The following amendment has been selected: amendment 1 in the name of Paul Davies.

The next item is the Plaid Cymru debate on superprisons. I call on Bethan Jenkins to move the motion.

Motion NDM6506 Rhun ap Iorwerth

To propose that the National Assembly for Wales:

1. Calls on the Welsh Government to oppose the construction of a super-prison in Port Talbot.

2. Further calls on the Welsh Government:

a) not to sell or release any Welsh Government land for the purpose of construction of the proposed super-prison;

b) to develop the local economy through supporting businesses in the industrial park; and

c) to make representations to the UK Government in support of alternatives to large prisons.

Motion moved.

Diolch. Since the announcement of a new major Titan or superprison was announced back in March of this year, it has alarmed people across the communities I represent in Port Talbot and the wider area too. It’s galvanised a wide cross section of the community and led to a genuine cross-party effort in Port Talbot to say ‘no’ to this prison. It’s led to people getting involved in democracy who have never done so before, and I’m pleased to be able to have this debate today so we can outline why I think all Members of this Assembly should join those of us campaigning against this prison by saying ‘no’—not just here, but anywhere in Wales.

There are a multitude of reasons why we should reject this plan. They range from the problems with the site itself through to wider concerns about what we want our criminal system to look like. What do we want from Government spending in our communities? Just because we have an offer from Government of ‘investment’, is it the right kind of investment for our community? The site itself, proposed on Baglan Moors in Port Talbot, is deeply problematic. It sits in a flood-risk zone, and according to Welsh Government’s own technical advice note 15 development policies, there should be no building of the scale of this prison on the land in question. It will do nothing to aid the sustainable development and improvement of the area, and so should be avoided. I understand that the designation of this land was changed from a C2 flood-risk designation to a C1 zone, so perhaps the Cabinet Secretary could clarify what the reasons for these changes are.

The site is in the middle of the Baglan industrial park, part of the enterprise zone, clearly earmarked for development of enterprise. This prison will not build on the entrepreneurial potential of the area, and one major local employer in advanced manufacturing has said they will seriously consider leaving the area if the prison goes ahead.

We need to have answers to questions about what we are supposed to do about prisoners who are released on probation and into the community. As far as I could see from a letter that was sent to the MP for the area, it was particularly why Port Talbot was chosen for this site, as opposed to other sites in Wales.

It’s also worth pointing out that the Welsh Government passed the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Bill to ensure sustainable development, which, at its heart, is supposed to emphasise developments that are beneficial for the long-term well-being of local communities. I fail to see how building this prison doesn’t fly in the face of that legislation. We are talking, amongst other things, of building a prison in the flood-risk zone in a ward in which 42 per cent of homes are at risk already.

This prison has also, at least for my party, become a symptom of the failures of the UK criminal justice policy: the failure to change course and focus on proper rehabilitation with a goal of keeping those who don’t need to go to prison out of prison. Instead, the superprison programme is intended to deal with as many offenders as possible in the cheapest possible way: prisons outsourced to private contractors where, then, there is a financial incentive for those companies to work against reducing the prison population. The UK Government is starting down the road of the United States and potentially igniting a problem that will be extremely difficult to eradicate in future: the beginnings of the UK’s very own mini prison industrial complex.

I have been encouraged by the cross-party nature of the opposition to the prison in Port Talbot, but—and there is a ‘but’—the Welsh Government needs to own up to what its angle is on the prison, because what’s truly perplexing is that a Labour Welsh Government, supposedly committed to the ideals of social justice, is backing this at all.

We also need to consider what kind of economic message this sends. The Welsh Government is content for Wales, is it, to import prisoners from other parts of the UK when we don’t need those extra places here in Wales. The Minister, the Cabinet Secretary, is shaking his head, and, if he wishes to intervene, then I will, of course, be happy to take that intervention.

The suggested site for the prison is part of the Port Talbot enterprise zone, which is owned by the Welsh Government and was created at the height of the steel crisis as an attempt to encourage business activity in the area. Boosting business, encouraging exports, and strengthening Wales’s heavy industry should be the Welsh Government’s priority for the area, but instead it has thrown its weight in support of the superprison, and, if it has not, then I would like to see clarification of that today. A prison—

Will the Member give way?

Thank you.

Could she allude to how we’ve indicated that we are supportive of the prison? What documentation has the Member got to show?

Well, I’d love to have more documentation, but what we’ve found out is that you have had conversations with the UK Government. You’ve given them a list of potential sites from Wales. As I understand it—and, again, I’m happy to be corrected—you did not need to give the Ministry of Justice that list. In fact, it would take them putting a compulsory purchase Order on that land, should it come to it. So, from legal advice I’ve sought from the National Assembly, there is no compulsion on you, Cabinet Secretary, to have given them that list. And, if I’m wrong, then, again, I’m happy for you to intervene or to tell me in your reaction to what I say here today. I also understand, from an e-mail I’ve seen from our local councillor Nigel Hunt in Port Talbot, that you have actually disposed of that land to the MOJ. So, again, if that is not correct, then please—. That’s an e-mail he, I think, has had with the local council. If that’s not the case, then, again, I’d like to have clarification. We are, of course, seeking to get answers wherever we possibly can. This is not an attempt to undermine anybody. We’re trying to get answers all along the way.

