

I know the Member knows, but just to repeat: the point being that, if the law is passed at a UK level, it is the law, and so it can be enforced. We can, of course, make representations about how it’s enforced, and we have conversations with our local police forces and our local authorities about that. And to give an example—a long-standing one, which I’m very glad will now be repealed—the Vagrancy Act 1824, for example, went directly against all our homelessness policies, and I had, when I was the relevant Cabinet member for that, long conversations with the police and with local authorities about how we would implement that in a more compassionate, trauma-informed Welsh way than was otherwise the case. And I know that my colleague the Cabinet Secretary for social justice is having similar conversations. But in the end, the UK law is the UK law.

Alun Davies (Labour, Blaenau Gwent)

And that’s, of course, why it needs to change. I agree very much with the First Minister. In her speech in the Norwegian church, she said that the UK Government should never act in devolved areas without Welsh Government consent. We objected to this under the Tories, she said, and she continued to say that we are not happy with this under Labour. And I agree with the First Minister.

But the position is as you have described it, and the position is as Rhys ab Owen has described it, that we have a dysfunction at the heart of our constitution. Is it not time now for the Welsh Government, the Scottish Government, the Northern Irish Executive and the UK Government to agree a different constitutional settlement, where our democracy is respected within the United Kingdom, and that this Parliament plays a full role in the governance of the United Kingdom on an equal basis to the United Kingdom Parliament?

Julie James (Labour, Swansea West)

Yes, it’s absolutely the position of the current First Minister, the current Welsh Government, under all of its First Ministers, that that is the case. It’s certainly my position. It was the position of the former Counsel General also. So, we continue to have those conversations with the UK Government. As I say, I’m pleased that, so far, we haven’t had a breach of the Sewel convention. I very much hope that that will continue, and we continue to have those discussions. But the Member knows, absolutely, as well as I do, that until those things are enshrined in proper statutory functions, then they cannot be protected, and they are indeed at the—. Well, so many of the constitutional conventions turned out to be not worth the paper they're written on, to quote the classic law. During the previous Conservative premierships, of one sort or another—and there are too many to list, aren't there—those things turned out to be worthless, because they are conventions and therefore they can be breached. So, I couldn't agree more, and we continue to work towards that.

David Rees (Labour, Aberavon)

Questions now from the party spokespeople. First, the Welsh Conservatives spokesperson, Tom Giffard.

Tom Giffard (Conservative, South Wales West)

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. On Friday, the First Minister said:

'actually, our record on delivery is really very good.'

Do you agree?

Julie James (Labour, Swansea West)

Yes.

Tom Giffard (Conservative, South Wales West)

Thank you for that answer. Will you hit your target of 20,000 low-carbon social homes for rent by the end of this Senedd?

Julie James (Labour, Swansea West)

Yes, we are working extremely hard to make sure that we will do that. Let me explain the nature of a target to the Member, who's clearly never, ever worked in an organisation that has targets. I know the Member thinks that the targets are something to beat somebody with, but, in fact, what the targets do is drive delivery. We have a target that is stretching in order to push the organisation towards that target. That is what it's for. If it was an easy target to reach, it wouldn't work as a target. As I say, I know the Member clearly has no understanding of how targets work in actually delivering things, but that is how they work.

Tom Giffard (Conservative, South Wales West)

You set that target, Counsel General—

Julie James (Labour, Swansea West)

I did.

Tom Giffard (Conservative, South Wales West)

—in your manifesto. You promised the people of Wales that you would deliver it, and you were unclear as to whether you actually would.

Julie James (Labour, Swansea West)

I was not unclear at all.

Tom Giffard (Conservative, South Wales West)

You said that you were working towards reaching that target—and I'm happy to reflect on the Record afterwards. You said you were working towards reaching that target. You did not guarantee this Senedd you would reach the target that you promised you'd reach by the end of this term. Because we've seen, haven't we, report after report saying that this is a target that you're simply not going to reach. Audit Wales said that the target will not be met unless a significant uplift in funding is implemented, and so the figure would still fall short. So, do I take it from your answer that you disagree with Audit Wales's findings, and if you don't disagree, why has the funding not increased?

Julie James (Labour, Swansea West)

The funding has increased. I was incredibly clear. I said we are working towards a target—

Tom Giffard (Conservative, South Wales West)

That's not what I asked you.

Julie James (Labour, Swansea West)

I explained to you what a target is—

Tom Giffard (Conservative, South Wales West)

I didn't ask for that either.

Julie James (Labour, Swansea West)

If you could guarantee delivery of a target, it wouldn't be a target, would it? It wouldn't be stretching in any way—

Tom Giffard (Conservative, South Wales West)

But you're the Minister for Delivery.

Julie James (Labour, Swansea West)

The whole purpose of a target is to drive an organisation forward to delivering it, and that is what we are doing. We are not yet at the end of the Senedd term. It remains to be seen whether we make the target. We are pushing towards it with all the power we have. We have incredibly increased the financing for that. Our transitional accommodation capital programme alone has seen record levels of investment. I know the Member doesn't like the idea that a target is something that drives an organisation forward, but, in fact, that's what it is. And just to remind the Member that, unlike any Conservative Government that we've ever seen, Welsh Labour promises things that it always delivers.

David Rees (Labour, Aberavon)

Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Adam Price.

Adam Price (Plaid Cymru, Carmarthen East and Dinefwr)

But do they? I'm sure you found the annex of the Welsh Government's annual report—[Interruption.]

David Rees (Labour, Aberavon)

Adam, one second. I wish to hear the contribution of the spokesperson for Plaid Cymru without disruption from the Conservative benches, please. Adam.

Adam Price (Plaid Cymru, Carmarthen East and Dinefwr)

As Minister for Delivery, I'm sure you found the annex of the Welsh Government's annual report setting out progress against the commitments in the programme for government as instructive as I did. What stands out is the number of policies and promises that you have already given up on. There will be no community bank, no national supply pool for teachers, no museum of north Wales, no national construction company, no shadow broadcasting authority, no reform of the school year, no European Union twinning fund, and the pavement parking ban, the taxi Bill and the council tax reform promised for this Senedd will not happen in this Senedd term. Why do you think you've failed across such a wide range of areas? Were you too radical at the start of this term or too conservative at the end?

Julie James (Labour, Swansea West)

Well, I think that's a very interesting list. I always—. I'm really disappointed, Adam, that Plaid Cymru, forever the most dismal, gloomy party in the history of the world—. You could have started at the beginning of the annual report and read for several, several, several, several sessions all the things we have achieved. But, of course, you always, always, always want to concentrate on the gloomy and pessimistic end of the spectrum. We had a very ambitious set of promises at the beginning of our manifesto. We have delivered the vast majority of them, by any percentage reckoning. Of course, we had the tail end of the pandemic in 2021, when we were elected with the biggest majority we'd ever had, might I remind you, and then, of course, we had the cost-of-living crisis, the appalling Conservative omnichaos, culminating in the Liz Truss omnishambles of a budget. Just for an example, a £1 million-worth of social housing grant, before the Liz Truss budget, bought us seven houses, but now it buys us four. So, despite all of that, we have delivered the vast majority of our promises.

Adam Price (Plaid Cymru, Carmarthen East and Dinefwr)

When you're appointed as a Minister for Delivery, you can't blame me for being gloomy when I just point out the pledges that you haven't delivered.

Julie James (Labour, Swansea West)

Well, you could have started at the other end.

Adam Price (Plaid Cymru, Carmarthen East and Dinefwr)

Don't publish an annual report, then. Can we try again? Do you accept, Minister, that, at the current rate of progress, your flagship targets for 20,000 new homes, as we've just heard, but not just that, the universal free childcare for two-year-olds, eradicating long NHS waits and creating 125,000 apprenticeships are all now unlikely to be met in this Senedd term? Welsh Government, in office 2011-16, reported delivering 90 per cent and 95 per cent of their programme for government commitments, respectively, but our analysis suggests your Government is on course to fall short of both those figures. Will you commit to publishing a definitive end-of-term delivery figure? And do you expect it to be equal or surpass the record of your predecessors?

Julie James (Labour, Swansea West)

Yes, we will absolutely do an end-of-term report. This is the last of the annual reports, because, of course, there's not a full Senedd year in the last year—it finishes in May—and any report on that would come later. Lots of the statistics in that report are, of course, delayed, so the figure on housing, for example, is two years old because those are the verified statistics. I know that we've put record levels of investment into the 20,000 homes, for example, and I know that we are close to meeting that target, having had record levels of new build right the way through the last two years. The figures reflected there are the Knowledge and Analytical Services's verified statistics, so there's a two-year lag. We have a lag in lots of the statistics, and so you always have to do a catch-up report at the end, which we absolutely will do.

In terms of health spend, for example, since the new UK Government and the investment in public services that have seen the consequentials for Wales have come forward, we've been able to see record falls in the waiting lists for the longest waits, and, in many health boards across Wales, zero two-year waiting lists, and I, for one, really celebrate that. We continue to drive that forward, and I work with all of the Cabinet Secretaries, not only on the headline ones, but right across the programme for government to drive the delivery where at all possible. And as I said, the point of the target—it's a convenient stick to beat Ministers with, of course—the actual point of the target is to provide a stretching set of criteria against which to push the delivery associates of the Welsh Government, so local authorities and health boards, but, actually, the internal civil service as well, to reach those targets, and a very handy tool for that they are.

Adam Price (Plaid Cymru, Carmarthen East and Dinefwr)

Another promise in the programme for government was to promote and support the work of the UK-wide constitutional commission being established by the UK Labour Party, and in the annex you say this commitment is now complete. And yes, you did support and promote the work of the Gordon Brown commission, which recommended the devolution of youth justice and probation. The problem is the UK Labour Party didn't reciprocate. You will have heard the comments of the prisons and probation Minister yesterday, when he told us that the Home Office needed to stabilise the crisis that the Home Office had created before powers could be devolved to Wales. Are we, in Wales, being patronised by Westminster, Counsel General? And is the UK Labour Government just stringing you along?

Julie James (Labour, Swansea West)

I don't agree with that characterisation at all. The Deputy First Minister had an extremely good meeting with the Lord Chancellor, in which she authorised officials to work together on the beginnings of the steps for the devolution of youth justice. That work is going on apace. We've appointed a head of youth justice devolution here in the Welsh Government in order to push that work on apace. Various other meetings on probation are occurring. Myself and the Minister for social justice are going up to visit the Manchester model for probation during August, for example, with a view to looking at that.

Lord Timpson has done an enormous amount of work on the absolute shambles the Conservative Government left the court and prison system in. They should be hanging their head in shame, as opposed to the nonsense we actually get. You've only got to look at any of the prisons—I have one in my own constituency—to see the terrible overcrowding and dreadful, dreadful outcomes of terrible years of failure to invest. Lord Timpson has been concentrating on that. To be fair to him, the devolution process is not within his remit. He's a Minister looking very specifically at some things. It is not our experience that that's what's happening. The manifesto of the UK Government said that it would explore the devolution of youth justice and probation, and we are doing that. I am confident that we will get the steps towards that that we expected in this first year and a bit of the UK Labour Government, and I'm sure that that journey will continue.

Gareth Davies (Conservative, Vale of Clwyd)

3. What legal advice has the Counsel General provided to the Welsh Government regarding the steps it can take to ensure that procurement practices incorporate consideration of the ethical treatment of pensioners when awarding public contracts? OQ63026

Julie James (Labour, Swansea West)

Welsh Government continuously promotes responsible and ethical procurement through the Welsh procurement policy notes and the 'Code of Practice—Ethical Employment in Supply Chains'. These principles support ethical treatment of all vulnerable groups, including pensioners.

