We now move on to item 7, which is a debate on the 'Port Talbot Community against the Super Prison' petition, and I call on the Chair of the Petitions Committee to move the motion—David Rowlands. 

Motion NDM6604 David J. Rowlands

To propose that the National Assembly for Wales:

Notes the petition ‘P-05-781 Port Talbot Community Against the Super Prison’ which received 8,791 signatures.

Motion moved.

Diolch, Dirprwy Llywydd. Can I say that I'm extremely pleased to open this debate on behalf of the Petitions Committee? This the second debate that has been held since the Petitions Committee agreed to consider referring any petition that gathers more than 5,000 signatures for a debate in the Plenary. The petitioners, led by Victoria Griffiths, are seeking to oppose the development of a new, so-called superprison on land owned by the Welsh Government in Baglan, Port Talbot.

I would like to begin by thanking the petitioners for bringing this petition forward and to congratulate them on running a passionate and eye-catching campaign. I remember it was certainly a vibrant occasion when the petitioners came to the Senedd to hand the petition over to the committee back in October. I know that the petitioners have also worked closely with their local Assembly Members on this issue, and I'm sure that a number of Members will be seeking to contribute during the debate this afternoon.

The petition in front of us collected 8,791 signatures using a combination of the Assembly's website and a local paper petition. This and the turnout at the Senedd indicate that there is a significant degree of local opposition to the possibility of a prison in Port Talbot, and I'm sure that this is not news to anyone here today. The petitioners have told the committee that they have a number of concerns with the Ministry of Justice's proposal to build a prison on the site, and, before I outline these, it is perhaps worth covering a bit of background about the proposals and their current status.

In March 2017, the UK Government announced that four potential sites for new prisons in England and Wales had been identified by the Ministry of Justice. We understand that, prior to this, the Welsh Government had provided a list of 20 possible sites in Wales to the Ministry of Justice. The Ministry of Justice has stated that it undertook a comprehensive evaluation of the 20 sites, and that Port Talbot was selected as the best potential site for a new category C prison build in Wales. As a result, Port Talbot was the only site in Wales chosen to proceed to a planning application. In the same announcement in March 2017, the then Secretary of State for Justice indicated that considerations over value for money and affordability would be part of the Ministry of Justice's final decision over whether to proceed with a new prison on the site. 

In answers given at Westminster on this subject in September, the prisons Minister indicated that Port Talbot was chosen for a number of reasons. These include the capacity of local infrastructure to support the prison and the potential for benefits to the local community. It is clear from the petition that large parts of the community dispute both of these statements. Media reports have stated that the proposed category C prison would have a capacity of 1,600 prisoners when it is fully operational, though I understand that this has not been confirmed by the Ministry of Justice. The UK Government has also stated that there are currently insufficient prison places available and, specifically, that there are not enough category C prison places in south Wales. 

In their response to the committee's initial correspondence about the petition, the Welsh Government confirmed that they received an approach from the Ministry of Justice and provided a list of 20 possible sites in response. The Government also reiterated that the decision over whether to proceed is a matter for the Ministry of Justice and that any planning applications would be considered locally by Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council. However, as I previously stated, the petition calls on the Welsh Government—which owns the land involved—not to sell to the Ministry of Justice for the purposes of development. During a previous discussion on this subject in Plenary in September, the then Cabinet Secretary for Communities and Children stated that no agreement has been made with the UK Government regarding the sale of the land, and no discussions over its value have taken place.

Given that justice is not a devolved subject area, and that a decision whether or not to proceed with the development of a prison will be taken by the UK Government, it is the issue of the sale of the land that the Petitions Committee will primarily be considering going forward. However, we have written to the prisons Minister to make him aware of this petition and the debate today. I am sure that local Members will wish to outline the views of the local community in more detail during their contributions, so I will limit my further comments to the concerns raised directly with the Petitions Committee.

The petitioners have outlined a number of concerns, most of which relate to the capacity of Port Talbot and the surrounding areas to accommodate a prison. These include the availability of health services and the capacity of local roads both during the construction of the prison and once it is operational. The petitioners have also questioned the impact it could have on local employment levels and the prospects for local people looking for jobs. This is due to the potential for the prison to operate as a rehabilitation centre, with inmates potentially allowed limited day release for training placements for work experience, which the petitioners fear will take opportunities away from local people. They have also raised concerns over local housing availability, which could be put under increased pressure if inmates choose to stay in the area following their release. Finally, the petitioners have highlighted that the land identified is an enterprise zone and is, apparently, subject to a covenant on its use. Schedules to this covenant have been quoted that state that the land should be used for the purpose of an industrial park and not for other purposes.