I’d like to end these remarks by saying I would like to praise the work of the working group in Port Talbot, which includes members of different parties—and everybody wants to work positively to keep this land for industrial development and business development—who are working together for the future of the town and for the future of Wales. And we do not want to have the scraps from Westminster in the guise of this huge prison, because I worry, and others worry—because they tell me—that this prison will have irreversible side effects on the area. We don’t want to have this prison imposed on us. In fact, people in Wrexham did not want to have the prison imposed on them, but they were told that there would be more spaces for Welsh prisoners, and yet we’ve seen articles in Welsh papers only yesterday telling us that there are not those Welsh prisoners in Her Majesty’s Prison Berwyn. So, what is the rationale, therefore, for building these superprisons in Wales? I’ll tell you what it is, but not in my words, but by a former prisoner interviewed by ‘The Guardian’—sorry, a prisoner, not a former prisoner—at HMP Oakwood in Wolverhampton. He says:

‘You pull [Wormwood] Scrubs down, you can make it into flats worth millions. Let’s cut the’— beep—

‘That’s why they are doing it. It is easier and cheaper to warehouse everyone in Wales.’

That’s what’s happening.

I have selected the amendment to the motion, and I call on Suzy Davies to move amendment 1, tabled in the name of Paul Davies.

Amendment 1—Paul Davies

Delete all and replace with:

1. Welcomes the UK Government’s £1.3 billion investment to modernise and upgrade the prison estate across Wales and England, creating hundreds of modern prison places and replacing old and overcrowded establishments with new, fit-for-purpose buildings.

2. Recognises the Welsh Government’s role in promoting and earmarking the proposed site at Port Talbot for a new super prison in south Wales.

3. Calls on the Welsh Government to conduct a full and thorough consultation with local residents and businesses on the likely impact of developing a new prison in Port Talbot.

4. Believes a full exploration of alternative sites should be undertaken by the Welsh Government with a proposed list made public.

Amendment 1 moved.

Well, thank you, Presiding Officer.

A gaf fi ddatgan, ar gyfer y cofnod, fy mod, tan yn ddiweddar, yn ymddiriedolwr Teuluoedd a Ffrindiau Carcharorion, sydd wedi’i leoli yng Ngharchar ei Mawrhydi Abertawe, sy’n debyg o ddioddef yn sgil dyfodiad y carchar categori C newydd hwn, rwy’n amau? Efallai bod yr Aelodau’n gwybod hefyd fy mod wedi fy hyfforddi i fentora unigolion sydd mewn perygl o aildroseddu, ac roeddwn yn aelod o grŵp trawsbleidiol Christine Chapman ar blant yr effeithiwyd arnynt gan garchariad rhiant ynghyd ag Aelodau eraill yma.

Er nad wyf yn honni bod hyn yn rhoi unrhyw ddealltwriaeth benodol i mi mewn perthynas â’r ddadl hon, rwy’n teimlo bod yn rhaid i mi wneud sylwadau ar annifyrrwch peth o’r rhethreg ynglŷn â’r penderfyniad hwn i ddod â chyfleuster modern ar gyfer troseddwyr risg isel i fy rhanbarth. Oherwydd, lle bynnag y caiff ei leoli—ac mae gennyf feddwl eithaf agored ar hyn mewn gwirionedd—nid tomen sbwriel yw hon. Nid gwladfa gosbi ddiwydiannol ei maint ydyw—

Will you take an intervention?

No, I won’t. You ought to intervene on your party, actually, Leanne. You’ve worked in the probation service, and you’re allowing members of your party to talk about importing prisoners as if they’re some kind of toxic English commodity. I think it’s disgraceful. You have been absolutely right to criticise how careless tongues have dehumanised refugees and asylum seekers, yet I see no intervention from you on the casual way that you’ve allowed prisoners to be dehumanised in this debate on the new prison.

Our Victorian prisons also dehumanise people. In Swansea prison, the staff have tried very, very hard to mitigate pretty grim conditions, but the space just does not lend itself to rehabilitation. The facilities for prisoners’ families are better than they were, not least because of the work of FFOPS, which I mentioned earlier, but I suspect that most of us here would recognise that it’s far from ideal. This new facility—and there are three others to be built in England—is not a wicked alternative to prison reform—

Member of the Senedd:

Will you take an intervention?

Maybe at the end.

[Continues.]—and stopping re-offending, as Bethan Jenkins suggested in March and today. It’s incorrect. It is part of that reform.

Would you allow an intervention?

Can we just leave it at the end? I’m sorry. I will take it if I have time. I’m saying that this prison is part of stopping re-offending. These outdated prisons, with dark corridors and cramped conditions, will not help offenders turn their back on crime, and nor do they provide our professional and dedicated—[Interruption.]—I’ll come to that—dedicated prison officers with the right tools and environment to do their job effectively. [Interruption.] I’ll come to that.