Gareth Davies (Conservative, Vale of Clwyd)

Thank you, Counsel General. I'd like to highlight the concerning issue of the unethical treatment of pensioners, namely those with defined benefit pensions accrued before 1997. I've heard from a constituent in Rhyl who is a former Hewlett-Packard employee and is now facing the reality of inflation eroding his retirement income simply because his former employer chooses not to increase pre-1997 benefits in line with inflation, even though they have the discretion and likely financial ability to do so. People who gave decades of service to their employer are seeing their real-terms income fall year after year with no legal protection. Also, the number of pensioners across the UK below the minimum income standard nearly doubled between 2009 and 2022, which is around 20 per cent of pensioners. The matter is primarily reserved, and Westminster's Work and Pensions Committee has written to the pensions Minister, Torsten Bell, on this issue. But, major corporations like HP, BP and Shell could be benefiting from public contracts here in Wales, yet choose to treat their former workers so poorly, which raises questions regarding—

David Rees (Labour, Aberavon)

You need to ask the question now, Gareth, please.

Gareth Davies (Conservative, Vale of Clwyd)

—whether it's right for them to receive taxpayers' money. So, what legal advice has the Counsel General provided to the Welsh Government regarding the steps it can take to ensure that procurement processes reflect this ethical treatment of pensioners? And will the Counsel General explore excluding companies that engage in such unethical practices from future public contracts?

Julie James (Labour, Swansea West)

Thank you. Responsibility, as you said, for pensions lies with the UK Government and is the responsibility of the Department for Work and Pensions. Actually, our Cabinet Secretary for finance is meeting the pensions Minister, Torsten Bell, tomorrow to discuss that and a number of other issues around pensions affecting the Welsh economy and Welsh pensioners.

In the meantime, the Welsh public sector has made significant advances towards ethical business practices in recent years, ensuring contracts are awarded compliantly with the highest standards of social responsibility. The Welsh Government's legislative framework enables contracting authorities to carry out robust due diligence and access to exclusion grounds to ensure only suppliers that meet robust standards can bid for public contracts. Any suppliers under contract later found to be in breach of their commitments under the Procurement Act 2023 may face penalties, including the termination of contracts and exclusion from future procurement opportunities, and that covers all of the range of people protected by vulnerable people, including pensioners.

Rhys ab Owen (Plaid Cymru, South Wales Central)

4. What work has the Welsh Government done to address legal aid deserts in Wales? OQ63024

Julie James (Labour, Swansea West)

Diolch, Rhys. Legal aid deserts remain a serious concern in Wales. While legal aid is reserved to the UK Government, the Pro Bono Committee for Wales plays a vital role in supporting the most vulnerable. However, voluntary support cannot replace a properly funded legal aid system and is not really a sustainable solution.

Rhys ab Owen (Plaid Cymru, South Wales Central)

Diolch, Cwnsler Cyffredinol. I recognise, as you've said several times here, your concern with regard to access to justice and the impact that has on the people of Wales. I am concerned with regard to the criminalisation of peaceful protest and the fact that that leads people into a system where they cannot receive the advice, the support and, ultimately, the justice they deserve. You've heard me asking before about Cardiff University having an injunction against peaceful protest within their grounds. Research by the University of York shows that only 20 per cent of cases with regard to people breaching an injunction with regard to peaceful protest—only 20 per cent—receive legal aid. Over the weekend, you will have heard that 13 people were arrested in Cardiff because they were protesting peacefully outside the BBC. They, too, deserve and need legal advice. What can you do to prevent a situation in which peaceful activists face the prospect of having to defend themselves without legal aid? Diolch yn fawr.

Julie James (Labour, Swansea West)

Thank you, Rhys. I share your concern absolutely on that, and it's unfortunately not the only area where people are denied access to justice because legal aid is no longer there. We've spoken before, haven't we, about the particular concern around housing in disrepair and immigration as well, both of which are areas where people really do need access to good legal advice and legal aid is often not forthcoming and has been removed in most of those areas. I said before in answering a question to you that we welcomed the first steps towards restoring some legal aid, but there's a long, long way to go.

In the meantime, I do welcome the invaluable work of the Pro Bono Committee for Wales and the Pro Bono Week committee in developing the guide for pro bono and other free advice in Wales. I have written to the committee fully endorsing the guide, and they intend to share it with Members of the Senedd so that all of you will know how to refer people for pro bono legal advice, and I can't speak highly enough of the lawyers who provide that pro bono advice. I'll lapse into anecdote myself, but when you're a young lawyer, pro bono work is a very good way of getting good experience, and I myself worked for Rape Crisis for many years in London as a pro bono lawyer, and you get really invaluable experience, but also, of course, it's a way of giving back. So, I'm really pleased that the committee is so active in Wales, but, as I said in my opening answer, it really is not a substitute for a comprehensive set of legal aid provisions to allow people to have access to justice. And we do continue to have conversations with the Lord Chancellor, and I make common cause with the Law Society and with the Bar Council in order to try to push for proper legal aid settlements to be put in place as soon as possible.

And then, just as a further remark, of course, encouraging lawyers to go into areas of work like criminal justice is increasingly difficult, because although it's a characterisation of lawyers that they're all rich, actually making a living off legal aid is really hard, and most of the legal aid practices have shut because they just cannot do it. I'd be very keen indeed, as soon as I'm no longer a serving Minister in this place, as of May next year, to get very involved in trying to start again a fully comprehensive law centre in Wales to try to do that. And I will be speaking with a range of progressive lawyers about how we might be able to do that as soon as possible. But, just to reiterate the point, there is no substitute for a proper, comprehensive legal aid system.

James Evans (Conservative, Brecon and Radnorshire)

5. Will the Counsel General set out specific examples of how her role as Minister for Delivery has led to measurable outcomes in terms of the delivery of the government's priorities? OQ63028

Julie James (Labour, Swansea West)

Yes. The annual report that we published last Friday sets out a comprehensive account of this Government’s impressive record on delivery. As Minister for Delivery, I work with my colleagues across the Cabinet. My successes are their successes, and together this Cabinet is delivering the things that matter most for the people of Wales.

James Evans (Conservative, Brecon and Radnorshire)

Counsel General, your job title is Minister for Delivery, yet it often feels to many of us in this Chamber like the Minister of delays, whether that's in housing delivery, delivery in education, delivery in our NHS. You're meant to unblock legal and legislative knots, oversee the delivery of the Government's programme, which we've heard from others is failing, ensure access to justice and the timetable for legislation, but time and time again we've seen Bills coming forward riddled with legal and grammatical errors, and we've also had calls from scrutiny committees here for greater transparency, which often go unheeded by the Government. So, can you talk us through some real-world examples of where your unblocking role has delivered measurable outcomes, where you've unjammed those legal blockages, accelerated legislation, improved court access or tightened up delivery of the Government's programme, or should we start calling you the Minister for apologies, not delivery?

Julie James (Labour, Swansea West)

Well, that was very poor, even for you, if I might say so. The entire Cabinet supports the priorities, and, as Minister for Delivery, I provide support to the Cabinet Secretaries in whichever ways they need. You asked for some measurable outcomes, so let me provide you with just a few: waiting lists slashed by 86 per cent from the pandemic peak; record-setting levels of affordable housing; directly supporting 40,000 jobs; on track to fix or prevent 200,000 potholes; more new trains than ever before, and over 77 per cent of the fleet made up of new carriages, just to start. And you can shake your head as much as you like, but those are incontrovertible facts—I know you don't like those. I meet very regularly with every Cabinet Secretary to review progress on the programme for government—[Interruption.]

David Rees (Labour, Aberavon)

I would have thought that you'd like to let the Cabinet Secretary respond to the question and not interrupt the response.

James Evans (Conservative, Brecon and Radnorshire)

If it was worth listening to.

David Rees (Labour, Aberavon)

I think that is out of order. Every response is worth listening to, and should be listened to.

Julie James (Labour, Swansea West)

The entire Cabinet meet twice a term to specifically review our progress against all the priorities and to ensure that every part of the Government is driving forward the things that matter most. So, for example, just to give you one example, very recently, we've unlocked a number of housing sites across Wales by getting the Cabinet Secretary for climate change and the Cabinet Secretary for housing together with Welsh Water and a number of councils to unlock the phosphate issue and unlock sites for thousands of homes across Wales, and that's very demonstrable indeed. And, of course, we have a range of things set out in the annual report that we've also delivered.

Alun Davies (Labour, Blaenau Gwent)

There is actually a very interesting question to be asked here; it's a shame that James Evans could not find it. The Welsh Government has over a number of years sought to create a number of different delivery mechanisms, but you are, I think—to my knowledge—the first Minister for delivery that has been appointed to the Welsh Government, and it would be useful if this Parliament were able to understand the means and the mechanisms that you employ as the Minister for delivery to working with your colleagues to ensure that delivery occurs according to the Government's objectives and ambitions, and it would help us with our scrutiny as Members if we were able to understand what those means, mechanisms and processes are, so we could understand the role. I'm very supportive of the role of Minister for delivery; I'd like to understand the role that you play around the Cabinet table and working with your colleagues.

Julie James (Labour, Swansea West)

Yes, thank you, Alun. I'm very happy to set that out. So, as I say, I conduct a series of meetings at least once every half term with every single Cabinet Secretary and relevant Ministers to go through the programme for government commitments, to understand where we are in delivering those commitments and what is necessary to make sure they get over the line, or to understand why they won't get over the line and what we can do about that, if that's where we are. I meet very regularly with people with the top four priorities to understand what the data sets look like for that and what we can do about those data sets to make sure that we have the right information and that we're driving the right kinds of improvement. Quite often, it's not about additional resource; it's about deploying that resource in a different way. I have asked a number of backbenchers to undertake things to assist me with that. So, Lee Waters, for example, did a piece of work on affordable housing for us. That piece of work identified a number of things that we could do to accelerate delivery in some areas. We've unlocked quite a lot of the phosphate problem on houses for that, and, of course, that has also helped us clean up our rivers, which is a mutual benefit point.

I also make sure that there are not cross-Government blockages—as you know, Governments can be quite siloed—to make sure that something that's happening here isn't actually actively working against something happening here and to bring them together to make sure that happens. And then, twice every half term, we have a whole Cabinet devoted to where we are with the programme for government and what those particular stats look like in terms of delivery. It's been very interesting, actually, and I'm very happy to share with some of the scrutiny committees some of the data analysis that we've been able to do, some of the things we didn't know that we perhaps ought to have known and some of the things that we've done as a result of that.

David Rees (Labour, Aberavon)

I thank the Counsel General.

3. Business Statement and Announcement

David Rees (Labour, Aberavon)

Item 3 today is the business statement and announcement, and I call on the Trefnydd, Jane Hutt.

Jane Hutt (Labour, Vale of Glamorgan)

Thank you very much, Dirprwy Lywydd. There are several changes to this week's business as set out on the Plenary agendas. Business for the first three weeks of the autumn term is shown on the business statement, which is available to Members electronically.

Paul Davies (Conservative, Preseli Pembrokeshire)

Trefnydd, I would like to request an urgent statement regarding planning in special areas of conservation. I recently met with local businesses who are deeply concerned that planning authorities in west Wales are adopting a precautionary approach to applications, based on a letter they've recently received from Natural Resources Wales. This is despite any formal planning guidance being updated, and so this approach is happening despite any actual change taking place.