Due to a recognition that it was important to proceed with this debate in a timely manner, the committee has not had time to investigate any of these concerns or claims in detail at this stage. We will return to consider the petition again at a future committee meeting. In doing so, I hope we will be able to also consider the reaction of the petitioners to the points raised today and the answers provided. As a result, the committee is presenting this petition to the Assembly without drawing conclusions or making recommendations in any particular direction at this stage. However, we feel that this is an important debate to have, and we hope that it will provide everyone who signed the petition with further information and answers to the concerns that they hold.

Before I move on to the substance of this discussion, I just wanted to express huge praise for the campaign group from my constituency, which is totally community led, for the work they have done to date to bring this petition to the Chamber. I know their dedication will continue beyond today to make sure that Port Talbot has a good way forward, and some of the members are in the gallery this afternoon.

The petition being discussed this afternoon calls on the Welsh Government to reject the Ministry of Justice's proposals to release the land for the development of the superprison. David Rowlands, as Chair of the Petitions Committee, highlighted that as the main focus, but can I also highlight that the public services that are being impacted upon are also devolved to the Welsh Government, so there's actually a second issue that you may want to consider?

Many of the arguments that will be raised this afternoon were raised during the Plaid Cymru debate on 20 September, and I'm not going to apologise for repeating any of those, as they are core to the reasons for rejecting this proposal. However, since that date, further evidence has been uncovered that supports our calls in this petition. There are two aspects that need to be addressed in this debate: (1) the appropriateness of the site for a superprison, and (2) the penal policy of the UK Government and the role the Welsh Government plays in its delivery.

With regard to the first point, there are numerous reasons as to why this site is inappropriate. First, it's on a C1 flood zone, as has already been mentioned, which was a C2 flood zone when the site was identified by the Welsh Government and given to the MOJ as one on the list, even though the criteria from the MOJ actually said, for suitable sites, 'Good ground conditions which do not have a high possibility of flooding'. Now, Cabinet Secretary, I did ask about this before, and I asked why it was included in the criteria. I was given the answer, 'It's not for the Welsh Government to determine that—it's for the developers'. I'm sorry, but that's simply abdicating the responsibility of the Welsh Government. The site should never have been included in any list the Welsh Government gave, and even now should be withdrawn on that basis, particularly as the conditions on the site haven't changed.

Secondly, the site is in the enterprise zone—Port Talbot Waterfront enterprise zone—as has already been mentioned. That should be used for economic growth of existing businesses and attraction of inward investment that would bring further economic benefits to the community. I know the claims of the MOJ are that a prison will deliver economic benefits, but research has shown that claims that the development of a superprison will win economic benefits—including the creation of jobs—fail to take account of the broader social costs of incarcerating a large number of inmates, and that simple job numbers are not an accurate measure of economic growth.

Also, the identified employment it would create does not necessarily benefit the local community immediately around the area—undeniably true in this case, because it's known that Swansea and Cardiff are up for closing. If they close, the direct employment of those will be transferred to this new site and all the supply-chain employment that feeds in. That is reality; those are the views of the UK Government about Victorian prisons. Additionally, the research shows that there can be economic downturns on investment for communities that become known as prison towns. We are experiencing that, with one business preparing to leave the town if it is given the go-ahead. So, the claim that the prison will be a vehicle for economic growth in Port Talbot is totally false.

Thirdly, there's the issue of the covenant on the land, and another criteria specified by the MOJ when they asked for the sites was that it should not have a covenant. Others may have more time to explore this matter, but I'm sure you're aware that we've already explored it with the Counsel General and the First Minister and I can assure you that will not go away. 

I wish to spend a little bit more time now on the second consideration, because we must give it to any new superprison proposal—the ability of the penal policy to reduce reoffending, improve rehabilitation, and the impact upon the services delivered by the Welsh Government to support that ambition. Again, numerous reports and research show that the creation of a superprison fails to deliver on that ambition. In fact, they do the opposite. Cabinet Secretary, building crime-free lives is about a more equal society. It's about poverty, healthcare, housing and education. It's about prisons that seek to build long-lasting change and not a prison industrial complex, which assumes that profound change will come through stuffing a building to capacity with humans, like they are bottles of wine that will mature over time when they're shut away in the cold and the dark. Let's not support an agenda that is financially driven by the MOJ. Let's rather deliver one that will address the needs of society.

Cabinet Secretary, considering the role the Welsh Government has in delivering services to prisoners, is it now time for penal policy to be devolved to Wales? Perhaps you should be pushing that agenda forward. I agree with the comments that were made in the Plaid Cymru debate—I've turned around, I've come around to your way of thinking—that perhaps penal policy should now be devolved. But if it was, would the Welsh Government consider superprisons a good model, let alone build one in the heart of a community on such flimsy evidence? I very much hope not.