In Parc prison, which houses higher-risk offenders, you will have seen how that modern environment lends itself to helping prisoners become more personally resilient and less likely to reoffend. We have been over and over the facts about the higher levels of mental ill health and illiteracy, of adverse childhood experiences, within our prison population, and it is in a modern, rehabilitative prison where many get their first genuine chances of help. It is wrong to characterise these so-called ‘superprisons’ as huge, un-nuanced spaces. It’s worth Members revisiting observations made by both the Cabinet Secretary and Mark Isherwood back in July, both having visited HMP Berwyn. They themselves have said that the site is made up of smaller human-scale units appropriate to targeted rehabilitation and education services, offered by expert third sector and other external organisations. I seem to remember that Coleg Cambria is in Berwyn, and I look forward to the detail of what will be the equivalent in this prison.

As for the site, yes, I think it’s right for both Governments to show their workings on this, actually. Is Welsh Government just so keen to push this forward so they can get shot of this piece of land at last? It’s been hanging around for years. It would be a mistake, I think, to ignore the passionate views about this. Some very useful points have been made by the group in Port Talbot, and I’m sure we’ll hear more today, notwithstanding that grubby tone I mentioned earlier. But I think it does help to have a fuller picture, and that’s why I moved the amendment as tabled.

I’d like my constituents to be fully and accurately informed, rather than making decisions on speculation in some cases. To this end, the Ministry of Justice will be holding a two-day event shortly to hear from residents directly—directly—to discuss face to face. That’s a chance to test concerns about the proximity to homes, for example, although I do recall the First Minister reassuring us on the same issue, as it affected the siting of Parc in the past. It’s a chance to test those additional demands on local services by prisoners and their families. It’s a good point, but, in the case of Berwyn, I think new money did follow to help meet that demand. It’s a chance too to test those claims that there’ll be between 200 and 500 jobs in this, as well as construction jobs. Because I think it’s actually a fair point to say that some of these jobs could be moving from other areas, but I’m not convinced that it’ll be all of them, nor that ancillary and supply-chain jobs—and certainly construction jobs—would come from outside the area. I don’t think it was the case in Berwyn, and the UK Government has stated a clear intention that as many jobs as possible will be local. So, I recommend that constituents take full advantage of this before responding to the statutory consultation, to which I also hope that they will really respond.

[Interruption.] Oh, sorry, I’ve run out of time.

We’ve all seen the economic and social pain that Port Talbot has suffered of late. I have to say that turning Wales’s industrial heartland into an industrial-sized penal colony is not the solution to years of neglect that that community has suffered. I want to concentrate in my remarks on the economic dimension, but I would say to the Conservative Member: look, it’s not humane to dragoon people—prisoners—and move them hundreds of miles away from their family. The evidence shows that rehabilitation is far less successful if people are moved hundreds of miles away from their families, and that’s what the superprison concept essentially represents. Let’s look at the real motivating factor behind this Conservative policy—[Interruption.] If you’d like to intervene on me, I’ll take your intervention. Let’s look at the real motivation. This is austerity—[Interruption.] All right, okay, I’ll take an intervention. Go on.

I’m looking forward to what you are going to say, but I hope you will provide evidence for what you are about to assert.

I’ll tell you this: what the real motivating factor is—. I’ll send you the—[Interruption.] I’ll send you the evidence. The real motivating factor is this: it’s austerity meeting inhumanity. The Government’s own forecasts have shown that HMP Berwyn is going to be the cheapest prison to run in England and Wales. That’s effectively what it is. It’s a big box, but for people. Where is the humanity in that? What we are doing, effectively, is that we’ll be the only country in the world that’s going to be importing prisoners from another country. It’s not good for them, it’s not good for anyone, and the evidence shows that. We are turning the south Wales of now into what New South Wales was 200 years ago. And this allusion that is put about, that this is going to be good for the local economy Port Talbot, it’s completely fallacious, completely dishonest, as the UK Government has admitted. Look, the real driving force here is you’re building the superprisons in order to shut the Victorian prisons. So, 200 jobs in this superprison in Port Talbot, and 600 jobs lost in Cardiff and Swansea. You don’t need a Fields prize in mathematics to work out that that’s a net loss. To put it another way, effectively, there’s your lacklustre response to the steel crisis, and you’re now expecting us to actually celebrate the fact that there’s going to be a net loss to the south Wales economy.

Now, I have to say to the Welsh Government, we’ll listen to what the Minister has to say. There has been an offer by the Basque aluminium company for this piece of land in the Baglan enterprise zone, which was set up as part of the response to the economic crisis. Take that offer. There is a company that is a successful company, which wants to expand and is obviously part of a cluster in terms of metals and materials in that area. So, there’s no actual reason why that offer should be refused. Take it now. Announce today that that offer is going to be accepted.

I have to say, though, that I heard earlier today the comments that the honourable Member—I’m allowed to say that about a Member of the House of Commons, aren’t I?—for Aberavon, Stephen Kinnock, or, as I shall now call him, ‘the grand archduke of Nimbyism’, saying that, actually, it would be all right as long as the prison was moved from Port Talbot to down the road in Swansea. His attitude seems to be that it’s not that he’s against a superprison in south Wales; it’s rather a case of ‘not in my business park’.

