Questions from the party leaders. The leader of Plaid Cymru, Leanne Wood.

Diolch, Lywydd. First Minister, as we start the new year, the familiar waiting time problems in accident and emergency, and with ambulances, show no sign of dissipating. But, there’s an urgent question on that, so I want to ask you about a crisis in waiting times that doesn’t often get the attention that it deserves. At the start of last term, I asked you about waiting times for children and adolescent mental health services. You said at that time,

‘The resources have been put in and I fully expect the waiting times and the numbers to go down as those resources work through the system.’

First Minister, how is that going? Have the waiting times gone down?

Well, if we look at waiting times in terms of mental health admissions, we know there were 9,570 admissions in the year ending 31 March 2016, some 1,400 resident patients in hospitals and units across Wales. So, we know that the number of admissions has stayed steady, and, of course, we now expect to see the extra money—the £8 million extra—that’s being put into children’s mental health services, particularly, help to cut waiting lists, and we’re seeing that across Wales—waiting times, I beg your pardon.

First Minister, the answer to the question that I asked you is that waiting times for CAMHS have not improved. The numbers of people waiting for over 16 weeks got slightly worse over the course of the year, and, as well as stagnating over the past year, the waiting times remain substantially worse than they were three years ago. Now, one explanation that you’ve given for this is that there are too many children being referred. For example, in November 2015, you said,

‘evidence suggests that around a third of young people referred to specialist CAMHS have no mental illness’.

And you said,

‘A further third have low-level difficulties that wouldn’t reach the threshold for treatment by a specialist service.’

And these sentiments were echoed by your previous health Minister. Do you stand by that view, First Minister?

Yes.

Well, in fact, there’s no evidence—no evidence whatsoever—that children are being added to waiting lists without reason. Now, the Children, Young People and Education Committee’s report of 2014 highlighted that many children have to wait until their condition worsens to access support. The charity YoungMinds have said that many children and young people tell it how they’ve been frequently turned away from accessing services because the threshold for treatment is too high for them. First Minister, the evidence is growing that there aren’t enough services for young people with mental health problems. I’ll ask you the same question as I asked you in September last year: when can people expect to see improvements in the waiting lists, which you have promised to this Assembly time and time again?

First of all, CAMHS is an acute service; I wouldn’t expect people to be referred to CAMHS automatically. I expect young people to see their GPs and the GP to refer if that’s necessary. Secondly, every secondary school has a counsellor, and that counselling service is available for those who require it. I wouldn’t expect everyone, in the same way as I wouldn’t expect every single person who goes to a GP to be referred automatically to a secondary care service, to do that.

In terms of CAMHS, we’ve made significant investments in CAMHS; there’s no dispute about that. The money has gone in and we expect to see further significant progress over the course of this year. I will, however, write to the leader of the opposition in terms of the evidence base that we have of the nature of referrals to CAMHS, and I’ll provide that information to her.

The leader of the Welsh Conservatives, Andrew R.T. Davies.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. First Minister, over the Christmas period and recently over the last couple of days, there’s been considerable speculation over the merits or not, as the case may be, over the deal that is before the steelworkers at Port Talbot and other plants across Wales—Trostre, Llanwern and Shotton. Before we broke for the Christmas recess, you clearly said to me in a line of questioning that this is a very good deal and that it was a deal that you can endorse and that provides a future for the plant. Is that still the thinking that the First Minister has around this deal, because I’m unaware of any plan B if this deal is rejected?

I’m aware of the concerns, of course, around the process of the pension scheme and Members in this Chamber have echoed those concerns, but I have to say that I do not see that there is any other alternative on the table and so, although it’s a matter for workers to make their own decisions, the proposal that is on the table is, I believe, one that will preserve the steel industry in south Wales. There is nothing else. There is no plan B.