It has been made clear by local planning authorities that planning applications that involve any potential run-off into a special area of conservation will not be determined until NRW updates its official planning guidance, though planning applications have been progressing until recently under existing NRW guidance, and the guidance has not yet changed. Trefnydd, the economic implications for west Wales cannot be ignored. If developments are stalled, it will seriously affect local businesses, and jobs could be at stake. We therefore urgently need a statement from either the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs, or, indeed, the Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Energy and Planning. It's essential that the current situation is clarified for all concerned and the Welsh Government must ensure that development is not brought to a standstill in west Wales.

Jane Hutt (Labour, Vale of Glamorgan)

Diolch yn fawr, Paul Davies. You've drawn attention to something that is a matter for local planning authorities, and, obviously, democratically elected local authorities, their planning functions are very much guided by 'Planning Policy Wales', but also, of course, take into account guidance from other bodies, such as NRW. You've raised the question. It obviously needs a lot more explanation about impacts in terms of, already, whether these changes are being made, but, anyway, I think it's important that you have raised it, and I'm sure the Cabinet Secretaries will respond in terms of further questions.

Heledd Fychan (Plaid Cymru, South Wales Central)

Trefnydd, as you'll be aware, Interceltique de Lorient takes place again this August, which, as many Members will know, is the largest annual festival of Celtic culture. Wales will, as always, have a delegation at the festival, including, from my own region, Treorchy Male Choir, but Nation.Cymru reported last week that there will be no Welsh Government presence, meaning that the only Celtic nation without a promotional stand will be Wales. I'd like to know if this is the case, and I'd also like to ask for a written statement from the First Minister outlining why this decision was taken, especially in light of the fact that we do have a memorandum of understanding between the Welsh Government and the Regional Council of Brittany, and culture features as part of that MoU.

Jane Hutt (Labour, Vale of Glamorgan)

Diolch yn fawr, Heledd Fychan, and thank you for drawing, again, to the attention of the Senedd that really important annual festival, Celtic festival. I certainly have recalled Welsh Government engagement, and indeed ministerial and first ministerial presence at that. I would like to take this back and clarify the position. Diolch yn fawr.

Julie Morgan (Labour, Cardiff North)

Could I ask for two statements today, please? First of all, please could we have a statement from the Government following the publication of the infected blood inquiry's additional report last week? The inquiry felt it necessary to hold further hearings at the beginning of May because of serious concerns about the way the Infected Blood Compensation Authority was being set up, the significant delays being experienced, and the complete lack of consultation with those who should have been at the heart of decision making.

I was very pleased that my constituent Lynne Kelly, the chair of Haemophilia Wales, was a witness at the hearings and was able to put forward the concerns of those infected and affected. The report was published last week by the inquiry's chair, Sir Brian Langstaff, with some very damning remarks and conclusions, such as that anyone who listened to this

'will have been in no doubt that trust has not yet been regained but has instead been further damaged and that people have been harmed yet further by the way in which they have been treated.'

This is a scandal that has been going on for 40 years. Could the Welsh Government make a statement as to how it is going to respond to this latest report?

I'd also like to ask for a statement—

David Rees (Labour, Aberavon)

You used your time up in asking that question.

Julie Morgan (Labour, Cardiff North)

Okay. Thank you.

Jane Hutt (Labour, Vale of Glamorgan)

Thank you. Diolch yn fawr, Julie Morgan. Can I thank you for raising this question? It is a question that, of course, has come to the fore again as a result of this report. Can I just pay tribute to Lynne Kelly, Haemophilia Wales and the constant work, the diligence, the commitment, she has shown to this campaign? I recognise the frustration of those who are affected by the infected blood scandal and their families and relatives. I think, across the Chamber, we have all got constituents—I certainly have—who we are representing as far as this is concerned.

I think also the inquiry has been led so ably and with such commitment by Brian Langstaff, and we must recognise that today. This is a matter for the UK Cabinet Office, and of course—and I’m sure we’ve all corresponded with Nick Thomas-Symonds, the Minister responsible—they are considering the recommendations made in the report, and the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care is meeting this Thursday with the Minister, Nick Thomas-Symonds, along with all his colleagues in the devolved nations, to discuss the recommendations and next steps.

Joel James (Conservative, South Wales Central)

Trefnydd, I know that you’re well aware of the increasing antisemitism in our country, and it is particularly upsetting to see this hatred land disproportionately on young people. Indeed, I’ve even received complaints about statements put out by Urdd Gobaith Cymru, an organisation I’ve always associated with fairness and inclusivity. A report has recently been released, commissioned by the Board of Deputies of British Jews and backed by the UK Government, that shows that antisemitism has now been normalised in Britain. The review warned that Jewish people in the UK were suffering increasing prejudice in our professions, cultural life and in our public services, and found that antisemitism has become pervasive in our NHS, in our universities and in our arts sector. With this in mind, can I ask the Welsh Government to bring forward an oral statement as a matter of urgency on what actions it is taking to address this report and tackle antisemitism in our NHS, in our universities and in our arts? Thank you.

Jane Hutt (Labour, Vale of Glamorgan)

Thank you, Joel James, for your question, and for drawing attention to a new report, which was co-chaired by Dame Penny Mordaunt and Lord John Mann. To say, obviously, as I've said and the Senedd knows, that the Welsh Government condemns antisemitism in all its forms and stands in solidarity with Jewish people and communities across Wales and the UK. We welcome the findings of the commission. In Wales, we’re committed to building a fairer, more inclusive society where everyone feels safe, respected and valued, and, through our ‘Anti-racist Wales Action Plan’, we are working with communities, public services and educators to challenge hate, promote understanding and ensure that racism and discrimination have no place in our nation. We continue to engage with Jewish communities in Wales to ensure that their voices are heard and their concerns are addressed. Also, we will be, of course, looking at these recommendations ourselves.

Mabon ap Gwynfor (Plaid Cymru, Dwyfor Meirionnydd)

I note the written statement made by the First Minister yesterday providing a six-monthly update on work done in response to the recommendations of module 1 of the UK COVID inquiry. The statement, generally speaking, is disappointing and superficial. In looking at recommendation 1, for example, it notes that the Government has responded and completed the requirement listed. With the exception of one side of A4 of explanation, there is no way of ensuring that that requirement was met as far as the Senedd is concerned. In response to recommendation 5, it notes that a desk exercise was completed. The point is that we cannot scrutinise any of this statement publicly. The situation is, therefore, unacceptable. Can I ask for these statements in future to be made orally, so that we can have time to scrutinise them?

Jane Hutt (Labour, Vale of Glamorgan)

Diolch yn fawr, Mabon ap Gwynfor. As you say, a written statement was published on Monday, on 14 July, and shared with Members in respect of progress on the inquiry's module 1 recommendations, and the response of the Welsh Government did reaffirm our commitment to continuous learning, not only from inquiries, but from incidents and exercises. We've already taken action to improve our understanding of risk and our preparedness. The Welsh resilience framework, published in May, provides our plans for enhancing preparedness, response and recovery capabilities and ensuring a more resilient Wales, both now and for the future. I think it is important and it is very welcome that there is a debate tomorrow, and that the Public Accounts and Public Administration Committee has also agreed to take responsibility in taking this forward in terms of the report that was done by the special purpose committee, but thank you for raising this today in advance of that, Mabon.

Carolyn Thomas (Labour, North Wales)

Please could I ask for a statement showing a commitment to publishing a national beaver strategy and wild release licensing framework for beavers, following a written statement last September by the Deputy First Minister confirming that the Welsh Government supports moving towards the managed reintroduction of beavers in Wales? By the time we return, it will be 12 months since that statement. I know he's been very busy, but we are waiting for this. Thank you.

Jane Hutt (Labour, Vale of Glamorgan)

Diolch yn fawr, Carolyn Thomas. Well, you have the Cabinet Secretary here in the Chamber. He has been reminded of the importance of our statement of support in terms of the reintroduction of beavers. I think we've already seen that occurring across the UK, and I'm sure that, in the autumn term, the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary will wish to update the Senedd.

Natasha Asghar (Conservative, South Wales East)

Business Minister, can I please request a statement from the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care about supporting women with menopause? Menopause is a major health and workforce issue, affecting thousands of people across Wales. From my understanding, around 900,000 women have left the UK workforce due to unmanaged symptoms, and menopause is estimated to cost more than £10 billion annually in lost productivity and absence, yet support, sadly, remains fragmented, with long NHS waiting times, inconsistent work policies and limited access across menopause-trained professionals.

The south Wales menopause community, who I was pleased to meet with recently, is working really hard to change that. They have proposed a joined-up, regional model for menopause support, as one of the things that brings together healthcare providers, employers and holistic services. Their vision is a dedicated menopause well-being hub that supports medical, mental health, lifestyle and workplace needs under one roof, with a digital arm to ensure inclusive reach. They are interested in launching a pilot programme, and I have put them in touch with Aneurin Bevan health board, but a statement from the Cabinet Secretary outlining what steps the Welsh Government will, indeed, be taking to support women with menopause would be greatly appreciated. I'd also implore the Cabinet Secretary to meet with the south Wales menopause community, something that I'd be more than happy to facilitate. Thank you so much.

Jane Hutt (Labour, Vale of Glamorgan)

Diolch yn fawr, Natasha Asghar. Of course, you raise such an important issue for all women, in terms of supporting women through the menopause. Of course, we now have a real opportunity to address this comprehensively across Wales with the women's health plan and also the expectation and the financial support for women's health hubs in every health board area. I know that the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care will welcome your focus today on supporting women through the menopause, and also I'm sure that the Minister for Mental Health and Well-being, who's taken a lead role with the women's health plan, will want to respond as well.

Jane Dodds (Liberal Democrat, Mid and West Wales)

Good afternoon, Cabinet Secretary. Could I ask for a statement, please, from the Cabinet Secretary for Transport and North Wales to explain how the Welsh Government plans to better integrate public transport in rural communities, looking particularly at bus and train transfers, particularly in areas like Knighton? Knighton is right on the border between England and Wales; in Wales, it feels very neglected. One of the things it does have is the Heart of Wales line running to it, but there is very little opportunity for people to connect from the train on to a bus; for example, the 9 p.m. train arriving at Craven Arms to allow people to go on to Knighton misses totally the bus link to take people on. While the Bus Services (Wales) Bill promises to improve integration between bus and rail, questions actually still remain about what it will mean in reality. So, please could I urge you and the Cabinet Secretary to set out how the Government will make sure that communities like Knighton don't feel left behind? Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Jane Hutt (Labour, Vale of Glamorgan)

Diolch yn fawr, Jane Dodds. It is important that you draw attention today to communities like Knighton—beautiful communities. I remember walking through, and in fact staying in, Knighton as a result—just walking, of course. It’s such a place for visiting, and for residents, of course. But I think this is where we need to make sure that Transport for Wales take into account the ways in which active travel and trains on the Heart of Wales line link up in terms of the timetables, working closely with the local authority as well to make sure that there are those connections and that communities like Knighton are involved in that. Transport for Wales are developing multimodal approaches to improve public transport connectivity in the Heart of Wales line area, and the bus Bill, of course, will help us deliver through bus franchising. So, I'm sure that this is something that, in terms of the Heart of Wales, and particularly Knighton, there will be improvements in terms of that multimodal response to services.

