Dirprwy Lywydd, I’m very glad to have the opportunity to respond to this debate on behalf of the Welsh Government today and thank Steffan Lewis for moving this motion today, which we support. And I thank Members also for their contributions to this very important debate.

Of course, I need to state at the outset that pensions aren’t devolved and are matters for the UK Government. However, the Welsh Government acknowledges the need for proper, safe and well-managed arrangements for this pension scheme, particularly in the light of recent concerning events around large-scale pension schemes.

When we look at those who benefit, as of 30 September 2015, there were 162,684 pensioners and 37,807 deferred pensioners in this mineworkers’ pension scheme in the whole of the UK. In June of this year, 2016, approximately 22,000 former miners and coal industry workers in the scheme were from Wales. In recognition of this, the First Minister wrote to Amber Rudd, Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, on 22 June, on the mineworkers’ pension scheme, supporting the position of the National Union of Mineworkers in calling for a review of the funding arrangements.

It has been said in this debate, following the privatisation of the British Coal Corporation in 1994, that the UK Government provided a solvency guarantee to the mineworkers’ pension scheme that guarantees that basic pension entitlements will always rise in line with inflation and should not fall in cash terms regardless of the performance of the funds.

This motion seeks today to address the apparent unfairness of the current arrangements. The UK Government case is that the current division of surpluses between the membership and Government represents fair and reasonable recompense for taxpayers’ past investment in the schemes during the industry’s period of public ownership and for the risks they continue to bear through the Government guarantee, which will continue until closure of the scheme, expected to be in the 2070s. The guarantee arrangements that were negotiated at the time by the trustees, with the support of all the mining trade unions, gives scheme members the opportunity to share with UK Government in benefits of any periodic surplus in the scheme’s funds. In practice, I understand that this has meant that members enjoy bonus pensions worth almost 30 per cent of their index-linked benefits. It should be pointed out that the UK Government doesn’t make investment decisions; that is for the scheme trustees. But, in response to the First Minister’s letter earlier this year, the UK Government has indicated that, whilst they would consider any proposals, they appear not to have any plans to make changes to the current arrangements at this present time. So, this debate today and this call for a review are very important and timely and we have a strong message to send to the UK Government.

The heart of the matter in this motion is the question of the large surpluses that are generated, and there is a recognition from that that these need to be reviewed, as Members have so clearly identified. The mineworkers’ pension scheme has been a hugely successful scheme, generating substantial surpluses. It’s clear that the amount of money being taken out of the fund by the UK Government is in desperate need of a review. The funds in the scheme were earned by the miners themselves and should be used for the benefit of those miners and former employees of the mining industry, and indeed, of course, their families—those miners who, for over a century, were the backbone of British industry, many of whom sacrificed their health and, in too many cases, their lives for the benefit of Britain’s industrial prosperity. It’s only right, as Hefin David and Jeremy Miles have said, that we want to see the best for them for the debt we and the whole country owe them.

Dawn Bowden drew attention to the longstanding and ongoing campaign by the National Union of Mineworkers for a full review of the current arrangements, which we fully support. Of course, they’re not calling for an end to the Government guarantee—we must make that clear; they want to ensure that the way in which any surpluses are divided is fair and proportionate. The NUM has a just cause and made a strong case for review. The Welsh Government gives them our full support and supports this motion to ensure that this review is undertaken in full in terms of what the motion calls for, working with all those in devolved administrations who can make this happen. For the same reason, we oppose the amendment proposed by Paul Davies on behalf of the Welsh Conservatives.