I now move to the short debate. For those of you who are not remaining for the short debate, please leave swiftly and quietly. I call on Julie Morgan to speak on the topic that she has chosen. Julie Morgan.

Thank you. Diolch, Presiding Officer. Just to say at the beginning of the debate, I’ve given a minute to Rhianon Passmore and a minute to Joyce Watson at the end of my speech. The title of the debate that I chose was ‘Should I Stay or Should I Go? What factors have influenced public opinion over the EU referendum campaign?’

Now, I tabled this debate before the terrible events on Thursday last week when the MP for Batley and Spen, Jo Cox, was tragically killed in her constituency. I think it is fitting that we look at the influences on public opinion in the run-up to the referendum tomorrow. Sadly, I think Jo’s death has had an influence on the debate over the weekend and on into this week. It was right and fitting that there was a lull in campaigning over the weekend, but now we’re back to it quite ferociously, as the previous debate has shown, but perhaps there is, UK-wide, a slightly different tone.

So, I hope, in the light of the type of person Jo was and what her husband, Brendan Cox, has said following her tragic death, that she would be happy and would want us to carry on with the debate on the EU referendum and the fight to remain in the EU because she was, as her husband said, a passionate supporter of the EU and was campaigning for a ‘remain’ vote. So, Presiding Officer, I want to say a bit about Jo, personally, and then link her beliefs to the vote that we will be having tomorrow.

Today would have been Jo’s forty-second birthday, and events are taking place all over the world to remember her. There were events in New York, Brussels, Buenos Aires, Dublin, London, and there will even be a tribute at the Glastonbury Festival. There’s also a candlelit vigil at a woman’s charity in Syria because Jo was a great supporter of women’s rights. I’m very pleased that we had the cross-party event of women Assembly Members on the steps of the Senedd yesterday, highlighting what the EU has done for women because, as I say, Jo believed that the EU was delivering for women. And an event is taking place just up the road now—or has already taken place—in the Temple of Peace and Health here in Cardiff, at the Welsh Centre for International Affairs, with the theme of ‘What can we do?’

I didn’t know Jo Cox, but I feel like I do, and as one of my colleagues said recently, I wish I had known her. I identify with her as a woman politician and as a mother, and I can especially imagine the excitement she must have felt arriving in Westminster just over a year ago, after the general election in 2015. I can remember that feeling, when I was elected in 1997 for the first time as a Member of Parliament. I think we all felt it, just six weeks ago, when we all had the thrill of being elected and came to this Chamber with our plans to change the world. The poignancy of what has happened to all those hopes and to her individually, I think, strikes me so strongly, but the things she believed in, I think, are what we must carry on with.

I must say, I was particularly struck, listening to the present women MPs talking about being in the House of Commons with Jo and how they all used to talk about their worries, about how they balance their family life, looking after their children and doing politics, and the maternal guilt that this produces, which many of us have had. The discussion in the House of Commons, in that sort of way, strikes a chord with many of us. What has emerged from the coverage of Jo’s life is how she loved her family so much, but she loved her politics as well, and they didn’t conflict. She was a passionate campaigner, and she was full of compassion. She campaigned for human rights, international development, the plight of refugees, the plight of people who are dispossessed, and her background was working in campaigning non-governmental organisations, like Oxfam. Of course, we’ve already heard a lot about her ability to work on a cross-party basis, and the Conservative MP Andrew Mitchell said that Jo was

‘a truly exceptional woman, whose goodness and passionate dedication to humanitarian values has inspired us all.’

Jo’s husband Brendan has said that, before she died, she was becoming increasingly concerned about the tone of the debate in the EU referendum campaign, and I think those feelings have been reflected here this afternoon in the debate we’ve already had. Four days before she was killed, Jo Cox wrote an article warning against the spin around immigration in the EU debate. She wrote

‘We cannot allow voters to fall for the spin that a vote to leave is the only way to deal with concerns about immigration.’