Janet Finch-Saunders (Conservative, Aberconwy)

I would like a statement from the Cabinet Secretary for Education on the provision of post-16 school transport. I've had quite a shock recently. I've had a few young people—girls—wanting to go into science, technology, engineering and mathematics subjects, and what have you. Basically, they want to study at their local campuses, which, for us, is Grŵp Llandrillo Menai, or on the island as well. Now, the local authority's own school post-16 transport policy restricts support to a learner's nearest college, without taking into account course availability or individual learner needs. Since this change, the college have seen a significant increase in inquiries from students, particularly in engineering and STEM. And for 14 years, I've sat through when they've been saying, 'We need more women, we need young people going into STEM and engineering subjects', yet the local authority, Conwy County Borough Council, are refusing to fund their transport.

Could you perhaps have a look into this and maybe speak with Conwy County Borough Council? This is two pupils that have come forward at present, but I believe others will be coming forward to request this. This is not something the local authority, I believe, should be rejecting the funding for. It's vital we get these people into STEM subjects.

Jane Hutt (Labour, Vale of Glamorgan)

Thank you very much, Janet Finch-Saunders. I think we absolutely agree on that point. It's great to know that there are pupils, school students, who want to study STEM subjects, and particularly for girls to study STEM subjects. We've invested a lot of funding to encourage under-represented groups, and it is often girls, to go into STEM subjects. And, of course, that is about availability of those courses in the communities where they live and that are accessible. You've raised a question there about access to these courses in your constituency in terms of post-16 educational transport, and I'm sure this is something that the Minister for Further and Higher Education will want to look at in terms of access and availability.

Laura Anne Jones (Conservative, South Wales East)

Trefnydd, I'd like to ask for two statements, please. Firstly, a statement on what plans the Welsh Government has to fill the 2,000 nursing vacancies here in Wales. We know that there are plans to reduce the number of undergraduates taken on at the Cardiff nursing school. Surely this will exacerbate the recruitment problems and sector needs. I recognise that the Welsh Government recruited 200 nurses from abroad earlier this year, but I know that many of my constituents feel that bringing nurses from overseas is not a sustainable way to staff our struggling NHS, and that we have to ensure that we look after and grow our homegrown talent as much as possible, and train and nurture these people in Wales to these crucial roles. So, I'd like to request a statement from the Welsh Government reacting to that.

Secondly, it has been now over three months since the Supreme Court ruling, and we're still waiting for the Welsh Government to provide an oral statement on what the next steps will be. I'm not sure that a delay of this kind can be justified, Trefnydd, and I think—I know, in fact—that there are now moves to take this Welsh Government to court over not acting swiftly and in accordance with the law on this. The Senedd is now about to break for recess, and we will not hear a statement now until September. So, can I ask you, Trefnydd, please, as a matter of urgency, can we have it in that first week back in September? Diolch.

Jane Hutt (Labour, Vale of Glamorgan)

Thank you very much for those two questions, Laura Anne Jones. I'm sure that the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care would welcome the opportunity to update the Senedd on the very encouraging levels of not only training, but also actual staffing in terms of nursing levels in Wales. Clearly, we have to address the vacancies, but I think this, again, is an opportunity to show that, as the First Minister said, the highest level of NHS staffing, and that obviously includes our all-important nursing staff.

As far as the Supreme Court judgment is concerned, you know that I issued a written statement on this, and also that I responded to the consultation, as did many, that was launched by the Equality and Human Rights Commission. The closure of that and what it could mean in practice in terms of guidance and the result of that consultation, of course, we await. It only finished on 30 June. I have also taken the opportunity to meet organisations who are affected by this and who are interested in the outcomes of the consultation. I have met them across all interests over the last few weeks, but we await the outcome of the Equality and Human Rights Commission consultation, and move forward in terms of understanding the impacts of this in the way that we respond. It is really important that this is about being inclusive, compassionate and recognising needs and impacts already.

David Rees (Labour, Aberavon)

And finally, Peter Fox.

Peter Fox (Conservative, Monmouth)

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Trefnydd, can I request a statement from the Cabinet Secretary for Transport and North Wales on support relating to the A465? The Welsh Government have been pleased to announce the conclusion of the A465 improvement works, and I agree it is an impressive project that I am sure will be the subject of debate on value for money for many years to come. The Welsh Government have said the scheme is finished and the communities near the road are open for business, but for many in my constituency the scheme is not over, as they are still suffering with the consequences of the work, such as the lack of promised improvement works, business support and compensation. A number of my constituents are still waiting for a number of resolutions, with one specific case having been ongoing for over 12 years, relating to the access to property that has been impacted by the new road. This wait is simply just not good enough and our residents need outcomes to be able to get on with their lives. Too many are stuck in limbo. I would therefore welcome a statement by the Cabinet Secretary outlining what the Welsh Government are doing to ensure all outstanding cases of support, access or other issues relating to the A465 are resolved, so that the project can be considered as finished once and for all.

Jane Hutt (Labour, Vale of Glamorgan)

Thank you very much, Peter Fox. I am sure we would concur with that. Obviously this is a major development that will support your region, your constituency and all of those who will benefit from it, and all those indeed—and I recall this discussion last week—who have engaged in the construction, and the benefits to local people and communities in terms of education and apprenticeship opportunities. Clearly, where those issues need to be resolved, that will be the priority now. Diolch yn fawr.

David Rees (Labour, Aberavon)

I thank the Trefnydd.

4. Statement by the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs: The Sustainable Farming Scheme

David Rees (Labour, Aberavon)

Item 4 today is the statement by the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs on the sustainable farming scheme. I call on the Deputy First Minister, Huw Irranca-Davies.

Huw Irranca-Davies (Labour, Ogmore)

Thank you very much, Dirprwy Lywydd, and a good afternoon to you all. I am very pleased to be able to announce today our sustainable farming scheme. This is truly a landmark moment for agriculture in Wales. The scheme will support farmers in Wales to produce world-class high-quality food, whilst caring for the environment, tackling and adapting to climate change. It will also build resilience for those who will work and care for this precious land in the years to come.

Huw Irranca-Davies (Labour, Ogmore)

Our ambition is for a thriving, confident agriculture sector built around innovation and growth, rising to challenges and grasping opportunities. The people of Wales value farming, and that’s clear to see. They understand a farmer's role in nurturing land and the Welsh language, producing world-renowned food, and protecting fragile habitats. But more is needed. Extreme weather and drought are signs that the climate and nature emergencies are here. It is not possible to consider future food production without mitigating these emergencies, as set out in the sustainable land management objectives.

The people of Wales want to know that the money we are investing in agriculture is bringing the benefits they want. They back Welsh farming, and they want soils protected, water quality improved, countryside access maintained and nature supported. So, with this in mind, the scheme represents a new agreement between the people of Wales and our farmers.

Huw Irranca-Davies (Labour, Ogmore)

This is not just a scheme for farmers; this is a scheme for the whole of Wales—a whole-farm, whole-nation approach. And it is a product of unprecedented collaboration. We have listened to wide-ranging views and worked intensively with the ministerial round-table and with supporting groups, and my thanks to everyone who has engaged with us. This has resulted in a scheme that works for the industry and meets the needs of everyone. I intend for the ministerial round-table to continue as we strengthen and embed the SFS across the industry. So, we’ve listened, and we will continue to listen.

No two farms are the same, so we’ve ensured that the scheme is accessible. It offers flexibility to accommodate different farming types, tenants and new entrants with access to land. The framework of universal, optional and collaborative actions responds to the asks from the industry. The framework provides stability whilst helping farms to be more resilient and productive by improving soil health, animal health, managing pests and developing skills.

We’ve reduced complexity by reducing the universal actions, simplifying requirements and simplifying the administration. We commit to supporting the universal actions and legacy basic payment scheme with the same budget in 2026—£238 million—that we currently spend on the basic payment scheme. Social value accounts for a significant proportion of the universal payment in 2026, reflecting the multiple benefits farmers provide alongside the sustainable production of food. We have set this budget to encourage farmers into the scheme in 2026 to realise the scheme benefits sooner.

However, our environmental commitments will only be met with substantial uptake of optional and collaborative actions. The earlier the uptake, the earlier we’ll see the benefits at scale. This is why we’ve bolstered the budget available for these actions in 2026, and why we commit to further shifting the balance of future budgets to optional and collaborative actions. This is essential for our climate and nature objectives, and to offer a truly sustainable future to Welsh agriculture.

We will continue developing the evidence base underpinning social value to better understand how individual actions contribute to different elements of social value, including the benefits that come from protecting our environment, and to refine this approach and then apply it more widely to optional and collaborative actions.

We’ve changed our approach to tree planting. We need to plant more trees and hedgerows to meet our climate ambitions. And that is why, having listened to farmers, we’ve moved away from 10 per cent tree cover on every farm towards incentivising farmers through generous and flexible planting support in the optional layer. As a minimum, we’re asking farmers to plant at least 0.1 hectare by the end of 2028, or have arrangements to plant by the end of March 2029. To incentivise early planting, we’re proposing enhanced payments for those planting in the first three years.

Trees benefit livestock as well as capturing carbon and providing habitat, which is why our tree planting offer supports a range of planting types, including shelter belts and integration of trees alongside food production as part of an agroforestry system. We are not expecting, nor do we want, farmers to plant on their most productive land. They will decide where to plant, with guidance, to ensure the right tree in the right place.

Following extensive stakeholder discussions, I’m confident this will achieve as much, if not more, planting than would have been achieved under previous proposals. At scheme level, we’re aiming for at least 17,000 hectares of planting by 2030, with an aspiration of 21,500 hectares. But, if by the end of 2028, we’re not progressing, we will review our approach.

Change isn’t easy. This scheme is a big change, but it’s a change we believe is good for farming, production and the environment. I believe and hope that the majority of farmers join the scheme. The BPS is available for those outside the SFS, although reduced by 40 per cent next year. This is the same as it would have been had we introduced the SFS in 2025. We're prioritising the SFS to encourage farmers to join the scheme and to start benefiting. We continue to fund other schemes to help farmers transition to the SFS and to deliver farm sustainability and other rural priorities.

These are challenging times for rural communities, where farming is not solely a livelihood, but a way of life. The scheme will support a thriving, productive, sustainable farming industry, underpinning these communities for generations to come. The scheme starts in January, but that’s the beginning. We’re supporting farmers and food for the long term. The scheme depends on farmers, their families, and all who support them, so I hope farmers will now take the time to understand how it works for them.

Huw Irranca-Davies (Labour, Ogmore)

I am committed to continuing to work collaboratively with all Members of the Senedd to ensure the sustainable farming scheme represents and supports the best of Welsh agriculture, and provides the stability and certainty that farmers require to be truly resilient and sustainable.

Samuel Kurtz (Conservative, Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire)

Thank you, Deputy First Minister, for your statement today. Our thanks must also go to every farmer, and to the wider agricultural supply chain across Wales, for all they do to produce high-quality, sustainable and traceable food. We also pay tribute to those farmers who took to the steps of the Senedd, or gathered in livestock marts across Wales last year, to protest the Welsh Government’s then proposals. Thank you. Your voices were loud, clear and necessary. Thanks must also go to the National Farmers Union Cymru and the Farmers Union of Wales, the Country Land and Business Association Cymru, the Nature Friendly Farming Network, and many others, for their tireless advocacy on behalf of an industry that is the backbone of rural Wales.