Let’s reiterate: Wales does not need superprisons as part of our economic strategy. It’s not good for the prisoners themselves, who should be rehabilitated in their communities. And if they are low-risk prisoners, they should be in the probation service. But, of course, you privatised that, didn’t you? The fact is that it’s not good for our economy. The numbers that have been offered to us in terms of jobs, they’re worthy of the side of a big red bus. And I would say to the Welsh Government: please, the reason we have a Welsh Government is, when the Westminster Government says jump, don’t ask ‘how high?’ When we actually believe that this is not the right way for us as a nation, then we should say so unequivocally, with one voice. We are better than this. The people of Port Talbot deserve better this. Let’s say ‘no’ to this pathetic excuse for an economic policy and social policy that actually should mean that you hang your heads in shame.

In opening this debate this afternoon, the Member for South Wales West established several threads within the discussion, including the effectiveness of superprisons in reducing reoffending rates and offering inmates a safe environment for rehabilitation, whether Wales needs more prisons, and the unsuitability of this site in Baglan for the new prison, as announced by the Ministry of Justice on 22 March. At present, some of these issues are not devolved to the Welsh Government, but the ownership of the land being proposed, and thus the impact of the development, is within the Welsh Government’s control, and as the constituency Member for that site, it will come as no surprise to Members in this Chamber that I will focus on the unsuitability of the location and the impact the development would have on my local community.

However, I will raise my concerns over the effectiveness of the approach of the UK Government of building more superprisons to replace overcrowded Victorian prisons as a means of achieving its goal of reducing reoffending rates. I struggle to find any evidence, empirical evidence, that they actually do reduce reoffending rates as a result of any improved rehabilitation within them. So, surely, the Ministry of Justice would be well served by taking time to analyse the effectiveness of the superprisons it already operates—HMP Berwyn, and HMP Oakwood in Birmingham—before it goes ahead with its cost-saving plans for more. In fact, there is greater evidence out there that there are known problems with large prisons. Even as far back as 1991, Lord Woolf demonstrated the problems, further demonstrated by a study by the chief inspector in 2009, and more recently in a damning report on HMP Oakwood. The Welsh Government should reflect on these, and the social impact upon both communities and inmates prior to any decision they will make upon the sale or lease of the land within its ownership for development of a superprison.

Llywydd, I will now move on to the unsuitability of this site and why I’m calling for the Welsh Government not to release this land to the Ministry of Justice for this new prison. In her opening remarks, Bethan Jenkins highlighted many of the challenges to the arguments used by the MOJ for this decision, including many that needed consideration in the planning process. I concur with those and will expand upon some, but I won’t have time to do them all, unfortunately.

Let’s start with the argument for the economy, as already outlined by Adam Price in one sense: one that implies that the MOJ thinks that Port Talbot will take any jobs, no matter what. Well, we do need to diversify the local economy, and we need to improve labour market indicators—GVA and unemployment. But this proposal will not do that. This site is within the Port Talbot waterfront enterprise park and an area that has been earmarked to help the economy grow by encouraging existing businesses, or new businesses, to invest in growth.

Will you take an intervention? I just wonder if you can clarify whether this land has been designated as where the Swansea metro is due to pass through, and therefore if we were to put a prison onto this site, that would obviously have smooth implications for the smooth running of the Swansea metro.

I thank the Member for that. I actually can’t give the answer, but it’s an interesting point we can add to the list of questions we will be asking.

We already have businesses saying they will move out. Now, moving out means they’re not coming in, and therefore we’re losing business to the economy. The MOJ claims this prison will bring new jobs to local people—numbers, by the way, that they can’t confirm. Never mind the 200, they actually can’t confirm, because they’ve said to me they don’t know how many until they know which operator. Well, that operator could be a private operator, so they haven’t got a clue. By the way, if it’s a private operator, the Labour Party manifesto in this year’s general election actually stated we should not be involved in building any more new private prisons.

The reality is Swansea and Cardiff, both Victorian prisons, will close, and those jobs will be transferred to this site. That means no new jobs, actually, but people coming in, but they won’t necessarily move into the area. Supply chains will also go with them, so no supply chain jobs coming in. Once operational, there will be no growth. This will not meet the objectives of the enterprise zone of bringing growth to our economy. What will bring jobs are new industrial units to attract other businesses to come in and to invest in We haven’t got units of 5,000 to 10,000 sq ft; let’s get them in. Why not do the same here as for other areas of Wales and establish a strong offer for businesses?

Cabinet Secretary, I have actually asked the Welsh Government for published evidence to support the claims of economic prosperity from building a prison, and I hope that we will get some, because I haven’t had any yet. Can I also ask the question of whether the Welsh Government has had discussions with the chair of the enterprise zone board and if he is in favour of this proposal?

Cabinet Secretary, also, the history of this site is known to local people, including myself. I can remember when ponies were walking across it as a marshland. We can all tell you that this location is the wrong site for this development. My call to you now, and in the future, will be, ‘Don’t sell this land, or lease this land, to the MOJ’.

Now, another question is the claim that the prison will offer inmates preparation for following release. Wonderful, but that preparation will include work placements. How many businesses are actually being approached and asked whether they will take this opportunity? I can tell you: none. How can reform work if a basic analysis hasn’t been undertaken into delivering rehabilitation? The whole economic and rehabilitation premise of this development is flawed.

Llywydd, I know there’s little time, and, in concluding my contribution, I ask the Cabinet Secretary: if prisons were devolved to Wales, would the Welsh Government build a superprison in the heart of a community on such flimsy evidence? I sincerely hope not. There’s clearly no justice coming to Port Talbot from the Ministry of Justice. Instead, I ask the Welsh Government to deliver it and say ‘no’ when asked to sell or lease the land to the MOJ. Set our economy as the priority, and not the MOJ’s desire to save money.