Following her death, in his Commons tribute to her, Stephen Kinnock warned that ‘rhetoric has consequences’, and I think that is very important for us to remember. We must be very careful when we talk about sensitive issues like immigration, because rhetoric does have consequences. He referred to the poster that the Cabinet Secretary referred to earlier on today and said that Jo Cox would have been disgusted had she lived to see the UKIP poster, which depicted a crowd of refugees fleeing from the Syrian civil war as a way of boosting support for Brexit, and:

‘I can only imagine Jo’s reaction had she seen the poster that was unveiled hours before her death—a poster on the streets of Britain that demonised hundreds of desperate refugees, including hungry, terrified children, fleeing from the terror of ISIS and from Russian bombs. She would have responded with outrage, and with a robust rejection of the calculated narrative of cynicism, division and despair that it represents’.

And I do believe that that is the tone that this referendum has encouraged, because immigration has been a running theme throughout the referendum campaign. It’s been hugely reported in the newspapers, online and in the broadcast media. I’m sure many of you will have seen the debate last night and, as Sadiq Khan said in the referendum debate last night, to the ‘Out’ campaign, with regard to immigration,

‘Your campaign hasn’t been project fear, it’s been project hate’.

I’ve been out campaigning in my own constituency in Cardiff North, and when I speak to people, I think there’s absolutely no doubt that the tone of the debate has influenced, and is influencing, people’s view on immigration. And I think it’s really important that, when we talk about immigration, when we talk about immigrants and migrants, we should think about the effect that this is having on people who are immigrants, who are migrants, who are living in this country. What do they think about this debate? What is their reaction? There’s absolutely no doubt that this is having an effect on people in that situation. They feel they’re not wanted here. People have come and told me here that they feel they’re second-class citizens, and I think it’s absolutely outrageous that human beings in our country should be made to feel like this. I think it is possible to have a debate about immigration, a proper, balanced debate, but not in the tones that this debate has been framed. I think it has been insidious, and I think it has influenced people when they are considering how they’re going to vote.

Also, it’s very important that we have a debate that is based on facts, and we know that the figures that are given, and the tone of the debate, are just grossly exaggerated. According to figures from Cardiff University School of Social Sciences, the percentage of non-UK-born nationals in Wales is just 5.8 per cent, and the percentage of migrants of working age in Wales is 8 per cent of the population. That includes asylum seekers, refugees, 25,000 international students—and we know how much we want to encourage international students here—and, of course, migrants engaged in both high- and low-skilled work. We know that migrant workers are likely to be younger, they’re more likely to be better educated, and they’re more likely to be employed than the UK-born population. I think those figures show the huge contribution that migrants are making to Wales and to the UK.

Thousands of migrants are working in the NHS. Thousands of migrants are working in the care industry. What if they all decide to go home because they’re so fed up of the way they’re being treated in this country, that they’re being treated like second-class citizens? Of course, across the UK, EU immigrants make up 10 per cent of registered doctors, and we know how difficult it is to get doctors. What is going to happen if they decide they want to go home? Also, why should migrants living here get the blame for any deficiencies there are in housing or hospitals or schools? Because that’s what people have taken from this insidious propaganda—they say, ‘They’re taking our houses; they’re taking our places in schools.’ We have seen a prolonged period of austerity from the Tory Government at Westminster, which has made even more cuts to local authority services inevitable, but it is not the fault of the migrants if there aren’t enough council houses to go round, or if a local library closes. That is in the hands of the Government—our Governments here in the UK.

The other arguments that have actually been aired very robustly here this afternoon are about sovereignty—the idea that we should take back control of our borders, when we already know that we’re not part of the Schengen agreement, so we do have control of our borders—and also the idea that unelected officials in the EU are making policy here in the UK, which is completely false, because nothing can go through unless it’s agreed by the Council of Ministers, who are elected. It is very rich that a country that still has a House of Lords thinks that the European Union is bureaucratic and non-elected, because, really, I think most other countries thinks that it’s absolutely extraordinary that we have a House of Lords here.