Llywydd, I'll conclude with the following because I see my time is up—I've got a lot more to say but I see my time is up. This afternoon, we'll be asked to vote to note the petition, but I actually want more than that. I want the Welsh Government to listen to the people who signed the petition and act on their behalf. I said in September that there is clearly no justice coming to Port Talbot from the Ministry of Justice, and I called on Welsh Government to deliver that by setting our economy as the priority and not the MOJ's decision to save money. Cabinet Secretary, it's quite simple: when the MOJ comes asking for that land to be developed on, just say 'no'. Listen to the petitioners: Port Talbot can do better and deserves much more. 

As you know, the proposed site at Baglan, Cabinet Secretary, is in my region. I'm very interested to see the steps that both Governments will take on this next. As I said in my contribution to the debate a few weeks ago that I have fewer reservations about the concept of these large-site prisons for the reason I gave then, which boil down essentially to their better rehabilitation rates and better facilities for prisoners and their visitors and staff as compared to the older prisons. I won't have time to dispute at length with you on that, but I think that's a contestable statement you made earlier.

I've already visited Swansea and Parc but since the last debate have taken the opportunity to visit HMP Berwyn in Wrexham to help me develop my views on this a little bit—whether the type of modern prison is what I thought it was and whether the Baglan site would be appropriate. While I fully appreciate that this will be highly unlikely to change their views, I'm very pleased that three objectors to the plans have agreed to come with me, as soon as I can agree a date, to visit HMP Berwyn to find out a little bit more for themselves about the type of prisons we're talking about here.

When you make visits like this as an Assembly Member, you expect to see the best or worst gloss on what you're seeing, depending on why you're there. I think this is something we perhaps all recognise. And, if you're wise, then you factor that into your impressions. But even so, I would like to thank my hosts for some very frank and open discussion when I was there, even though the south Wales plans are nothing to do with HMP Berwyn, and I hope that the openness that they displayed then would be extended to anyone with an interest in this.

Questions about potential burdens on local services and partnership working were met with credible answers that were in accord with answers given by Welsh Government here in the Chamber previously—

Will the Member take an intervention? 

I haven't got much time. Make it quite quick.

Just a quick one. I appreciate your efforts to look to what's going on in Berwyn, but it's also fair to say that Berwyn is not at capacity. Therefore, it hasn't experienced some of the real pressures that will come, particularly when we have a situation across the UK on the prison estate where there are huge problems in prisons, particularly when they're at capacity. As such, I think that Berwyn is not quite yet at a situation to give us good details.

It's not at full capacity, I completely agree with you, but many of the staff there have had experience of working in this type of prison before and were informing their answers to me not just on their experience in Berwyn but where they'd been previously.

As I say, I did ask those questions about the burdens on local services, and they did fit with what we'd heard in the debate coming from Welsh Government. I appreciate that that's contestable as well. But I got to see the prisoner accommodation and a whole range of facilities. I won't go into the whole range of them. They were impressive, as you might expect. I saw the health centre, which was particularly impressive, which was staffed and supported by the prison service themselves, not by the NHS, which fed into those questions about how public services might be affected by this. But I've got to say that the most impressive thing about this visit was the interaction between the prisoners and the staff, which include many women staff, incidentally. It's a completely different culture, based on dignity and respect—on relationships between human beings and not that negative captive and captor sort of set-up that perhaps we associate with prisons. And I really don't want us to overlook this in the very specific question of Baglan and whether that's a suitable location.

One of the most important relationships we discussed was that with the local residents, because there were strong objections to the site in Wrexham at the time, and you can see why. The area's not the same as Baglan, but there are similarities in that it's on the edge of an industrial estate, it's next door to small businesses and adjacent to a housing estate. In terms of visual impact, there's no getting away from this: it's a functional prison; it's not the Taj Mahal. But there has been some success in working with the residents in the housing estate independently of local councillors in helping them understand how the prison works and allaying fears about public services, what happens post release and that sort of thing. I think that might be what the petitioners are talking about when they talk about 'associated problems'. I think it's referred to in the petition. The management there realises that it will take some time to persuade everyone of their commitment to be good neighbours and contributors to the community.

I did receive some evidence that there'd been some small business development on the back of the prison, but I didn't have time to explore that, so I'm not going to introduce that as a material point today. I don't expect the impressive number of signatories to this petition will change their views. You're right, David, it's a really impressive campaign. But in sharing their views directly with the MOJ, it's just sensible to be prepared for other views that the MOJ will have to take into account.

I'm a bit disappointed that these roadshows that we were expecting have been delayed until the new year—I've just had that confirmed—but it does give time for all the interested parties to marshal and test any new evidence. I think the First Minister yesterday could have told us who the beneficiaries of the covenant on the land are. Knowing that will help interested parties so that they can take a view on the likelihood of enforcement of any breach, and I'm pleased that the MOJ has now responded to that Welsh Government letter referred to yesterday, although, of course, I haven't seen it.