Deputy First Minister, you personally have been working on this for a year, but the industry has been waiting over seven years for clarity. Welsh farmers deserve certainty, not just for one year, but for the long term. This new scheme will replace decades of support that has kept Welsh farming and rural communities viable. A shift of this scale must be built on evidence, collaboration, and, crucially, trust. But, right now, that trust is broken. According to a CLA Cymru poll, just 3 per cent of farmers trust this Welsh Labour Government.

Firstly, it’s disappointing that you’ve decided to cut the basic payment scheme to 60 per cent for those not singing up on 1 January, shortening the transition period. I know, as you argued in your statement, that this reflects what would have happened had the SFS launched in 2025, but it didn’t launch, because the scheme was so heavily criticised that you had to go back to the drawing board. So, now, farmers are being punished for that failure, and, as NFU Cymru rightly say, this cliff edge overshadows much of the rest of the scheme.

Securing a universal layer budget, matching the current BPS allocation—£238 million—is to be cautiously welcomed. While this Government has refused to increase this budget in recent years, holding the line at least offers some short-term stability. As you know, a ship is balanced at its hull, and, here, the universal layer is where stability must be anchored. But that certainty only extends to 2026. There is no guarantee that the universal layer budget won’t be cut in future years, with funds diverted to other layers. From your written statement published this morning, it seems that actually is the intention, and, for me, that’s unacceptable. Let’s remember: £238 million is not the full farming budget. It stands at £340 million. So, where will the remaining £102 million be spent? Had this Government increased the budget in line with inflation, it would be now be worth closer to £500 million. So, Deputy First Minister, putting aside the small matter of a Senedd election next May, what funding guarantees can you give that a floor will be set to ensure the universal layer never falls below £238 million?

While the 10 per cent tree planting target is no longer mentioned, there does remain a scheme-wide 17,000 hectare tree planting target by 2030—only four years away—with an expectation for farmers to plant 250 trees by 2028. So, really, there does remain a tree planting target per farm. We’ve always said, from these benches, the right tree, in the right place, for the right reasons. But trees are mentioned 115 times, food only 66 times. So, does this scheme really prioritise tree planting over food security?

Finally, and most importantly, you could promise the finest scheme in the world, but if the economic impact assessment shows it leads to job losses, livestock cuts and falling incomes, then farmers will rightly reject it, as they did before. What's deeply troubling is that no economic assessment has been published alongside this announcement today, yet you've already admitted, on Politics Wales, on Sunday, that you've seen the modelling. But we haven't. Why? Without it, you're asking farmers to take a blind leap of faith, based on your statement on Politics Wales that, 'My feeling is that it will be better'. That simply isn't good enough. You must publish the impact assessment ahead of the Royal Welsh Show and allow Senedd Members and the wider industry to judge the evidence for themselves.

Because those figures in an impact assessment aren't abstract numbers; they represent families, communities, and livelihoods. They don't even capture the full ripple effect on rural supply chains and local economies. There is much more that I could ask and challenge you on this, Deputy First Minister, but trust is not built on sentiment alone. It is earned through transparency, partnership, and a scheme that supports, not punishes, Welsh farming. Diolch.

Huw Irranca-Davies (Labour, Ogmore)

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Sam. Thank you for those comments. You are right: trust is based on open collaboration, seeing the evidence together, working together, confronting the facts together as well, agreeing the outcomes together as well, and then moving ahead together. That's what we've been doing for the last 12 months. We've built that trust, both with the farming community, with the farming unions, with the other stakeholders, the environmental groups around that round-table, with the officials—over 300 hours of work that has gone into this, to get this scheme right.

At the start of this, I said I would burn the midnight oil. It's not just me who's been doing it, it's every one of the participants in it: the farming unions, the nature-friendly farming, the organic sector, everybody who's played a role, the wildlife trust, Coed Cymru—all of those; everybody has been deep in the engine room of this. That's the way you build trust. And the great thing about launching this today is that that year has not just been to get the technical detail right, and the design of the scheme right, but it's to build that relationship, and, as I've made clear in the statement, that we keep this going—this style of working that is actually deeply embedded.

If you want to see an illustration of the well-being of future generations Act's ways of working, it's this co-production of an outcome. That does mean I still make the calls and the judgements, but this is the way to build trust. There will be people today who will say, 'I wish he hadn't pushed so hard on that', 'I wish he would have gone further on that'. I accept that, that's my call. But you build it through looking at the same evidence and where the outcomes are agreed. Right at the start of this process, we said we would work to those SLM objectives—all of them—and recognise the importance of dealing with, as well, the nature and climate emergency.

And by the way, in some of my statements today, contrary to what has been said, we have actually put in there—. This is not a word count game by the way, but food security has featured within it; so has food production, so has high animal welfare standards, so has livelihoods and ways of life, so has social value of farming, so has Welsh language. But that's what you build the trust around. I'm absolutely focused on that, entirely.

You mention the 40 per cent taper. The 40 per cent taper, as I outlined in my remarks here, we're 12 months further down the line. We would have been hitting the 40 per cent by now already. But there is a genuine message here as well, Sam, which is to say to farmers: BPS is going. It is going. Come into the SFS. Grab hold of the opportunities within this. Work to make your farm good, innovative, productive. Make it climate resilient as well. Work with the money and the funds that we're putting into this scheme, and come into it early. So, that's why we have genuinely geared it towards, if you come in early, you will see. In the optional layer, for example, on the tree planting and tree creation, there will be opportunities there for farmers to get into that sooner and get more generous funding for it. It's deliberately designed that way. But it's designed around the work we've done in the round-table as well.

Thank you for the cautious welcome for the universal layer. But, importantly, the universal layer isn't the be-all and end-all. The universal layer is critically important because that ensures that we can make it, as we've always said, as accessible as possible to every farmer in the land, and we've designed the scheme in that way. That's why we've been proud to actually make sure that the quantum of fund that, two years ago, we guaranteed for the BPS, and that we at risk guaranteed last year, is now carried over into the universal layer. I have to say that is a marked contrast with what we were offered when we left the EU, when it was going to be a land of milk and honey, and, all of a sudden, money would be flowing into farming, remarkably. There would be no Cabinet discussions to be had about the balance between driving down waiting times or investing in transport or hospitals or schools and farming. That land of milk and honey was a complete fallacy. I'm not saying it was you, Sam, but there were people who were saying that. They were wrong then, and they're wrong now.

What we've been able to do, as a Labour Government, because of the budget that we voted for, is to actually deliver this once again, so we can give that certainty. But the real benefit going forward is, and this includes in the taper as well—. The discussion we've had on the round-table has been that, as the years go by and we migrate people off the BPS, because eventually the BPS will stop—that's a legacy issue now—everybody will move into the SFS. And, as we do that, the funds go into the optional and collaborative. So, we can have farmers working at a landscape level, working, for example, in the upper reaches of somewhere like the Conwy river stretch, where the river now is in the mid twenties degrees, where there is nothing living in the river when you have these heatwave temperatures, where we should be on a landscape catchment basis—lots of farmers planting trees alongside that river—and including dealing with pollution going into the river as well. That's what this scheme can do.

You mentioned the scheme headline commitment. That is a proud achievement of this scheme. You were right in saying some people do not like the fact that we've walked away from the 10 per cent per farm commitment. I understand that, but what we have here is a headline target that has been through the round-table, that we're all committed to, to deliver 17,000 hectares. It would be above and beyond what would be delivered by 10 per cent per farm. But farmers will have the ability to devise their own plan for their own farm, not planting trees on areas that have other biodiversity needs within them, not planting it on prime productive land, but mapping and then delivering it, and dropping down from the optional layer of money that will be made available to plant as well.

And finally, on the business plans and the impact assessment, we've already done the modelling and the assessments, both environmental and economic. We're very well sighted on those in bringing forward this today. We've analysed the potential impacts of the scheme, and that has helped us make the decisions that we've come to. But just to be clear—just to be crystal clear—these are scenarios, not forecasts. These are scenarios, not predictions. So, we will keep the scheme under review as we gather further evidence. I'm really confident that this scheme will be better for both farm businesses and for the environment. We've made a number of changes to the scheme, including what I've just mentioned and described with tree cover. It's resulted in different outcomes to the scheme as previously devised. There will inevitably, I've got to say, be a cost to the farmer from completing some of the universal actions, and that's recognised in the evidence that I've seen. But there is also a significant number of benefits to those farm businesses from the scheme, such as stability, increased productivity, greater efficiency.

We will, Sam, finalise the analysis and the assessment ready for publication in September, and it'll be complete and it won't be out of context. It will be the whole picture for you and I'm sure you'll welcome that. And just to come back to the point—. Sorry. And for individual farms, Sam, because—[Interruption.] And for individual farms, just to say to you, there will be a ready reckoner available. So, any farmer in the land will be able to walk into the Royal Welsh and subsequently, or do it online, and see what this will mean for their farm. Do you know, that's the real economic impact that people will be looking for, not in aggregate, not headline figures, but actually, 'What does it mean for my business?' That's what they'll be looking at.

Llyr Gruffydd (Plaid Cymru, North Wales)

Thank you very much for your statement. May I thank your officials for the technical briefing offered to Senedd Members a few hours ago? Of course, we've only had a high-level outline. As always, the devil will be in the detail, and that will come with time. I think it's fair to say that the scheme we now have is an improvement on the original scheme. Certainly, there are fewer universal actions. There's been reference already to the fact that the 10 per cent tree cover on all farms isn't included in the scheme now; it is a whole-farm scheme. The payments are capped to ensure that the funding is distributed more broadly within the sector. So, it is an improvement, but there are fundamental questions that remain unanswered. As I said, we've only had a few hours to look at the detail, and more will emerge with time, and we'll have an opportunity to consider this over the coming weeks and months.

Llyr Gruffydd (Plaid Cymru, North Wales)

One thing the sector was looking for today was long-term certainty, or at least clarity to give them confidence that this is the right way forward, not next year and within the 12 months, but beyond that. I haven't seen that in sufficient measure this afternoon. It's disappointing that we've only had a one-year funding commitment, albeit retained at the current level. I can say here now that Plaid Cymru would commit to a longer term funding cycle, based, at a minimum, on the level that you've outlined today. That is something that we would be willing to commit to, and if other parties would be willing to commit to that, then hopefully that would give you confidence maybe to go further today. I would ask you to reconsider that and whether you are able to give a longer line of sight when it comes to funding the scheme.

You also say that shifting the balance of future budgets from the universal action to optional and collaborative actions will happen. You don't tell us when. You don't tell us how much. Again, that will ring alarm bells in people's minds to give them the confidence as to whether they step into the SFS or not. If somebody joined the scheme today, they need to know—not next year, they need to know what happens in year 2, 3, 4, 5. So, a bit more clarity around your thinking—. Because it's modulation, effectively, isn't it? It's moving from what was pillar 1, universal payment, to pillar 2. So, maybe some more information will be forthcoming on that.

The transition rearrangement and condensing the transition now I think is the wrong approach. I think a 40 per cent drop in the first year is too significant. You're right when you say it's taking us to where we would have been had the scheme proceeded as intended last year. But it didn't, did it? It didn't proceed as intended. And if the principle of a five-year transition was necessary last year, then I think it's only fair that that remains this year. So, I would urge you to reconsider on that front as well and revert to your original plan. For one practical reason as well, of course, in that I know we want people to come into the SFS as soon as possible, I understand that, what if there's a huge influx in year 1, when the Government's systems haven't been tested, when the processing of applications is maybe clunky, to use a word that you've used in different contexts in the past? There's a risk in that as well. So, maybe a more gradual transition would actually not only support those who want time to adapt their business models to the new scheme, but would also help the Government in seamlessly implementing the new scheme.