So, in terms of work and the idea that immigrants are taking people’s jobs, this again is another myth that has been perpetuated. There are more people in work in Wales now than at any other time, and there are more people born in the UK who are working now than ever. That is true of Wales and the UK. Migrants are part of the economic success. So, this idea that migrants and immigrants are taking jobs is nonsense, and I just hope that, when people vote tomorrow, they will take into account these important facts and will not be influenced by the insidious spin that has been put on all these facts, because there’s no doubt that there is a divide in the country—a divide in how people are going to vote. Whatever the result, we’re going, I think, to have a job in trying to restore community cohesion. But I do hope that people, as they vote, will think of their children and their grandchildren, as has been said this afternoon in the debate, and the hopes and opportunities for their children and grandchildren, but also think about the huge contribution—the economic contribution, the cultural contribution—that every person who lives here in our country, in Wales, contributes. When we say things, let’s remember that.

Diolch, Lywydd. It is also with great sadness that I stand here today and speak to the influences of public opinion. The tragedy here is that this has been predictable in terms of the shift across the media in particular in terms of the tabloid newspapers that have, indeed, fuelled this insidious racism—let’s call it what it is. I feel very sad that, as a result of this type of misinformation, as a result of that the facts haven’t got through effectively in terms of immigration, that the expert opinion of every known economic body, almost, to man has been discounted in favour of an insidious race to the gutter in terms of the party opposite, who, quite frankly, haven’t even bothered to turn up to this short debate this evening or this afternoon—. I find it, personally, quite tragic that this has contributed to increasing division in our society, an increasing lack of cohesion in our society, and increasing racial hatred, which the data now are actually proving in terms of what’s coming through.

The sick pictures that have been referenced by many today are still out there; they’ve not been recalled as far as I know. I know that Unison is taking action with the metropolitan police in terms of incitement to racial hatred, but what I find very tragic is that this is actually normal and it’s been normalised. The tone of this debate has got to such an awful point that we’re actually here talking about pictures of refugees being used as political fodder, so that we can actually target opinion based around false facts around immigration and false argument around what this is all about.

You need to bring your words to a conclusion.

Okay, thank you. So, instead of pandering to these issues around immigration and ignoring the facts, all I would say, to finish my comments, is that, to honour the memory of Jo Leadbeater—Jo Cox—who was for equal treatment and humanitarian causes, aid for refugees and a fair media, we must choose to collaborate and work within the EU, not outside of it. To use her words, we are all far better working together than divided apart, and I think this is a fitting statement for us to consider and for Wales to consider when, tomorrow, we actually make that vote.

I thank Julie Morgan, first, for bringing this debate and, secondly, for giving me one minute, which I shall try and stick to. I, like all the colleagues here, present now, want to pay tribute to Jo Cox. We are all stunned by what happened, but we are also, I hope, inspired by what she left behind, and want to pick up what she believed in and what she, hopefully, has left behind as a marker, as a catalyst for change in political discourse, going forward.

There is no doubt that the political discourse hasn’t been very helpful in this referendum campaign, but there has been a change. The sadness is that it took somebody’s death for that change to happen. I believe—and I’m sure everybody else does here—that what we need to do, whatever the result tomorrow, is move forward in celebrating the diversity that the different cultures and individuals bring to our society. We must make a promise here, today, on what would’ve been Jo’s birthday, to never promote division and fear, but to unite together to move forward in hope and love.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government, Mark Drakeford.

Diolch yn fawr, Lywydd. I’m very glad that I’ve had the chance to stay and hear this short debate. I thought Julie Morgan’s contribution was absolutely characteristically thoughtful about the issues and committed to finding answers for people who need them most of all.

She began by talking about the life of Jo Cox, and I don’t think there’s anything I could say that would add to the tributes that were paid yesterday, and again in the short debate, to her life. I thought what I would do is just to think, for a moment or two, about the causes that the money that has flooded in in the aftermath of her death—the causes to which that money is to be devoted. Because that money is a spontaneous way in which people, so touched by what happened and struggling to know what they could do to say anything about their own reaction to it—handing some money in is just one way that people feel they can do something practical, and there are three causes, as people will know, that her remarkable family have decided that that money should be devoted to.