It’s a pleasure to take part in this debate. I’m grateful to follow David Rees’s strong contribution there, because obviously it was a shock to us all when Carl Sargeant, the Cabinet Secretary, announced the intention to build a superprison potentially housing 1,600 prisoners in Baglan earlier this year. We did not see it coming. Welsh Government obviously were not involved in any discussions prior—

Will the Member give way? I don’t wish to disparage anything, but, just for clarification, actually the announcement came from the MOJ, not Carl Sargeant. I don’t want to defend him, but it was theirs, unfortunately.

I’m grateful for that clarification, David, but I was expressing my sense of shock when we had the statement from the Cabinet Secretary that day back in March. Granted, the decision—more of that later on—was not the Cabinet Secretary’s; he was merely the conduit of it here, but it didn’t lessen the shock that some of us felt. But I’m grateful for your intervention anyway.

Up to that point, obviously, I hadn’t detected a popular groundswell of public opinion wanting a prison in Port Talbot, I’ve got to say. No public clamour at all. There was, and is, public clamour for a tidal lagoon in Swansea bay, there is public clamour for electrification of the main railway line from London to Swansea, but a superprison in Baglan—public clamour came there none.

Now, of course, this unexpected announcement—via the Cabinet Secretary—came about because obviously policing, crime and justice are not devolved to this National Assembly for Wales. Westminster can announce things and that’s it. Yet, policing is devolved everywhere else, obviously: Scotland, Northern Ireland, London, Manchester even, but not Wales. And this isn’t just an argument about powers for its own sake, but, in terms of criminal justice, the need to tackle the revolving door of reoffending, as alluded to elsewhere, is paramount.

This deficiency cuts across that. To try and prevent offenders from reoffending, a concerted, co-ordinated response is required across all public services and local voluntary and charitable institutions. Because, for offenders leaving prison, we need housing, housing for people on their release; we need education and training possibilities; we need general health services; we need mental health services; we need drug and alcohol treatments; we need social services support. All of these already overstretched services are devolved to Wales. We manage them from here. Co-ordination with policing, probation, criminal justice and prisons, which are not devolved, is very difficult therefore, which is why we can just have this sudden announcement, whoever announced it, wherever—and I’m grateful to the Cabinet Secretary for that announcement back in March.

But because criminal justice and prisons are not devolved, this is how we can have this sort of announcement, and are we expected to pick up the pieces with our devolved services already overstretched here in Wales? Because preventing reoffending is already a very difficult task. Persistent reoffending rates are a testimony to all of that. But in the end, this superprison is not needed. There is no popular public clamour out there for it. It’s not welcome. Vote for the Plaid Cymru motion. Diolch yn fawr.

My view regarding the potential building of a prison in Baglan, Port Talbot—and I live in Port Talbot—has always been that public consultation is extremely important, along with risk assessments, environmental factors—for example, traffic congestion—and, as previously mentioned, flooding in the area. We must also take into consideration alternative suitable sites. But should the above criteria be passed and the green light given, we have to accept that prisons are permanent features of our society. What alternatives are there to imprisonment? We’re open to suggestions.

A custodial sentence is often the last resort by judges where reoffending has occurred or the crime has been too serious. And where there is crime, there is a victim. Try telling a lady who’s been the victim of domestic abuse with a broken nose and broken ribs that we are looking for an alternative to prison for the offender. There will be public outcry. The victim of a crime needs to feel safe and secure in their community. Taking a perpetrator out of society for a period of time gives the victim peace of mind and the perpetrator a chance in prison to rehabilitate.

If prisoners are locked up in cells 23 hours a day, there is very little chance of rehabilitation happening or of it being successful. My work in HMP Parc concentrated heavily on rehabilitation. Prisoners are not locked up 23 hours a day, but were actually out for 14 hours a day, as per contract. A typical day would be: breakfast at 7 a.m., exercise and shower; prisoners then went to various groups: education, industries, work, court discharges, visits with family. The industries provided horticultural work, woodwork, metal work, printing, to name just a few. With regard to rehabilitation, there is a family unit, which concentrates on building family life following crime and provides mediation with that family. There is an armed forces unit, particularly for PTSD, drug and alcohol issues and family breakdowns. Some also train—some prisoners train as listeners and work with the Samaritans. They then leave prison, and many have gone on to become councillors. The health and wellbeing unit assists with disabilities and concentrates on how to improve lifestyles, make changes to benefit health, learning about nutrition, dealing with obesity, prevention of diabetes and so on. There is a healthcare unit for poor copers with mental health issues; there is a voluntary testing unit for people who have taken drugs but have quit and wish to be tested randomly to make amends to their family and contribute positively to society. D block is a pre-release block, which links up with probation. A jobs fair is held every six months and prisoners meet with prospective employers on this unit. Prisoners are released into the community prior to release for a day now and then; this is not a new concept. When prisoners are released permanently, where do they go? They go back into the community with as much preparation for this release as is possible, and day release is important. Some prisoners have been fortunate and were selected from HMP Parc for the merchant navy. So, there are positives of rehabilitation that are not being portrayed here.