On the social value payment, in an early statement that was released first thing this morning from yourself, you said that you were still developing your understanding on the social value payments, but I now see, of course, in the document released this afternoon, that there will be a £107 per hectare payment for 2026. I welcome that. That's a positive step. But what I want to know is what happens, then, in year 2, 3, 4 and 5, et cetera, because social value is social value. The social value of farming doesn't diminish, so can you assure us that the payment for social value will not diminish either?

I know there are a lot of questions there, Deputy First Minister, but there will be even more that people will want answered. As I say, that will be forthcoming, hopefully, over the next weeks and months. There are still big gaps in the details, but they will emerge, I hope, in time. I thank you and all of the stakeholders for the work that you've done to bring us to this point. It is an improvement, but there are a lot of questions that need answering.

Huw Irranca-Davies (Labour, Ogmore)

Thank you, Llyr. Look, I acknowledge that, and I think the deliberations that we've been involved with over the course of the last year and more being landed in front of people, even though we landed the headline outline of the scheme back in November last year, which was very welcomed and gave some idea of those important pillars of the universal, optional, collaborative, and some confirmation of how we were going to deal with sites of special scientific interest and common land—. We tried to give a little bit as we went along. But this is now all the detail at once for everybody. So, it is important, actually, and the message out there for farmers is: 'Go and look at that ready reckoner.' It sounds really glamorous—it's not, I promise you. It's basically a sort of spreadsheet application, but it will give them a really good idea of whether this works for their farm: 'So, when that's available next week, go look at it, take some time, don't just get clouded with the headlines going on, take some time, look at what it means for your farm business.'

And I think it's the same for us as Senedd Members as well. Members of the Senedd, this will have been a great reveal, with a heck of a lot of detail—the sheer weight of evidence and material and data we've gone through. But curiously, the importance that you attach to not just the quantum of funding that's gone into the BPS transition to the universal layer of SFS this year, but the future of the optional and collaborative, because there's a quantum of funding in there—. Now, we have made very clear, and we've been very frank and honest about this, that there's a maximum that we're putting into the universal layer. Because it's really important for the transition, but we actually recognise that the value-for-money case for those wider benefits comes through the optional and collaborative. So, there's a maximum on the universal level—we're being very frank and honest about it—and there's a minimum level on the optional and collaborative, which will grow over time as more people migrate across from BPS and that money is released into the optional and collaborative. We have things like the draw-downs for those landscape-scale interventions that we could have, which benefit productivity and innovation for the farmer, but also nature and the environment as well.

But just to say to all Members, I'd be very keen to keep on engaging on the detail of this as we go through the summer, through the autumn, through the shows and so on, so that we can get more detail. That's also, by the way, why we do want to—Sam, just to come back to you—keep on working through the summer, because if you’ve seen some of the responses from some of the environmental non-governmental organisations as well, they're very much taken with that piece, along with Nature Friendly Farming Network and others, of saying that we need to absolutely now fine-tune that optional collaborative piece to make sure it delivers on those multiple benefits. So, by the time we get to the September piece, you will have a well-rounded piece of economic and environmental analysis and the full business case and the value for money. Because bear in mind, the value for money case of this is also critically important—does it deliver those wide benefits?

The systems are in place, by the way, to deliver this. I would love it if we had a really rapid uptake of this by farmers, and we're ready to do it, because it's been based on, just to reassure colleagues, systems, adaptations of the systems, that are already in place. We're not building new bureaucracies to do this, we're adapting the ones that work really well. So, it'll be familiar to them and we can deal with whatever the uptake is. But that exactly is the point. Why can't we predict further into the future? Because this depends on the uptake by farmers, the entry of farmers into it, and then it depends on what options they actually go for, and the higher level options as well. So, we can't actually model that definitively. We'll be able to get an idea when we're in year 1, year 2, whatever, and we'll keep on dynamically adjusting. And just to assure you, social value is integral to the scheme going forward, but you do touch on a wider piece about actually—and Sam, sorry, I didn't answer this to you as well—the issue of the annual budget cycle. Well, just to say, it's not new. We've been doing this on the BPS as well. So, we always have to go through the Cabinet process of arguing where does this lie within the grand scheme of things.

What I would say to you, by the way, and to all those outside—because you will notice that there are many people who say we need even more money in this, and curiously there's an alignment here between environmental organisations, farmers and others—is that I actually agree with them. One of the biggest arguments we now have because of this scheme, when we sit around with the Cabinet and the Welsh Treasury, is to actually say we're not only doing high standards of food production, high standards of animal welfare, all the food security pieces and so on, we're also delivering on clean rivers, clean air, we're delivering on the climate and nature emergency, all of those things that we're asking here. So, there is a stronger argument because of what we've delivered today than there formerly was when you were simply saying, 'This is just food production over here and the farmers.' We're now saying, 'Look at what farmers have to deliver for us.' It puts a much stronger argument.

And the second thing is that we have designed this in a way that if, in future, there are opportunities, for example, for green or blended finance to come into elements to supplement it, we've designed it in a way that that can be taken on board as well to do more for the farmer, but also for nature and climate as well. So, we'll keep engaged with everybody on it, but, yes, we've given you a lot of information today, I appreciate, but thanks for acknowledging that we've offered technical briefings as well. I suspect that we might need more of those in the weeks to come.

Jenny Rathbone (Labour, Cardiff Central)

I want to pick up on what Sam Kurtz said about this idea of trees versus food, because why is it not possible to see trees as a source of food as well? And obviously we're talking here about fruit trees. It's very disappointing that the English Woodland Trust continue to talk about only native trees being able to be planted when in fact there are plenty of Welsh fruit trees that are part of our heritage. So, I want to know why there's no mention of fruit trees in your quite right venture to promote more trees. I'm not sure that sufficient trees are being planted because the climate is changing so hugely, but I do want to know why fruit trees are not an essential part of the increase in tree production.

Huw Irranca-Davies (Labour, Ogmore)

Thanks, Jenny. It's a really good question. We need to recognise the multiple benefits of tree planting. Tree planting within this scheme, in the right place, is to do with a myriad of things, including climate resilience, including shelter belts for animals. Why are shelter belts for animals good? Because they increase the productivity of the animal. Why does that work? Because if they're not suffering through the heat or dramatic weather incidents, they fatten better, you get more value for them at market and all of that. There is, by the way, just to say in terms of fruit trees, a fruit and nut tree mix as part of our optional actions for tree planting. So, we have actually listened to the representations you've made before, and we've worked that into the scheme as well. So, they can plant, for example, fruit and nut trees, and get paid for it as part of this scheme as well. What we do want is to get those multiple benefits, though, from tree planting. That's really critical. And it could be for animals and livestock, it could be for actually production of fruit and so on, or it could actually be because some farmers want to go into agroforestry, in the right place, not shifting into areas where there's high food-productive land or into areas where there's other high biodiversity that we don't want to displace. But there is room for the right tree in the right place in this scheme, including fruit trees.

Janet Finch-Saunders (Conservative, Aberconwy)

I have to say, I agree entirely with Jenny Rathbone on her previous question about why can't there be fruit trees.

So, Cabinet Secretary, you do know—I've raised it with you several times—about the universal element of SFS in terms of common land graziers. I've a number of farmers who are very angry, in my constituency, that there are active common land graziers and there are those who do not graze the common land but are still drawing in the grants. The farmers that do graze the common land find this to be quite unacceptable. Non-active graziers of common land should not be receiving any financial inducement for not using their own grazing rights. To take an example from my constituency, we have an area of over 250 hectares of common land known as Conwy mountain and Alltwen. It has been abandoned by registered graziers for years, but they are continuing to receive BPS payments. You've no idea currently how much money is going to farmers who shouldn't be receiving this. Will you look at this again and maybe go back and review how many farmers are not actively grazing common land, or put that money back in, to support those that are? Grazing associations in Eryri and Brecon have also contacted me, because I've raised it before, and they believe they're not being listened to by the Welsh Government, and I think that means you. So, can we work together on this, and let's find out which common rights graziers are using their rights, which are not, and let's maybe review the payments to some of those, to allow more money in the pot for genuine hard-working farmers?

Huw Irranca-Davies (Labour, Ogmore)

Thank you, Janet, and thanks for also supporting Jenny's point as well. Jenny and Janet, I forgot to mention, traditional orchards that are well-established orchards are actually included within the universal level as well. So, just to say that, as well as new planting that you can get on with as well.

On common land—listen, thank you for making this point, Janet, and it's something you've been consistent on. We deeply understand the value of common land, both economically but also ecologically and culturally as well. So, the universal code includes requirements that farmers wishing to receive universal baseline payment on their common land right must adhere to. And this includes the need to have relevant livestock and the ability to graze the common. This has been specifically included to ensure that only active farmers, as you say, Janet, who graze the common, are paid under the universal layer.

The existing agreements under the Habitat Wales scheme for commons can continue in 2026, and this includes established agreements between graziers on the use of the commons for grazing in support of the HWS payments. We will include a payment for individual graziers who hold grazing rights and who can turn out suitable livestock. Payment will be included on their whole farm and social value payments and will be apportioned in a similar way to the current BPS.

Now, the Habitat Wales Scheme (Commons) will be available in 2026 to the already-established grazing associations in order to be able to support co-ordinated grazing regimes. We are also considering how to support the formation of new grazing associations, to enable more common land to be brought forward into co-ordinated management from 2027 onwards, and more targeted management, which I've seen first-hand, such as management of bracken and other invasive species, or peatland restoration, often requires consent from the owner of the common, ideally working in partnership with the graziers. So, this will be supported through a continuation of our existing landscape-scale collaborative schemes, such as the integrated natural resources scheme, or Ffermio Bro, which supports activity within designated landscapes, and the national peatland action programme as well. So, supporting commons to enter into agreements where they don't exist may take a bit of time, and some will need support from the Government, which they will have. So, lots of good work going on in that space, Janet, and I hope you can take that message back to those graziers, those common land graziers, that you regularly engage with.

John Griffiths (Labour, Newport East)

Thank you for your statement, Minister. As you say, the universal layer is a very important entry point to this scheme, but really it needs to act as a stepping stone to the optional and collaborative layers, and in that way support farmers to meet pressing environmental challenges and restoration of nature and help for the climate. On the Gwent levels, for example, Minister, this would include helping farmers manage those sites of special scientific interest and help rare species, such as the shrill carder bee. So, I just wonder if you could say a little bit more as to how these layers will be developed as we move forward, and when they will be available to farmers, and how monitoring and compliance will be taken forward. Should we be confident that the scheme will deliver on its ambitions through effective compliance and monitoring?

Huw Irranca-Davies (Labour, Ogmore)

Yes, absolutely. On the latter point, John, we've built in schemes to regularly monitor compliance with this through the Food Standards Agency and other measures so that we have accurate data about what's happening on farms across our land, across the whole of Wales, already, and where we need to see the improvements as well. So, when farmers enter into these agreements, either at the universal level, or drawing down the option of the collaborative space, we'll be able to work with them, but also to monitor that.

When I was out today, actually, at a cracking farm down near Margam with Robert and his dad—a three generation farm—he was saying to me, 'Well, some of the things that we've tried over the years have really worked well. Some of them haven't; they've actually had a detrimental effect on the environment.' He said, 'Is this scheme going to be able to deliver the ability to learn and do better?', well, yes, because we will very closely monitor it, but also work with farmers to make the improvements necessary, allow an element of risk so that we can see that improvement on the farms as well.