Just finally, Dirprwy Lywydd, the critical arguments against development will be in the domain of planning, and I ask: is it really likely that this land will change hands for that purpose before there is certainty on planning permission? As we know, no application has been made and, as we know, the petitioners have material arguments on this side—David Rees has mentioned some of those—and they will not be considered lightly by the local authority. They dare not consider them lightly, should it get that far. Thank you.

The strength of feeling regarding the proposed prison is clear, and it's great to see that some of the campaigners are here today. The fact that we're having another debate on this issue so soon after the Plaid Cymru debate is testament to that success. It's also testament to the willpower and the determination that exists in the community and beyond. I too would like to start by paying tribute to the work of the local Stop NPT Prison campaign. It's been fantastic to see so many people who have never been involved in politics or some community campaigns before getting involved in the betterment of their community.

There are lots of placards across Port Talbot, thousands of leaflets have been delivered and volunteers have been knocking doors and doing street stalls. Some people would think there was an election on the cards, because of the level of activity. It's clear, too, that those volunteers are more than prepared to step up that activity if this proposal goes to statutory consultation, as am I. They don't want this prison and many, many people, as you've seen from this petition, do not want this prison to go ahead in Port Talbot, and we do not need it here in Wales either, for reasons that we've given previously.

Despite the strength of feeling, there has been a noticeable flip-flopping of positions by the Welsh Government over this issue—our Government, which is tasked with making the lives of the people of this country better. This petition is clearly worded to call on the Welsh Government to change course. First, the Welsh Government, when this proposal was first announced, said they had worked closely with the UK Government to select sites and that they would continue to work with the MOJ. There seemed to be a positive welcome of the modernity of the new prison and unproven arguments about rehabilitation. Then, things changed to the decision being purely one of the MOJ and that the Welsh Government had very little at all to do with this proposal, despite evidence that Welsh Government officials were engaging with local businesses in the vicinity of the site, possibly before the formal announcement in March.

The latest position, after being presented with evidence related to the land covenant agreement on the proposed site, is that it is within their power to block or at least delay the proposed site from going ahead. The Welsh Government are now in a position of saying that they're waiting for more information and vague guarantees regarding the site before any decision is made. That no decision has been made to sell the land owned by the Welsh Government is where we're at at the moment.

There is an inconsistency and a refusal by the Welsh Government, in my view, to take responsibility, which has become the hallmark of what we've seen with regard to this particular issue. So, let me make it clear: the ability to block the prison is within the power of this Welsh Government. They do have ministerial power to block or delay the sale of this land to the MOJ. Not only is there a covenant, but there's also the fact that, very recently, this site, as has already been said by David Rees, was a high flood-risk area. I don't think Government answers on that issue have been enough for local people so far.

Legal advice that has been provided to me shows that the Welsh Government can legally refuse to sell the land and force the MOJ to compulsory purchase it. I and others have pointed this out to Ministers time and again, but to no avail. The fact that they will not recognise the power they hold suggests to me that they want this superprison to go ahead. But beyond the legalities, where is the Welsh Government in doing their duty and being an advocate for Wales? I understand that some here, particularly the Conservatives and UKIP, are generally in favour of more prisons. But the progressive position should be to oppose an ever-increasing prison population. There should be an opposition to doing incarceration and rehabilitation on the cheap. There is plenty of evidence from elsewhere in the world that large-scale prisons are not conducive environments for proper rehabilitation. And do you know what? Not even talking about looking at research—. Talking to prisoners now and talking to ex-prisoners who tell me that it's like a factory system, who tell me that they're not rehabilitated when they get out of that system, that they go back into crime and that crime happens in prison—crime that they weren't even involved in before they got into prison; they got involved in it when they were incarcerated. So, I think we need to get a reality check on that too.

Rehabilitation in prison works best on a smaller scale. It's the same in schools—it's not a new concept. If you have a smaller class size, you have more attention from the teacher. If you have a smaller class in prison to be able to be rehabilitated by that person, you will generally be more successful. Why are we looking at these expansive-sized prisons here in Wales when we simply do not need to have that scale of prisons? The Wales Governance Centre has said that we will be overcapacity if we create this prison in Port Talbot when we have a new prison in north Wales to house those very Welsh prisoners who are in prison in England, because they could not be housed in Wales before now. Why are we not repatriating those prisoners to Wales, where they should be, as opposed to keeping them in prisons elsewhere in the UK?