Thank you for that clarity, because I think it is important to understand the gravity of the decision that the steelworkers do face, and it is their decision, in fairness, because they are being asked to give up something in return for assurances around the long-term future of the steel industry here in Wales. We understand now from Plaid Cymru that it is their opinion that this deal should be rejected. What do you believe will be the consequences if this deal is rejected for the long-term and medium-term future of those plants that occupied so much of the political agenda as well as the community agenda in those communities through the whole of 2016?

I understand the concerns that Members have expressed, but, as I’ve said before, there is no other alternative on the table. The other consortia that were interested in taking over were all concerned about the pension scheme as well. So, the issue of the pension scheme is never going to go away. The alternative, I suppose, is that the UK Government could nationalise the industry. Your party made it very clear that you will not do that, and so, it seems to me that it is this plan, at the moment, or no plan. That is what the workers have to consider.

It is a matter of regret to me that the UK Government—things were different under the previous Prime Minister, if I’m perfectly honest—have not taken an interest in the steel industry in Wales; they’ve not addressed the issue of energy prices properly; they’ve had no discussions with us, as Ministers, on the issue of the future of the steel industry, or very few, since the new Prime Minister came into place, and I regret that. I noted carefully what Theresa May said yesterday about intervening in the market, but we’ve seen no evidence of that in terms of help for the Welsh steel industry.

I believe we have a very supportive UK Government, First Minister, when it comes to this issue, and I’d be interested to know how many requests have gone to Downing Street to seek that meeting on the specific steel issue. Do you agree with Stephen Kinnock, and very often—[Interruption.] I can hear the Deputy Minister chundering from a sedentary position, but he might well like to listen to the question first and then we might get an answer that would inform his constituents as well as other people in Wales. Do you agree—?

Can we allow the leader of the Conservative Party to be heard please?

Do you agree, First Minister, with Stephen Kinnock, that the proposals put forward on the table by Tata Steel are impressive proposals, and actually these do unlock significant investment for the steel plants across Wales, and offer a secure future, certainly in the short and medium term, for the many thousands of jobs that depend on this investment being unlocked? Seven thousand jobs—

I did ask for the leader of the Conservative Party to be heard, and I intend to be listened to when I ask.

Seven thousand jobs depend on this deal. Do you agree with that?

In the absence of anything from the UK Government, and the lack of interest from the UK Government since the last Prime Minister left his office, I believe this is the only deal that is on the table. We have provided a substantial amount of money, the UK Government have provided nothing, and we believe that that package—well, we will demand that that package—helps to secure the thousands of jobs in the steel industry in Wales.

The leader of the UKIP group, Neil Hamilton.

Can I welcome the First Minister back from his trip to Norway? Perhaps he could tell us what conclusions he arrived at as a result of that. Is he aware that 70 per cent of the Norwegian people are still adamantly opposed to membership of the EU? And as regards membership of the European Economic Area, will he confirm that Norway is a member of the Schengen agreement, and so unfettered access to the single market, which the First Minister is always advocating, is going to require also unfettered access to the UK for unlimited numbers of EU immigrants?

‘No’ is the answer to that, because people in Norway—. He’s right to point out that they do not support EU membership, but they very strongly support EEA membership and freedom of movement. But, there is a difference, and I believe this is an issue that is a profitable route for us to pursue in the UK: freedom of movement in Norway involves freedom of movement to work. It’s not an unlimited system of freedom of movement. There are some rules surrounding how people can look for work if they lose a job, but it’s not an unfettered right of freedom of movement. All they do, actually, is follow the European rules to the letter, which the UK didn’t. The UK was more liberal in its approach and went beyond what the rules required. If that is what’s required in order to access the single market, I think that is something people would find perfectly reasonable.

Well, we discovered the answer to that question in the result of the referendum itself, because the referendum, the result, was overwhelmingly motivated—and everybody seems to agree this—by fears about unfettered migration, and as regard—. [Interruption.]