Certainly, in terms of the Gwent levels, and things like species down there that are so important, such as the shrill carder bee and so on, this scheme gives that flexibility to adapt on that whole-farm basis to individual plots of land, to individual habitats and species, and to make sure it delivers for them. That's the joy of this, that it's not a top-down, prescriptive, one-size-fits-all approach; it's work with the evidence and then work to the themes that are within this about actually delivering all those wide benefits of farm sustainability in terms of a commercial point of view, but also sustainability in terms of an environmental approach as well. I think one of the testaments to the last year of working with all the stakeholders, environmental groups and farmers of all different types is actually all of us coming on a journey that says that we agree with the outcomes that we're trying to achieve, and I think it feels very different, and we need to maintain that going forward.

Rhun ap Iorwerth (Plaid Cymru, Ynys Môn)

Thank you, Llywydd, and I thank the Deputy First Minister for the statement today. All of us who represent rural areas in Wales will be looking for assurance for those people that we represent. I'm looking for assurance, evidently, for farmers in Ynys Môn. The scheme that we have now is a considerable step forward from what we had originally, which showed a lack of understanding on several levels in terms of how farming works. But while many of our questions have been answered, there are many that haven't, and the ability of farmers to plan ahead is very important. That's why I, like Llyr Gruffydd, am looking for funding commitments beyond the first year, for example.

But one specific question: there will be relief that the 10 per cent tree coverage has gone. It was never practicable. But there are questions about what comes instead of that. All farmers who join the scheme will need to complete an opportunity plan for creating woodland and hedgerows in the first year of entry to the scheme, and they will need to show progress in achieving the aims of the target by the end of scheme year in 2028. A simple question: how will one demonstrate progress? Because that's the kind of question that farmers need answers to as they plan for the future.

Huw Irranca-Davies (Labour, Ogmore)

Thank you very much for the question.

Huw Irranca-Davies (Labour, Ogmore)

Thank you so much, and thanks for recognising this really is based on the work that's been done, and my thanks to everybody who's been involved, including some of the Members of the Senedd here as well, who've fed in what their constituents were feeling as well. I think we've got a far, far better scheme, even though, today and in future weeks, it'll face some criticism here and there. I think this was always going to be one of those schemes where there were going to be people moderately unhappy on this bit, moderately unhappy on that bit. But, if we're agreed on what we're trying to achieve here, then this is a major step forward and we're all working towards it.

Now on the tree planting, the commitment within the scheme will—. As I've said previously, this has the potential to go further than 10 per cent on every single farm, recognising that each farm is different, but recognising that some farmers want to do a heck of a lot more in terms of tree planting, for various reasons. Some of them will want to supply wood that goes into those mills in the centre of Wales that go into our homes for long-term, locked-in carbon, into the wood-built homes that we're building now increasingly within Wales, and need to do so much more with our timber industrial strategy.

But how do we do it? Well, we start from a very good point, because, over the last couple of years—. We've done two iterations now in the period I've been here. Even though I've only been in post for whatever it is—I can't remember now—18 months or whatever, we've been through two iterations of the HWS mapping on tree planting. We also have other mapping that we have as well. We had some challenge back from farmers 15 months ago, saying, 'Well, that map doesn't accurately reflect what's on my farm.' We said, 'No problem. Here's what we've got. Now, we'll come out with you. Let's look at it. Yes, you're right—that tree we hadn't spotted there, that copse down there.' So, we've done two years of adjusting it. So, we've got very accurate mapping now of where the trees and woodland cover are, including those trees within hedgerows. On that basis, farmers now will be asked, farmers now will be compelled, to actually devise that opportunity plan for trees and hedgerows on their farms, and then to plant to it, to draw down money from the optional level. And we've pushed heavily, into the first three years of the scheme, additional money, ring-fenced within that, to actually plant those trees and get on with it, because we know, and I think you will share as well, that we need to actually do this for all the reasons we've outlined and get on with this tree planting as well.

But we can monitor it now because we know where the trees are. We work then on the opportunity plan for hedgerows and trees that farmers bring forward. We expect them to draw down that money and to actually deliver on it. And the trajectory we have will be an increasing trajectory, to be quite frank. So, what the Climate Change Committee have said to us now, for our 2030 targets, is they've acknowledged this is where we can go by then, and then it will accelerate. But, by that time, we might have many more farmers saying to each other, 'Look at what I've done in my patch. It works. It does work.'

Lee Waters (Labour, Llanelli)

I'd like to welcome much that's in the scheme and to commend you for the efforts you've put into trying to find consensus, building on the work that Lesley Griffiths did over a number of years. I'd just like to ask you about that increasing trajectory, as you just referred to, to Rhun ap Iorwerth, on the tree planting. In order to reach net zero by 2050, we said that 5,000 hectares a year needs to be planted, and last year we planted something like 960 hectares, so well short. You do seem to have abandoned the 2030 target the Government had committed to of 43,000 hectares by 2030, whilst keeping the ambitious 2050 target. So, I'm a little puzzled of how we're intending to achieve a stretching 2050 target whilst lowering our ambition in the immediate future. Perhaps you could explain that.

Huw Irranca-Davies (Labour, Ogmore)

Yes, I can, and thank you for that question. And Lee, thank you as well for your engagement on this, because I know you are absolutely, as many Members are, wedded to doing what we have to do, which is to increase tree planting across the whole of Wales, both in terms of farmland, but also on things like our woodland estate, on things like Crown Estate, and up the ante in terms of tree planting. We absolutely have to.

So, back in May—I've got to get my correct phraseology here—revised advice was put forward by the Climate Change Committee. As you know, as a former Minister, they periodically revise it. They looked at the practical and pragmatic approach to tree planting in Wales, and they also looked at what you quite rightly point out is our failure to plant so far. So, rather than do a shoot-for-the-stars straight line, they said, 'Realistically, including what you're trying to devise in this with farmers, with landowners, we think you can do this by 2030', and their figure was 22,000 on that balanced pathway. But they've also said, Lee, just to be clear, 'That doesn't let you off the hook; in fact, you're going to have to then accelerate to achieve a slightly more ambitious—'. Because their overall path here—. Let me just get the figures right. By 2050, their advice for woodland planting in Wales has increased from 180,000 hectares to 208,000 hectares. We're committed to that, but we want to work with people to do it. We want to really work with people to do it. We've got to own this together. Landowners and farmers have to own it as well; so do NRW, so do Crown Estate, so does everybody else. So, we haven't walked away from that longer term ambition. What we have said is: 'We're going to do what we can now to 2030, based on the revised CCC advice, and then we know we're going to have to do more.' What I would say to you, though, is that if this does bring people with us—and there is a genuine ask here, I have to say, of all the farming unions, of the CLA, of the forestry people, of everybody, to actually deliver on this headline target; 17,000 is what we're aiming for, but with an ambition to hit 21,500, which is within spitting distance of that revised CCC advice—then we'll have won the hearts and minds of people to bring them with us on this. We'll have demonstrated it can be done, and then we can go further. So, we haven't walked away from that longer-term advice, and, as I say, the CCC advice for 2050 is now even more ambitious. But what they've done is they've recognised that, to get there, there is less of a straight-line trajectory, and we've got to take that managed pathway to get there.

Laura Anne Jones (Conservative, South Wales East)

Diolch for your statement, Deputy First Minister. Well, I suppose it could have been worse. We would broadly but cautiously welcome the changes, although this document is heavily weighted, as has already been said, towards trees rather than our food-producing sector, as is your round-table.

There are good things within it, which have already been outlined by other Members, but I have concerns that the good things will be completely overshadowed by the shortcomings, the obvious example obviously being 80 per cent to 60 per cent in the first year, which is a massive change to stomach. There is an improvement on the previous iteration of this scheme, which was really a mask-slip moment, wasn't it, for the Welsh Government and their real attitude towards our farmers. Our farmers are valued by the public, and they should be valued in this place as well, especially as the deliverers of your environmental schemes.

Look, this massive, 200 page, weighty document is full of complexity and terminology that many farmers won't be familiar with. Deputy First Minister, the weight of the detail is unquestionably daunting. Don't you agree that this needs to be simplified? And due to there being obvious problematic areas within this document that are likely to present themselves in the future, is this going to be a scheme like Glastir that will be able to evolve and adapt as problems present themselves? I have real concerns, for example, that, to some landowners, this scheme will be lucrative, but, to many tenant farmers, they will now obviously be very worried about being stuck with huge rents, and I'd like your thoughts on that, please. Diolch.

Huw Irranca-Davies (Labour, Ogmore)

Diolch yn fawr iawn. 'It could have been worse.' That statement reminded me of the day that I walked down as a young boy in shorts on Christmas Day and found a beautiful new shiny bicycle wrapped up in the best room, as it used to be called—the best room, the front room—and I walked into the front room and thought, 'Wow, my dad has bought me the bike. Look, great'. 'No, no, that's your brother's present.' [Laughter.] It could have been worse; I did have a present.

But, look, I think the glass is more half full than half empty here, because I think this is a unique opportunity for us to work together in Wales to deliver those multiple benefits. We have rightly described this as the only whole-farm approach. This is not a 'bits of' scheme, like they've delivered over the border in England—a bit of environmental, but a bit of standard support and whatever—this is a whole-farm scheme, but it's also a whole-nation scheme. The people of Wales genuinely want farmers to succeed and have thriving businesses and to be able to bring their children through into the farming business, but they also want that lush pasture land to have really good soil. They do not want run-off into the rivers. They do not want rivers that are baking in the heat because there's no woodland cover. They want the whole thing. So, this is a contract between the people of Wales and the farmers of Wales, and it shows the integral nature of farming to Wales as well. Farmers will deliver this for us, but they'll deliver it with us—with us, together. That's the way it has to be.

You talk about the terminology and the narrative. It's been a common theme of the round-table. All the people sitting around it, from the environmental groups, to the meat and livestock and processors people, to the unions and others, have all said what we need to do is deliver this in a way that's very understandable to farmers. The immense documentation you have is immense documentation for a purpose, so that you and I and people who want to can get our heads into the details. We do not expect every farmer to want to do that. I will expect every farmer to want to actually get their head into 'What does it mean for me?', hence why we're bringing forward the ready reckoner next week at the Royal Welsh, hence why we're bringing forward separate guidance for farmers, that makes sense to them.

So, for example, when you say to a farmer, and this is one of the original criticisms, 'Well, what is CPD?' Well, I know what it is because I did a HNC and a HND in college, so I know what continuing professional development is. But if you actually say to farmers, 'Right, let me explain that in terms that you know. So, that training course that you go on, that you've done with other farmers down the road, that has helped actually drive productivity in your livestock because of doing x, y, and z, that's CPD.' 'What, you mean those six hours I did down there on that weekend away?' 'Absolutely.' Yes, so we will absolutely do that.

And you also ask whether this will be able to evolve and adapt: yes. Just to tell everybody, we have built within this scheme, even though we've got the stability Llyr and Rhun were talking about, the need for stability and certainty is delivered in the framework that we have and the payments that we've outlined; the ability to adapt and be flexible and to learn dynamically is built into it as well. We will monitor success on this, on every element, and we will then work with farmers and with the environmental NGOs to say, 'If this doesn't work, like Rob on the farm this morning, we can try something else. We can innovate. We can put more funding into this bit and the optional and take a bit away and try and do something else.' So, it's a dynamic scheme as well. So, whether it's me or somebody else sitting here in future, all of us will be able to keep an eye on them to say, 'Right, this bit isn't working, have a tweak on it, have a change on it', but still have the platform that gives stability to farmers.