I'm already over time. I have much more to say and, sadly, won't have the time to say it. But I think it's a testament to this campaign and the local area that we want jobs that are viable in Port Talbot. We don't want to have jobs that are—that, somehow, we should accept anything for the sake of having a job. I think it's quite unambitious of the UK Government and the Welsh Government to think that we should just accept what we are given. Talk to the people of Port Talbot, talk to them about what jobs they want, as opposed to it being thrust upon us without us having a decision on something so important as a prison. We do not want to have a new prison in that area, and I hope that the campaigners are successful and will join those politicians who are on their side as part of this campaign. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

I'd like to thank the Chair of the Petitions Committee for bringing forward this debate today on an important issue facing my region. I live in Port Talbot, and I must say at the outset that I am not, in principle, opposed to the establishment of a new prison in Port Talbot—in principle. Despite the protestations of many opposed to the new prison, Wales definitely needs a new prison, but the location has to be correct, and if there is any aspect that renders it incorrect in Baglan, unsuitable, such as the flooding aspect that Nigel who is a Plaid Cymru councillor spoke to me about not so very long ago, then, obviously, that site is unsuitable.

Just two weeks ago, mental health charity Hafal warned that overcrowding at HMP Swansea was affecting the safety and mental health of prisoners. When the Victorian prison—Victorian prison—was built, it was designed to hold around 240 prisoners; it currently holds twice that number. Swansea is the third most overcrowded prison in the UK. With the exception of the new prison in north Wales, all of our prisons are overcrowded. Cardiff is operating at 150 per cent capacity, as is Usk. Parc is operating just over capacity.

Having worked for many years at HMP Parc, I can tell you that overcrowding is hard, both on prisoners and staff alike. Prisoners in modern prisons are not simply shut away in the dark and forgotten about; they are rehabilitated. If anyone wants to speak to me about my eight years of experience, I would only be too happy to tell them. 

In recent years, as a result of overcrowding, self-harm amongst prisoners has sky-rocketed, as has sickness and absence amongst most prison officers. There has also been a rise in assaults on prison staff. In the last 10 years, the number of self-harm incidents have nearly doubled to around 38,000 a year. Over the same period, assaults on staff have increased by over 32 per cent. Last year, there were around 6,500 assaults on staff, 761 of which resulted in the prison officer being hospitalised.

Will the Member give way?

Yes.

I thank the Member for taking an intervention, and I listened to what she was saying and I accept fully that when prisons are overcrowded we need to ensure that that's the case. But do you agree with me, therefore, that the £1.3 billion that the Ministry of Justice is putting aside for four new superprisons would actually be better spent on improving the justice system to ensure that the people who need to be in prison are in prison, not all those who are but don't need to be there, and therefore get the system right, because the system's failing? The system's in chaos.

So, are you trivialising crime and not thinking of the victim, then, David? Because what you're saying is: crime is trivial, or some crimes are trivial. They're not when there's a victim involved—

I didn't say that, and you know it.

Well, you have just said it.

We have to tackle overcrowding, and, unfortunately, this means building more prisons. Wales currently has five prisons, yet a large number of Welsh prisoners are housed in prisons in England. Some opponents of the prison claim that Wales is becoming the new Botany Bay, becoming a dumping ground for English prisoners. This is rubbish. There are nearly 2,000 Welsh prisoners held in English jails, yet 700 English prisoners are held in Welsh prisons.

We have no women’s prison in Wales and not a single category A prison. There is a clear need for a new prison. Wales has 4,747 prisoners, yet the five prisons in Wales have an operational capacity for 3,700 prisoners.

We have to build a prison but we have to ensure it is in the right location. I believe my region will benefit from the new prison. Neath Port Talbot recently topped the chart for having the worst social mobility in Wales, and one of the worst in the UK for poverty. The local community desperately needs inward investment, and the prison will bring much-needed employment opportunities. I resent the fact that these employment opportunities are being trivialised and called 'non-jobs' effectively, not just in the construction phase, but also during it's operation, and despite this some politicians have been mobilising opposition to the plans and playing on people's fears.

The argument based on community safety just doesn't stack up. The prison will be a low-category prison, not housing dangerous, hardened criminals and murderers; it will house category C prisoners. In contrast, we have prisons in the city centres, in Swansea and Cardiff, that house higher category B prisoners, and there have been no public safety incidents at either of these prisons, and nor have there been any at HMP Parc, on the outskirts of Bridgend. HMP Parc, Swansea and Cardiff have also not been a drain on local resources.

And on the petitioner's claim that over 8,000 signatures show the majority of the town are against the prison, Port Talbot is home to over 37,000 people. If every one of these signatures were from that town, that would be less than a quarter of the population, and these signatures are not all from that town, are they? If the majority of residents were opposed to this prison, and I couldn't convince them of the benefits it could bring, then, as their representative, I would oppose the prison being built in Port Talbot, but as it stands, the majority of people have not shared their views, and I therefore believe that this should be decided by the planning department, and as we are in the early stages of this proposal and process, I cannot support the petitioners at this time.

I don't think we need a new superprison, like we've got at Berwyn—certainly not before we've seen how Berwyn performs in terms of its ability to reduce recidivism. At the moment, it looks horrendous: over 2,000 people in three blocks, and units of 88 men together. This is not the sort of— . It's barracks accommodation and I can't see how that is going to do anything—

I just wanted to check whether you've seen that, because I have, and I wouldn't describe it as barracks accommodation myself.