Oh yes. All the evidence shows that that was the clinching factor in the result. Plaid Cymru, of course, are not only in favour of full membership of the single market, but they’re also in favour of full membership of the customs union, which would prevent us from entering into deals with third-party countries as well. So, at least the Labour Party hasn’t gone that far in its adherence to EU membership. But, the reality is, isn’t it First Minister, that 508 million people currently have a right of entry, being EU citizens, to this country, to come here to live and to work, and if we were members of the EEA, then that would be, to all intents and purposes, the same as it is now?

No, because if you interpret the rules strictly, that’s what you get: you get a freedom of movement to work. I believe that people would accept that. I think if people believe that somebody is coming to a job that they have, that will be a reasonable position to adopt. The other thing we have to remember is that the UK will have an open border with the EU. It will have an open border in Ireland, which will not be in any way policed and not be in any way monitored. Now, whenever this in mentioned in the discussions we have with UK Ministers, we see the equivalent of an ostrich plunging its head into the sand. They keep on saying, ‘It’ll be fine,’ but the reality is, given the fact that there will be an open border with the EU, given the fact that the UK Government will then want to monitor whether somebody has the right to work in the UK, how does an individual prove that right? Passports are optional, driving licences are optional; you end up with a compulsory ID card system. There’s no other way of doing it. Again, this is something that hasn’t been thought through properly, amongst many, many questions that are yet to be answered by the UK Government.

In the nicest possible way, I’d like to encourage the First Minister to spend more time abroad, and going to other countries where he can learn something about how the world operates outside the EU. In particular, I’d like to encourage him to go to South Korea, because South Korea has—. Not just because it’s about as far away—[Laughter.] Via Los Angeles possibly. Because South Korea has actually managed to negotiate a free trade agreement with the EU. So, it’s not part of the single market, but it has all the trade benefits of membership of the single market without any of the encumbrances of the freedom of movement of people. As this has been lauded by the trade commissioner of the EU, Cecilia Malmström, in these terms she says,

‘The evidence of our agreement with Korea should help convince the unconvinced that Europe benefits greatly from more free trade… it spurs European growth. It safeguards and creates jobs.’

I’m sure that the First Minister and I are absolutely in agreement on that point. Therefore, it would be very helpful, I think, for the UK generally if he were to add his considerable weight to the argument for more free trade agreements with the rest of the world, which is something that we can negotiate only outside the customs union and outside the EU.

Well, I don’t know whether he means political or physical weight. I’ll try and be optimistic in terms of what he means. [Laughter.] The reality is this: free trade agreements take many, many years to negotiate. The UK will not have a free trade agreement within two years. Whenever I’ve spoken to officials who’ve been involved in such discussions, they find it laughable that people can even say that. It takes nearly two years almost to set the framework for the discussions. The concern that I have is that, in two years, the UK will fall off the edge of the cliff and have a free trade agreement with nobody, because there’ll be no transitional arrangements. So, transitional arrangements will be absolutely crucial beyond March 2019. Otherwise, there’ll be nothing.

He mentions Korea. What I don’t want is for the UK to become a kind of European North Korea that’s actually cut off from the rest of the world, without any kind of trading arrangements with anybody. That surely is in nobody’s interest. But there has to be a dose of realism here. It’s been said, ‘The world will fall at the UK’s feet.’ I don’t believe that at all. The UK is small compared to the other trading blocs. We have to be realistic and have to enter into negotiations with an open mind. We also have to understand that, as far as market access is concerned, there is a quid pro quo. We cannot demand from the European Union everything we want and expect to get it. That’s not going to happen. It’s not going to happen that way. For me, there is a choice: either you say, ‘We’re going to limit immigration’, which is impossible because of the open border, or you say, ‘We’re going to have access to the single market.’ To me, access to the single market is absolutely the most important issue for us in Wales and therefore anything else can be compromised on. I believe that if we say to the people of Wales, ‘There is a freedom of movement to work’, then that is something that most people will accept as perfectly sensible.