Jane Dodds (Liberal Democrat, Mid and West Wales)

Good afternoon, Cabinet Secretary. Thank you for engaging with me on this issue and also for the technical briefing. I am very grateful, and it feels that there are some real steps forward here that we can build on. As Llyr has said, we do need to see the detail and the opportunity to look at how that will apply. We must just recognise, though, the stresses that have been on farmers, not just over the past year, but even longer. We've had farmers who've seen these changes, been really concerned about them. They're dealing with health and safety obligations, environmental rules, disease testing. We've had bluetongue in the last couple of months, and now these changes as well. On top of that, rising energy costs, higher national insurance, and of course the shameful family farm tax. They've all added to the strain.

Farmers and their families are under immense stress. A UK-wide survey by the Farm Safety Foundation showed that 91 per cent of farmers believe poor mental health is the sector's biggest hidden challenge. Sadly, in the year 2022, 44 farmers in England and Wales took their own lives. There's a real mental health crisis. One of the issues that they do say very clearly, and you've referred to this in your response to Llyr, is about having a multi-year stability in terms of the income that's coming in. We all have that. Industry has that. Our public sector have that. Surely we should have that for our farmers, and I'd just like you to commit in principle that that is something that is top of your list in terms of the considerations you have. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Huw Irranca-Davies (Labour, Ogmore)

Thank you very much, Jane, and thanks for your engagement on this, as with other Members as well. You're absolutely right about the stress that is within the farming sector, and recognising that not every farm is a family of many individuals, all sitting around the table in the evening, chatting through their problems and their issues; some farmers will be individual farmers in isolated locations, who will be—. The only time—. I mean, this is the benefit of farmers' markets; it's the time when farmers come together and go, 'Do you want to hear my woes?' And they chat about it and so on there.

But the multiple stresses within it, generally, and the uncertainty, that's one thing we can fix with this now. So, actually having been clear on what the scheme is, what the rates will be, getting people to actually look at that ready reckoner and say, 'What does this mean for me? Will it be worth my while? Does it give me financial certainty?', all of those things will help take away one of those uncertainties that we've been wrestling with since we left the EU, quite frankly. I've had to roll over, each year, BPS settlements, and we've done it through Cabinet colleagues engaging with me and agreeing that we've wanted to give that stability over the last couple of years. Now we give the stability going forward as well, and there will be options for the optional and collaborative layers as well that farmers can draw down. So, I strongly urge them to look at that.

On the multi-year stability issue, it's good to hear parties today saying, 'We'll definitely give the investment.' I want you to give more than that. It's not just the investment, it's give your support to the design of this scheme, because the worst thing that could happen for farmers' certainty is that we have any idea that we'll come back in and we'll start again, we'll remodel it. This scheme is a good scheme. This scheme is a whole-farm scheme. It tries to do multiple objectives, as well as looking at the financial investment, and I've said to you that the scheme is designed so that if there was more funding available in the years to come, you could lever it in. As the BPS taper goes on, there will be more funding coming in to the optional and the collaborative as well. As green or blended finance becomes available, we can push that into elements of the scheme.

But on the way forward, I think I've shown very clearly my commitment, and this Cabinet and this Government's commitment to the scheme, delivering the quantum of funding we've been able to put into it from the start. And then the next Government will face the same challenges, and will have to have those discussions, whether it's you sitting around the table or somebody else. You'll have to balance this up against other competing priorities. But our commitment is very clear. This scheme doesn't work for nature, for the climate emergency, for farmers, for viability of businesses, unless you have sufficient quantum within the scheme. It's a strong argument. It's probably the most powerful argument we've ever had, because this is a whole-farm scheme, not just a food production scheme.

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

We are already out of time on this statement, but I know there are many eyes on this statement today. So, I will call the three remaining Members who've indicated that they want to ask questions. The first of those is Carolyn Thomas.

Carolyn Thomas (Labour, North Wales)

Diolch, Llywydd. I really welcome that the scheme has been co-designed with the stakeholders, with farmers and environmentalists together. I also welcome the requirement to have 10 per cent for biodiversity, and I hope that this will help reverse the loss of biodiversity in Wales. It will help work towards it.

Ensuring farmers receive appropriate advice and guidance is really important going forward, those that need it. So, I was wondering: would you be able to outline how farmers will receive that advice to help achieve the aim going forward? Thank you.

Huw Irranca-Davies (Labour, Ogmore)

Thank you, Carolyn. It's critically important because the approach that we've taken in designing this needs to be replicated out in the field, by actually working with farmers with the right advice in a collaborative space as well. So, not only Farming Connect, but also some of the environmental organisations are very keen to work with farmers, because they're already doing it as well. There are farmers who are desperate to have this engagement as well. So, that's already lined up, ready to go. In fact, we're not waiting until 1 January, we've got it happening now in the stuff that we're already doing, and we're going to take that forward as well.

You're right in terms of the co-design approach. The co-design of this scheme needs to be actually reflected by what we do on the farm level in co-designing the solutions for that farm. It's a whole-farm approach for that individual farm. What works best for biodiversity, for clean rivers, and for fattening up your livestock, delivering the product to market as well, and so on. So, yes, the advice will be there.

James Evans (Conservative, Brecon and Radnorshire)

I'd like to register a relatable interest. Thank you. Cabinet Secretary, I speak to farmers every day in the work I do and due to my family, and a lot of them were very unsure whether they were going to enter the sustainable farming scheme. And because of that, that's why they were told there was going to be that gradual move away from the basic payment scheme with the graduated cuts of 20 per cent. Now we have that 40 per cent drop, many people I spoke to today on the phone who weren't sure about going into SFS feel like that's a cliff edge for them now, and feel like they're almost being pushed into something that they weren't quite sure whether they were going to enter anyway.

Some farmers have already planned their year ahead now, and they can't just change their businesses overnight to be ready for January. That's just simply not how farming works. So, I ask you, Cabinet Secretary, if you will look again at the phased move away from BPS. What we don't want to see is farmers making knee-jerk decisions, either they're not going to go into it, or they will. Every decision has to be made on an individual business basis. I'm sure you could understand that, and the industry understands that as well. So, will you please look again at this, because I think this is a key element that needs to be addressed?

Huw Irranca-Davies (Labour, Ogmore)

Thank you, James. Like you, I speak to a lot of farmers on a daily basis as well. We realise that the 40 per cent will mean that there is more of a push for farmers to join the scheme early, but I would also say that there are more opportunities for those farmers in joining the scheme early as well, in some of the funding streams that we've put into it. We've always been clear that BPS was going to be phased out; SFS is the future. We don’t want to have farmers who think, ‘Well, I’ll sit back and wait for a few years’, because it was going to taper anyway, and end. So, we’re prioritising encouraging farmers to join SFS and to start benefiting from the scheme.

Just to remind everybody, we’ve committed the equivalent of this year’s BPS budget, £238 million, to the universal payments and legacy BPS to provide the financial stability for farmers. But it’s important to point out as well that, if farmers enter the scheme—. And this is why I would say, ‘Look at it. Do that ready reckoner at the Royal Welsh. Look at it through the summer to see if it works for you’, because we’re talking about January, by the way, so we can think ahead and do this. Because if it works for you, you can also draw down then the optional and collaborative layers, and the payments that come from those as well. So, I’d encourage farmers to look at this and work out what it means for you, and come into the scheme early.

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

Finally, Lesley Griffiths.

Lesley Griffiths (Labour, Wrexham)

Diolch, Llywydd. It's good to see this statement brought forward today. The design of the new scheme to pay Welsh farmers was an opportunity to deliver an approach that would work for the agricultural sector, but also the Welsh taxpayer. But I do have some concerns about delivery. We need our farmers to lead on a just, low-carbon transition. We need them to lead on the reversal of biodiversity loss. And the sector itself needs to be supported to be more resilient in the face of the far-too-regular extreme weather events that we are experiencing.

We do need to be planting more trees, and as others have said, it’s extremely disappointing to see the Welsh Government’s policy for new tree planting of 43,000 hectares slashed to 17,000 hectares. This watered down target will not help Wales, I believe, reach net zero by 2050, and I heard your answer to Lee Waters on this. Also, the removal of the 10 per cent requirement. I appreciate that it was controversial, but it would have done a huge amount, Cabinet Secretary, to help you reach that target. I’ve yet to meet anyone outside of the agricultural sector who does not want to see more trees planted.

So, will the SFS help Wales achieve net zero by 2050? I note that you state that you hope to see the majority of farmers participating in the scheme, and I agree that that’s very, very important. So, what percentage of farmers do you expect to join the scheme from the outset, and what percentage of farmers joining the scheme would you view as a success?

Huw Irranca-Davies (Labour, Ogmore)

I was great up until you asked the question of 'What percentage of farmers do I see entering the scheme?', because, to come back to the starting question from Sam, a lot of this is modelling, which are scenarios not predictions, so I’m not going to get into the business of predicting, no more than I would in a football match or a rugby match, what the score will be. What I can give you assurance of is that this scheme is absolutely designed to be very accessible to all farmers and different types of things, and as I’ve said in answer to previous questions, we want farmers to join because there’ll be benefits for them, but also because they can then get on with year 1, doing their management plans for trees and hedgerows.

Within the universal layer, it actually has options within—sorry, ‘options within’, I’m mixing my terminology now. In the universal layer itself, you have to maintain, deepen, thicken and widen the hedgerows that you have, so not doing that annual cut, but doing it on a biannual basis instead, and making sure that it gets that little bit fatter and good for wildlife already. But we also have, in the optional layer, that ability to draw down generous funding—generous funding—to plant more hedgerows and to plant more trees. As I explained in response to Lee—and I know both of you are so committed to planting trees, as I am—this is a different way of going about it, and I realise that it doesn’t give the certainty of saying, ‘We demand that farmers plant x amount, or a percentage of trees on their land’, but in that just transition piece, part of the just transition is the winning of hearts and minds and of bringing people with you. And I realise that this means that the farmers’ unions, the CLA, the nature-friendly farmers and all of those will all have to now tell their members, urge their members, say to them, ‘We are committed to this 17,000—ideally to go to 21,500—we’re all committed to achieving it’, as opposed to, ‘The Minister is telling us we have to just get on and plant x number of trees’, and so on.

I think this will deliver more than the original concept of the scheme, but we will monitor this, we will test this, and if it doesn’t work, we will adjust it, Lesley—we will adjust it. But thank you for pushing me on that, because I share the same ambition. The trajectory, I appreciate, as in the revised-in-May CCC advice to us, is a different trajectory. But, to make clear, as I responded to Lee, another former Minister: it then accelerates, so we have to actually hit that trajectory by 2050, which is now more ambitious than it previously was.

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

I thank the Deputy First Minister. Samuel Kurtz.

Samuel Kurtz (Conservative, Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire)

Diolch, Lywydd. It was remiss of me not to register my interest, as there are animal welfare matters within the SFS, as an honorary member of the British Veterinary Association.

Elin Jones (Plaid Cymru, Ceredigion)

I think we probably have several honorary members of the BVA in the Chamber at this point, me included, and the Minister, so we'll make a mass declaration. Thank you for that.