I absolutely concede that I haven't been to Berwyn, but it's far too soon for us to know how it's going to perform, as it only opened at the beginning of this year. I certainly don't think we should be jumping into another superprison. We have an appalling record in terms of recidivism and at the moment we lock people up to make them into more successful criminals, particularly those on short sentence, despite the best efforts of individual prison offers and other agencies who endeavour to change that. But this isn't about attacking people in the system, nor is it about denying that victims need justice and that people have to serve their time. But we cannot be moving towards the US system, where they spend more money on locking people up than they spend on education, so this is not the solution, it seems to me. And I don't understand, therefore, why Wales should be part of the broken, ineffective criminal justice system that we have at the moment. The particulars of this site is that I understand it's due to go over a piece of land that Mark Barry has designated as part of the Swansea regional metro, and that seems absolutely crazy, if that is a strategic part of that.

The fact is that half of the adults released from prison reoffend, and 65 per cent of those—two thirds—reoffend if they've had a sentence of less than one year. So, it's completely pointless sending people to prison for sentences of less than a year, because we need to have other ways of ensuring that they serve their time. The recidivism is much less for people who've been given cautions. I just find the way in which criminal justice is completely dominated by the prejudices peddled by the Daily Mail, which for decades have been putting out their vitriol for anybody who tries to describe a different system—. Their vitriol doesn't just extend to offenders—it extends to children. I fully recall the deeply disagreeable campaign to stop a children's Christmas party at Holloway prison, all because it had been released that the prison officers had organised this for these children, who obviously are the most disadvantaged people, who lose their parents when they go to prison.

I just think that the cost per bed of £40,000 a year could be better spent. We need to look at better systems within Europe. For example, in Norway, the penal system—yes, people go to prison, but they are given trust and responsibility as soon as they are able to demonstrate that they are determined to live a crime-free life on release. They get weekly conjugal visits, which is a very important thing, because it enables families to stay together, which is a key part of preventing people going back to being criminals. If you treat people like animals, they're likely to behave like animals. Instead, in Norway, they live in pods—bungalows of four to six adults. They get to buy their own food for breakfast and supper; they only have one meal prepared for them. And they work in order to earn their keep.

I agree that Swansea and Cardiff are reaching the end of their life, but realising this asset would give us the resources to build a different sort of prison that retains the links to the local community. I can tell you that the people whose loved ones are currently in Cardiff prison don't have the money to go to Port Talbot. We need somewhere to hold people close to Cardiff—somewhere within metro distance of Cardiff. I hope that we don’t have this new superprison in south Wales. I don't feel the need for it, and I think we should do something completely different in Wales.

Can I welcome this petition, 'Port Talbot Community Against the Super Prison', and it's 8,791 signatories? It is a happy coincidence of the timetabling in this place that the debate before this was about citizen participation, elegantly espoused by my old friend David Melding there, and we all nodded sagely and everybody was in total agreement, what a happy and healthy place it would be if all citizens partook in the democratic process and were valued for their contribution. So here we are, stage 1: let's see if we value the contribution of the citizens of Port Talbot, then, shall we? Because we've rehearsed the arguments against building a superprison in Baglan here in the Assembly several times this year in questions already, and we had a Plaid Cymru debate, as we've already alluded to, in September. The vote was lost. The Plaid Cymru motion was asking us to vote to stop the superprison. Only nine Assembly Members here voted to stop the superprison.

Now, many people have said to me, 'Don't have a prison'. Nobody has said to me, 'A superprison in Baglan? What a great idea.' Nobody has said that to me. There is public clamour locally for the tidal lagoon. There is still public clamour for electrification of the main railway to Swansea. But a superprison in Baglan—public clamour came there none. I hope we're not being offered this prison instead of a tidal lagoon, or instead of electrification, but let's not hold our breath.

Welsh Government owns the land in the Port Talbot enterprise zone, as has already been alluded to by David Rees, Bethan and others. That's the land that's been earmarked for this superprison. Why does Welsh Government not simply refuse to sell the land to the Ministry of Justice? Job done.

We know prisons, courts, justice and probation are not devolved to us in Wales. That’s why London can come along and say, 'We'll have a superprison in Baglan', because we had no inkling that was happening. It's not devolved to us; why should it involve us? Because justice is not devolved.

However, the money, as Vaughan Gething, the Cabinet Secretary, told us in budget scrutiny in the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee a couple of weeks ago, the money that comes with prisons does not compensate for the expense of local health service provision, social services, mental health provision, local government provision and all the rest. It is inadequately funded by the Home Office, the current prison provision, in terms of the devolved services that have to be there to back up the situation as regards prisoners re-offending, as David Rees mentioned earlier. Those extra services are not funded adequately, and that comes from the Cabinet Secretary for health's own mouth. 