One of my proudest moments was after handing a prisoner who was from a travelling family his mail. He tore it up in pieces and threw it at me like tiny confetti. I told him someone had taken time to write it, and perhaps he should have read it first, and would he now mind cleaning it up. He cleaned up his mess and went back to his cell. He explained later in a one-to-one that he could not read at all, hence the reason he always seemed to be breaking rules; he couldn’t read the policies, could he? Initially, I helped him on a one-to-one, and later he joined a class. After a year, he proudly took the letter from his mum and read it to me.

The prisons in Wales are always at full capacity, which can lead to overcrowding. Some Welsh prisoners end up in England, making visiting impossible. Therefore, if we are to successfully rehabilitate and integrate offenders, then surely family visits are of paramount importance. There is also the employment factor to consider: employment within our steelworks has been drastically reduced in Port Talbot and many people would welcome the opportunity to retrain. It is not just prisoner officer jobs; there are non-operational roles: catering, healthcare, to name but a few. Money spent outside will boost the economy. During construction, it would be great if Welsh steel was used and local labour also provided. Due to opportunities at HMP Parc, many have left and now lead former productive lives upon release. However, private contractors are not tendering for prisons, and therefore, I suggest that the inference that this is a lucrative business is slowly going down the pan. Yes, we can look at the positives and negatives of tagging as an alternative, but, at the end of the day, if we are having a prison, public safety is of paramount importance, as is the safety of staff and prisoners, and any prison must be properly resourced to bring about successful rehabilitation and safety of staff. Thank you.

I am very uncomfortable with the proposal to build a large prison in Port Talbot and with the political games that are accompanying it. I don’t buy the argument that this is a non-devolved issue. This is about the type of country we want Wales to be, and Monday’s announcement of a commission on justice in Wales, led by Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd, the current Lord Chief Justice, offers us an opportunity to have greater devolution of the judicial system in Wales and also to have the debate about the kind of picture that Welsh justice looks like. I’d like to see a prison system that doesn’t warehouse people but focuses on rehabilitation. That is my strong instinct, but in reflecting on what to say in today’s debate I looked at some of the evidence, and the evidence is mixed. I think we do need to weigh the importance of keeping prisoners close to their families with the other evidence that shows that separating offenders from their peer group can help with the cycle of reoffending. Evidence shows that prisoners in newer prisons have better outcomes than those housed in older prisons, and this is a much bigger factor in recidivism than the size of the institution. Many argue that larger prisons are too impersonal to support effective rehabilitation, whilst others argue that the economies of scale provided by larger prisons mean better and wider training and employment facilities can be provided. So, the evidence is mixed.

The economic case isn’t clear cut either. People argue—

Will you take an intervention?

I’d be happy to give way.

I appreciate your point that the evidence is mixed, but I haven’t yet found any evidence to show that larger prisons actually reduce reoffending rates. I think that’s the crucial element here. They’re arguing that it does, but yet I haven’t found the evidence that it actually does. It might be approaching it, but I haven’t seen the evidence yet.

As I said, I think the evidence is mixed. There’s conflicting evidence on the point and, as I said, my personal prejudice is against superprisons. I chaired a public meeting in Wrexham at the time of the debate there, and did some work to oppose the prison in Wrexham. So, that’s my strong inclination. However, to be fair, we’re looking at the evidence, it’s not a clear picture, and I think we need to spend more time establishing the true picture and our position on it.

As I was just about to say, the economic case isn’t clear cut either. People argue the megaprison will bring new jobs both in the construction and in staffing required. But, as we’ve previously discussed in this Chamber, without reform to procurement rules, projects of this size often see jobs imported from outside the area, and if Swansea and Cardiff prisons close then the job impact will quickly disappear.

We’re also selling off this land like it’s got no other worth or potential, and, as Jenny Rathbone has already indicated today, there are indications from Mark Barry’s blueprint—his version of the south Wales metro network concept, which I think is an exciting vision—that this land could well be an important part of reducing journey times between Swansea and Cardiff and beyond. So, that should also be a key factor. Now, that again is at an early stage and we’re not clear how that will develop. So, I think we need to deal with these issues before we sign off this deal. Until we have this debate—crucially, the debate about the type of country we want to see and the justice system we want to see—in passing—[Interruption.] I’m just closing; I’m sorry, Leanne.

Is it a ‘no’?

It is a ‘no’, I’m afraid. I do apologise. [Interruption.] Until we have the debate about the sort of justice system we want to see in Wales, then it’s premature to pass this motion and I will therefore not be supporting it at this time.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Communities and Children—Carl Sergeant.

Thank you, Llywydd. I’ve listened carefully to today’s debate, but the Government will be opposing both the motion and the amendment as laid.

I must start by setting the record straight on the actions and powers of the Welsh Government, and some of the contributions that were made in the Chamber today. Responsibility for prisons lies with the UK Government. The Welsh Government was approached by the Ministry of Justice as part of an exercise across England and Wales to see if we knew of any land that could be developed for this scale of prison. We supplied a list of 20 sites. We regularly provide a list of this type—[Interruption.] In a second I will, Dai. We regularly provide this type of service for all businesses and all developers.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary for taking the intervention. I appreciate that the Welsh Government provides that service for all businesses, but in your response to me in May you highlighted the criteria the MOJ supplied you for sites. One of them was that it shouldn’t be a flood plain, and yet you supplied a site, which is this particular site, which is on a flood plain. Could you tell me why that site was supplied?