The first is to help volunteers in combating loneliness in her constituency. Now we were urged earlier this afternoon to listen to what people say to us on the doorstep. And when we are puzzling, as we must, as to why so many people who in other ways would share many other things that we think are important are going to vote in a different way than we would hope they would vote tomorrow, then—I think, as I went around the business of knocking doors in my constituency in March and April, that the more people are cut off from the life of the rest of the community around them, the more they feel they lack connections to ordinary and mainstream things, then the more people were likely to ask you about the referendum and more likely to tell you that they were going to vote to leave the European Union.

The social bonds that connect us in our own communities are the same social bonds that allow us to feel confident in wanting to be part of communities even beyond our own. The work that that money will do in helping to combat loneliness is part of work to stitch back that social fabric for people who have been disconnected from it by the impact of austerity, but also, for people that Julie spoke of who come to live in our society and who often struggle most of all to feel that they are welcome and that they have connections that they can build on to build a future for themselves amongst the rest of us, that money will help them as well. And it will help them in a way that the second of the organisations that money will help explains very well indeed, because it will be money for HOPE not hate.

It is true, as we’ve heard in this Chamber this afternoon, that, amongst some of those who have tried to persuade other people to vote to leave the European Union, their appeal has been to fear and to hate. We cannot possibly fashion a future that is the one we would want to see for ourselves or those that we hold dear to us that is based on that way of thinking. For a family that has been the direct recipients of the outcome of what hate can do to put money into hope, and hope for the future, I think is an absolutely remarkable decision, and which links the way in which people who feel apart from society, and therefore are susceptible to appeals that there is some easy answer that involves blaming somebody else for the predicament that they find themselves in—. To say that what we must offer those people is not hatred of other people, but hope for themselves and for their communities, is, I think, a genuine tribute to her life and what it has meant.

The third organisation is the White Helmets organisation, an organisation that operates not in this country, let alone her constituency, but in Syria—an organisation that has saved 51,000 lives of people trapped under the rubble that comes from being under a real threat of death and disruption. And that third sense of being connected, not just to the life of people in the community that is around you, but the way that that community can be connected to the lives of people experiencing things that we can barely imagine, I think is that third and remarkable tribute to her life, but not just to her life, but to the things that her life held to be important, and which would be identified with so very strongly by so many people in this National Assembly for Wales.

Now, Julie went on to make her own connections between the life of Jo Cox and the decision that is going to be made in this country tomorrow. The public has undoubtedly been exposed to a huge range of information during the referendum campaign, so much of it highly negative. But the case that we would make, the Welsh Government would wish to make, and other people in this Chamber would wish to make, for the future that has us in the European Union is one that is wholly positive. Being part of the European Union has been a positive experience for Wales economically, environmentally and socially.

When we think of what we know about how people may vote tomorrow, then, as well as a difference between those people who feel isolated and cut off and those people who are able to live connected lives, there will be a difference, as far as we can tell, between the decisions of older people, who are more likely to feel that they are at a distance from the life of the community, and how young people will vote. The future of the European Union for young people in Wales seems to me absolutely essential in making it clear that we are a nation in the European mainstream where our young people can work, live and study in other European states, can go, can take the richness of the culture we have here in Wales and return to Wales enriched still further by the opportunities that they will have had. It’s that positive sense of what being a European is about that I think should be at the heart of our message to people and why we want them to vote tomorrow for Wales to continue to be connected into a European Union that is vital to the present and future prosperity of Wales, that promotes and protects our businesses, our children’s education, our environment and the services that we rely on, that protects our workers’ rights, that is clear that environmental damage does not stop at borders and that progress against climate change, for example, can only be made by nations acting together—a Europe that helps keep us safer at a time when understandable fears about security are felt by everyone, a Europe that acts together to tackle the great challenges of our time and acts positively to provide a future for our children and our nation of the sort that those three organisations that the money raised in memory of Jo Cox will be doing in her part of the world and across the world as a whole. Thank you very much.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary, and that brings today’s proceedings to a close.

The meeting ended at 18:43.