So, we've had an elegant disposition on the power of citizen participation—[Interruption.] Oh, the very embodiment of the same.

This, of course, is about a very particular issue, whether there should be a prison in a specific place. What I think a citizen's assembly could do—and at the moment it would have to be and England and Wales one, but at some point we may have penal policy devolved here—I would ask them, 'Should we have an imprisonment pattern that's nearer the European model or our current one where we imprison between two and three times the number of people needed for public protection or protection from serious theft?' That's the sort of question. Because if that's answered in a particular way, you wouldn't need a superprison in the first place.

Exactly right, and surprising coming from the benches that you sit on, but I applaud that viewpoint, David, and also applaud your elegant disposition, as I said before, as regards the vital importance of citizen participation. This is what this is about. There is a petition there, there are petitioners here, and this is about the importance of citizen participation in democracy. If that means anything, if a petition means anything, surely Labour have a chance to stand up for their oft-used slogan of 'Standing up for the people of Wales'. Well, here's your chance: refuse to sell the land. Stop any prison development in Port Talbot. Diolch yn fawr.

I now call the Cabinet Secretary for Local Government and Public Services, Alun Davies.

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. I've listened carefully to the debate that's taken place this afternoon, and I'm very grateful to Members for the time that they've taken to participate in the debate, and grateful also for the Petitions Committee and the petitioners, who have taken the time to bring this matter to the attention of the National Assembly. 

The motion in front of us today asks us to take note of this petition. We will do so, we will take note of the petition, but in doing so we will also take note of the debate that it has engendered, and take note of the arguments that have been put forward. We will take note of the debate that we've had today, and the ongoing debate around not only this particular prison, but also the policy that seeks to underpin it.

And in doing so, Deputy Presiding Officer, I would also like to give my own personal thanks to David Rees, who has taken the time to brief me and to talk to me and to meet me to outline the issues that are behind this issue. I'm very grateful to David for the way in which he's approached this matter and the way in which he's informed the Government of the views of the people of Port Talbot.

Can I first of all, Deputy Presiding Officer, in replying to the debate this afternoon, do two things? First of all, to outline the process that has led us to where we are today, but then also to outline the approach that I would like to take in the future.

The Welsh Government was approached by the Ministry of Justice as part of an exercise across England and Wales to identify sites that could be developed for a prison. We regularly engage with businesses and developers in this way, and in this case we supplied a list of 20 sites. We were clearly not a part of the decision process that selected Baglan in Port Talbot as a preferred site, as this was a UK Government-led process—

Will the Minister give way?

Of course.

I thank the Minister, but, as I said in my contribution, when there are criteria set by a developer, surely it's incumbent upon the Welsh Government to meet the criteria that the developer wants. And in this case, it didn't. I just think that needs to be addressed.

I understand the point the Member's made, and he has made that point to me in our private meetings. I'm grateful to him for repeating it this afternoon. Clearly, the measures that have been taken and the debates and discussions that have taken place do not presume a successful planning application, nor do they presume the sale of the land. No actions that have been taken by the Welsh Government to date make any presumption on the conclusion of this process.

The Ministry of Justice wrote to me late yesterday afternoon regarding the Baglan proposal and the wider prison estate in Wales. They have confirmed that the proposed facility would hold category C prisoners. The Ministry of Justice have described Cardiff and Swansea prisons as reception prisons and that they, the Ministry of Justice, anticipate that there'll be little functional overlap with the Baglan proposal.

I will be considering the Ministry of Justice's response further, but believe that we do have a responsibility to undertake an open and wide dialogue with UK Ministers regarding the wider offender management agenda and, in particular, the current proposal for Baglan. And I undertake, Deputy Presiding Officer, that I will take forward that dialogue.

So, let me turn to the approach that I would wish to take as the Cabinet Secretary in this area. David Rees, in his contribution in this debate, suggested that penal policy be devolved to Wales. I would agree with him. I would agree with him that we do need a justice policy in Wales that is a holistic policy, but isn't simply a policy for the incarceration of people in the way that Jenny Rathbone outlined. I hope that we would see justice policy as part of our overall policy for safe communities, to ensure that people who have offended are rehabilitated and able to live lives as a part of our communities across the whole of Wales.

I would like to see a prison estate that is modern, that is functional, that is able to deliver safety and security for prisoners and for the wider community; a prison policy that isn't based on simply a punitive desire for revenge, but a policy that is based on safe communities; and a holistic approach to bringing together services such as education, skills and healthcare, which are already devolved.

At the moment, the current devolution settlement does not serve Wales well. It means that our administration of justice policy is poor in comparison with England and Scotland. It does not deliver the policy that meets Wales's needs. I hope that the justice commission that the First Minister has established will begin the job of creating a structured approach to justice policy that will meet Wales's needs for the future. I hope that we will be able to continue to bring together all of the community services that already lie within our devolved responsibilities, with a justice policy that will enable us to move forward and move away from the rather sterile debates of the past.