The details around that would be a general principle that there are mitigation measures that all businesses can react to in terms of flood plains and flood developments, and it is certainly not unusual for us to provide opportunities of land usage for all businesses, as I said. That choice is by the developer then, if they wish to pursue to develop or otherwise.

The Ministry of Justice expressed its desire to proceed with a planning permission application for a prison facility at Baglan in Port Talbot. We were not part of the decision process that selected Baglan as a preferred site.

Will you take an intervention?

One second. The Government is not playing a role in developing the prison or a role in the community. We may comment on the proposals when they become available.

Llywydd, we have granted the Ministry of Justice two licences to carry out work on that land. These include ecology mitigation measures and, again, this is normal practice. Developers want to know what the make-up of the land is prior to putting in a planning application. We have also been asked by the Ministry of Justice to discuss an option agreement for the land. We have not sold the land to the Ministry of Justice or come to an agreement regarding the sale or discussed the value. It is not a fait accompli as many have suggested in here and externally, as we’ve heard. If alternative offers for the land come forward, there is nothing to prevent us from assessing the economic benefits of that and accepting a good offer.

As you’ve specifically referred to it, have you entered into the option agreement with the MOJ that you just referred to?

What I said was we have been asked by the Ministry of Justice to discuss an options agreement about the land, but we have not sold the land or discussed an agreement on the sale or the value of the land.

You haven’t entered into the option agreement, then.

No, we haven’t. I’m happy to take an intervention.

I just wanted to clarify, because you said you hadn’t been part of any decision-making processes. But on 28 June, in communities questions in response to my question on the prison, you said your department have been, and I quote, involved

‘in terms of deciding and offering sites that were available right across the south Wales region’.

So, you were either involved in deciding or you weren’t, Cabinet Secretary.

Sorry, I think that the play on words or interpretation of what I said—. If I may clarify that position, as I have just done today, we have offered 20 sites across the south Wales region, as we would do for any business or any other developer. That is not unusual for the way Governments do business. I think—. Dai, did you want to intervene?

Not at this point.

Okay.

I do. [Laughter.] I just wondered if you could clarify why, if this area has been designated as suitable for installing a Swansea metro—why, then, the Government offers it up as a possible site for building, as that seems to be in contradiction.

Well, respectfully, these are matters for the Ministry of Justice. This is not in our ownership—[Interruption.] This is not our project. This is of the Ministry of Justice. What we do welcome is the Ministry of Justice’s intention—[Interruption.]

Allow the Cabinet Secretary to continue, please. He’s taken many, many interventions. Allow the Cabinet Secretary to continue.

I’m very grateful, Llywydd. I took about five interventions. We welcome the Ministry of Justice’s intention to hold a two-day community event that will give visitors and residents the chance to see and comment on the proposals before a formal planning application is made. And I’ve heard many contributions from Members in the Chamber this afternoon, which are all valid conditions around planning, and they should be consolidated and given as evidence in that process.

Llywydd, we call on the Ministry of Justice to make sure that there is full and genuine consultation for the communities that are represented by Members here today. If a planning application is received by the local authority, then residents will have the opportunity to engage with that planning process and I would encourage them to do so. Prison policy is not, as I have said, a devolved matter, but I’d like to share some thoughts on the wider questions posed here today.

I understand that there are not enough places here for the number of category C, low-risk prisoners in south Wales. It had also been suggested that a new prison would deplete local health and education budgets. Let me make it quite clear: as at HMP Berwyn, these services will only be made available if sufficient funding is secured from the UK Government to do so.

I don’t think anyone would disagree with the Ministry of Justice’s wishes to replace ageing, ineffective prisons—as Caroline Jones referred to—with modern, fit-for-purpose facilities in which a rehabilitation culture can be successfully developed. The prison estate and its management are matters for the Ministry of Justice and Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service. I would oppose sending anyone to prison unnecessarily. Equally, however, we do need to protect our communities from harm, and prisons clearly have a role to play in that. Dai Rees.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary for allowing me the intervention. I appreciate that the prison estate is the responsibility of the MOJ, but in this particular case the land is owned by the Welsh Government and, therefore, it’s a decision for the Welsh Government on the social needs as well as anything else. And particularly as we have the possibility of Swansea and Cardiff closing because they’ve been claimed to be Victorian prisons, and the UK Government’s policy is clearly to shut them, we could end up with a situation where there are two major prisons within 10 miles of each other and, therefore, it’s not actually serving the social needs of the inmates and their families in other parts of south Wales.

Respectfully, to the Member, I think what we should remain to do is stick to the facts. We are making many assumptions about what’s happening here. The two-day event held by the Ministry of Justice with your community is an important process where you can ask those questions effectively, which, I hope, will be answered accordingly by the Ministry of Justice.

Llywydd, the issue in regard to the prison estate, as I mentioned earlier on, is a matter for the Ministry of Justice. These are not decisions for us to make, but before we flatly oppose a modern prison we should think about the cost of that to Welsh prisoners, their families and not least the communities to which they return on completion of their sentences. Even prisoners and their partners, families and children should not have to visit them in institutions that cannot fully respect the human dignity of both prisoners and their families. I think we should ensure that for all.