I met with an Under-Secretary of State within the Ministry of Justice last week to begin this conversation. I will say to Members that it was a positive conversation and it was a conversation that I hope we will be able to progress. We discussed a wide-ranging agenda, including youth and female offending. I hope that we will be able, with the Ministry of Justice, to conclude an agreed way forward in the short term that will ensure that both devolved and non-devolved services are able to work together in a way that, perhaps, we have not done in the past. For the future, I hope that we will be able to have a single justice policy for Wales that will be a holistic policy, and one that will focus on the people and the individuals and the communities. 

So, let me say this in closing: the Welsh Government is committed to providing business and economic support for the people of Port Talbot and elsewhere—[Interruption.] I won't take an intervention at the moment. The points that were made by Dai Rees were well made: the United Kingdom Government has all too often turned its back on the people of that area. Electrification and the tidal lagoon are good examples of how the UK Conservative Government has turned its back on that part of our country.

In the last two years, we have offered near £1.5 million to nine companies in the area and £30 million to Tata, which will directly benefit the Port Talbot works. Communities, too, have benefited from £20 million of Welsh Government support, including an additional £11 million of Vibrant and Viable Places funds. So, we, the Welsh Government, and the people of Port Talbot need to understand what the Ministry of Justice wish to propose in the future, but we undertake, and I undertake as Cabinet Secretary, Deputy Presiding Officer, to keep Members informed of all of the discussions we have with the Ministry of Justice, on this and other matters. I give an undertaking that I will return to the Chamber to make a further statement in due course.

Thank you very much. Can I call on David Rowlands to reply to the debate? 

Yes. First of all, can I thank the Members for their contributions to the debate and the petitioners for bringing this petition forward? David Rees pointed out the appropriateness—or non-appropriateness—of the site with the flood zone and that it was designated as an enterprise zone, and job numbers are not really a measurement of what it would bring in the way of prosperity to the area. 

Suzy Davies pointed out that there were objections, agreed, to the prison, but there were also objections when the prison was due to be built in Berwyn. She pointed out that many of the concerns of the people in the Wrexham area seemed to have, at least in part, been negated over the last few months.

Bethan Jenkins spoke of the strength of the campaign, and pointed out the changes of mind of the Welsh Government and the Welsh Government's power to block the sale of the land, and reiterated David Rees's comments on the lack of rehabilitation in large prisons. I think it must be noted here the passion that both these speakers brought to this debate, and their commitment to the people of Port Talbot.

Caroline Jones took a different view, in many ways, to some of the contributors here, in that she's not, in principle, against the prison, but noted some of the physical barriers to the actual construction of the prison. She also gave a detailed description of overcrowding, particularly in Swansea, and a clear need for a new prison, and she emphasised that—

Are you taking an intervention?

—there were employment opportunities with this prison coming to Baglan.

Are you taking an intervention from Bethan Jenkins?

She also noted that it is a low-category prison, and that the ultimate decision on that is that it will, in fact, be decided by local planners.

Dai Rees pointed out that nine Members in this Chamber only voted to stop the prison in an earlier debate. He also pointed out the other matters, with regard to the Swansea bay barrage and electrification of railways, which would have been much more suitable places to build, and, of course, Bethan, I did—did I mention you, Bethan, in passing? I'm sure I did.

I just wanted to make an intervention.

Would you like an intervention? Oh, absolutely. Sorry, I didn't notice.

Well, the Minister didn't take—the Cabinet Secretary, sorry—didn't take an intervention from me, but what I wanted to try to ask him was on the fact that we're still none the wiser here today as to what the Welsh Government's view is. If you decided not to sell that land, there would be no need for a planning application. So, will the Petitions Committee consider this as part of your deliberations? Thank you very much.

Of course—we will, indeed. We will be taking all of the points made in this debate when we next consider this matter in the committee.

I would go on to say that Alun Davies, in answering some of the questions, said in particular that no action by the Government to date has committed the Government to the prison at Baglan bay, but emphasised that the Government would be continuing to engage in the process with the Ministry of Justice. He mentioned again the fact that the UK Government had not committed to Swansea bay or to electrification as far as Swansea, and he condemned them on that basis, and we could all understand why that is the case.

We will, as a committee, return to consider the petition again at a future meeting. In doing so, I hope we will be able also to consider the reaction of the petitioners to the points raised today and the answers provided. As a result, the committee is presenting this petition to the Assembly without drawing conclusions or making recommendations in any particular direction at this stage. However, we feel that this is an important debate to have, and we hope that it will provide everyone who signed the petition with further information and answers to the concerns they have held. Thank you. 

Thank you. The proposal is to note the petition. Does any Member object? No. Therefore, the motion is agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Motion agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.