The Ministry of Justice anticipated, when operational, this development will create around 500 new jobs and inject around £11 million a year into the local economy. These are certainly issues that should be taken up with the Ministry of Justice. As Dai Rees has said, he wants to see the evidence around that, and I think it’s a fair question to ask. There is a significant amount of alternative land allocated for employment use in the area. I refer Members to the local development plan. The Welsh Government has and will continue to make a comprehensive support package available for companies in Neath Port Talbot that wish to expand and grow. As we oppose, in the amendments, in the last two years we’ve offered nearly £1.5 million to nine companies in that area, as well as £13 million across the Tata Steel estate.

Llywydd, I recognise the need to move on, but as regards the flooding issue, as Members asked earlier on, it will be up to the Ministry of Justice—

Will the Cabinet Secretary take an intervention?

The Cabinet Secretary is well over time already. I do understand that you’ve taken several interventions already, but if you bring your contribution to an end, then you won’t need to take any other interventions. [Laughter.]

I’m very grateful for your advice, Llywydd. Just in regard to the flooding issues, it would be up to the Ministry of Justice to make a case through a flood consequence assessment as that process moves forward. The motion and amendments, in different ways, invite you to endorse misleading accounts of the role and actions of this Welsh Government. We’ve not chosen the site. The proposal will be subject to a full planning process. The Ministry of Justice decides to proceed or not, and the Welsh Government will continue to work to promote the economy in the area. [Interruption.] I urge Members to reject the motion and the amendments today, Llywydd.

I call on Bethan Jenkins to reply to the debate.

Well, if anything else, I’m glad we’ve had a fiery and engaging debate for those of us who have wanted to have that debate today, but I must say that I am disappointed with the reaction of the Cabinet Secretary because we’re in a week where we’re discussing devolution and the powers that we have. Sometimes, even if you don’t have the powers in your grasp, you have the moral authority to change things as a Cabinet Secretary. You have the power not to release that land to the MOJ. There may be processes that business follows, but you don’t have to always follow that process. You do not have to give the MOJ that list of different pieces of land for them to develop—[Interruption.] Well, they don’t simply have to do that, so do you—? I would like for you to intervene on me, Cabinet Secretary, because you were shaking your head when you said you hadn’t taken an opinion. Do you support this prison? So, then we can actually have you on the record saying if you do or not, because I’m still not sure. Carwyn Jones as First Minister seems to be happy for the prison to come to south Wales. Are you in favour of this prison?

Well, the Member clearly didn’t listen. You said earlier on that this isn’t about politicising this, which is exactly what you and your colleagues have started to do. This is—[Interruption.]

Allow the Cabinet Secretary to intervene. Carry on, Cabinet Secretary.

I’m very grateful for your advice, Llywydd. The issue for us is if an offer comes into that land base, as I said during my contribution, it’s still open for offers from other businesses. We haven’t fixed an opinion on whether the prison should go ahead or whether other business should go ahead. That is completely normal business.

So, will you therefore—? Envases, as Adam Price said, the company by that site, has said that they would be interested in purchasing it, and it’s been empty for so much time. Why have you not invested in this land prior to now? Because it’s on an industrial park, it’s your obligation to do that. I said—I didn’t say we wouldn’t be political; I said we are working cross party, and we are working with Members of your own party in Port Talbot who are opposing this development, and I would gladly carry on working with them for as long as we can in this regard. I won’t have time to go through everybody’s comments, but I do take issue with some of the comments from Suzy Davies, who is usually quite progressive, as opposed to being a mouthpiece for the Conservative Party on a UK level. I mentioned, many times, about rehabilitating prisoners. We do not want—. I speak to prisoners about this and they themselves say they do not want to have a superprison, that that does not aid them. They call them ‘warehouses’, they say they are churned in and out of the system. That is why we are fundamentally opposing this.

I’m not sure that it’s worth going through all comments, but I did think that it was important to hear what Lee Waters said in relation to a justice commission for Wales, but we know that Labour MPs on a UK level have opposed criminal justice being devolved to this place, so I would hope, through this justice commission for Wales, that we can see those MPs changing their minds. I hope that David Rees, as the local Member who spoke so eloquently here today, will be supporting the Plaid Cymru motion, as I hope other Members of your party will, because you spoke strongly as to why this area should be used for economic development, and why, from research you’ve done and others have done, that you cannot find strong reasons as to why a superprison should be built in Port Talbot. So, I look forward to working with you further on that.

I will bring my comments to a close, but this is not about trying to alienate or to talk down prisoners. We all, in this room, know how we want to support them and rehabilitate them, and we all have people who come to us in our communities to say how that should be done. But privatising the probation service is not going to help aid that process either, and I think we all have to work together to ensure—[Interruption.]

I can’t hear Bethan Jenkins. Can I hear Bethan Jenkins’s final contribution?

Adam, do you want to make an intervention? [Interruption.] I’m going to pull this debate to a close, and I thank everybody for such a lively debate if nothing else.

The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? [Objection.] I will defer voting on this item until voting time.

Voting deferred until voting time.