The following amendments have been selected: amendment 1 in the name of Neil Hamilton, and amendment 2 in the name of Julie James. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected.

The next item is the Welsh Conservatives' debate, and I call on Andrew R.T. Davies to move the motion. Andrew R.T. Davies.

Motion NDM6631 Paul Davies

To propose that the National Assembly for Wales:

Believes that the Welsh Government’s 'Prosperity for All: Economic Action Plan' fails to provide a comprehensive strategy for delivering economic prosperity in Wales.

Motion moved.

Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. It's a pleasure to rise to move the motion on the order paper today in the name of Paul Davies, looking at, obviously, the 'Prosperity for All' economic action plan that the Welsh Government laid before the Assembly and presented to the people of Wales just before the Christmas recess. It has had a fair degree of scrutiny, this document, and it's had three previous documents before it that, obviously, successfully laid out economic policy from previous Welsh Labour Governments that sought to outline economic activity, economic opportunity and prosperity for Wales. It is fair to say that all three failed to live up to the expectations that they sought to achieve. When you look at the hard facts of gross value added, for example, in the 20 years of Labour Government in Wales, GVA has gone up by 0.5 per cent in the 20-year period. If you look at wages, for example, which are another key indicator, a Scottish worker would have started at the same level of pay as a Welsh worker in 1999; today, that same Scottish worker is taking home £49 a week more in their pay packet than a Welsh worker.

No-one wants economic inactivity, no-one wants economic failure. It is an important role of Government to work with communities and work with businesses to deliver those opportunities, but it is fair to say that it is difficult to imagine how this document will differ from the three predecessors that sought to liberate many of the communities across Wales and spread the wealth of Wales more equally around Wales so that communities do not feel left behind. As I look across the Chamber, I can see the Member for Ynys Môn in front of me, and, regrettably, Ynys Môn, for example, has the lowest GVA in the country, it does. If you come down to the south, an area I represent, the capital city of Cardiff, which has benefited from realignment of opportunities through the Cardiff Bay regeneration that's gone on, to the financial service sectors—. But if you look at Cardiff as a capital city against the other capital cities of the UK—Belfast, Edinburgh and London—Belfast, our nearest rival, if you like, on GVA measurement, has a £5,000 a head advantage over Cardiff. If you it take against Edinburgh, you're talking £7,000 a head advantage. And then if you take London, which I take is a separate economy entirely, a £10,000 to £12,000 a head advantage. Those sorts of sums, after 20 years of devolution, really shouldn't be in existence, and the Welsh Government really should be more imaginative and bolder in the way that it's putting forward its economic policies to try and make up some of that ground.

The reason for this debate today is actually to pinpoint why this document lacks so much confidence. When you do talk—and it is fair to say, since its introduction, I have had the good opportunity to speak to many businesses and many organisations the length and breadth of Wales. They too lack the confidence that this document should have ingrained in them that the Welsh Government will be able to close some of these hard, economic indicators that have existed for many years.

It could well be the fact that the entire document is not based on any significant economic intelligence because, obviously, this is a line of questioning that I have put to the First Minister as to why the Welsh Government, in developing economic policy, has not developed an economic intelligence unit to look at the input/output tables, so that you know what you're putting in and what you're going to get out from the programmes and initiatives that you put in place. Many other countries across the globe rely on that type of data, and rely on that type of understanding of economic activity, to shape the policies and shape the initiatives that have moved the indicators positively for the communities that those Governments represent. In fairness, when it comes to Scotland, for example, they have commissioned a dedicated unit at Strathclyde university to make sure that that activity informs Scottish Government policy in the field of economic development and economic opportunity.

But I do go back to the point, in listening to the previous debate, that the Cabinet Secretary touched on how he sees his vision of the regional directors that he has put in place, which this document talks of in glowing terms, as being the game changer to the delivery of economic policy here in Wales. How does he? Because when you read this document, there are no indicators of what progress there will be in GVA; there are no indicators of where wages will go over the lifetime of this document. How does he believe that the new structures will be able to give that distinctive strength that he talks of to the regions of Wales? How will the regional directors, who are obviously going to be empowered—I would hope—from the Welsh Government to drive forward Government initiatives, make an impact where their predecessors have failed in the past?

I well remember now, with 10 years under my belt in this Assembly, much of the talk around the enterprise zones that were delivered here in Wales—enterprise zones that, on the surface, seemed to promise to deliver much and have consumed much wealth from the Welsh Government: £221 million of public money; but when you actually look at their impact across Wales, have achieved significantly varying results. And in the areas where they should achieve better results, where the challenges are greater, their impact has been minimal. I notice that the document talks little about the enterprise zones and the creation or development—or continued development—of that initiative that was underpinning much of the economic development that the Welsh Government had in the last term. So, again, from a lessons learned exercise, how does this document give us the confidence that the Welsh Government will be able to have that reach around the length and breadth of Wales, that previous initiatives, such as the enterprise zones, have failed to deliver?

Also, the one thing, again, I do think that this document fails to recognise is the devolution of responsibility when it comes to economic development in England. There isn't a single mention in this document about metro mayors or city mayors in England and how that cross-border working could enhance greater opportunities the length and breadth of Wales. If you look at Bristol, for example, if you look at the mayor for the west midlands, Andy Street, if you look at, obviously, Liverpool, and if you look at Manchester—four huge economic drivers right the length and breadth of Offa's Dyke—there is a huge—in one breath—competition for any investment that might be there, but there's also—in another breath—a great opportunity for collaboration, and yet after reading this document, it doesn't mention those opportunities once in it. Not once. That, surely, is an admission, Cabinet Secretary, of what you might be able to achieve when you collaboratively work across the border that is Offa's Dyke.

I also make the point in my opening remarks about how we are going to make that difference from being, regrettably, a low-wage economy to an economy that does deliver wages that are more comparable to other parts of the United Kingdom. I've used the example of that £49 a week going into pay packets in Scotland, but I could have pulled any region of England or Northern Ireland, because, regrettably, we have the lowest take-home pay of any part of the United Kingdom. This document, again, only mentions the word 'wages' twice. It mentions the word 'wages' twice, and when it comes to taxes, which is a new lever that the Welsh Government has, it actually mentions 'taxes' once. Surely, those are major areas that any economic document should be looking at, if it is looking to improve the lives of the people of Wales.

And then the big challenge for us on job creation and job preservation, which has been debated in this Chamber, around automation, if you look in eight years' time, the projections are that 25 per cent of the jobs will be lost here in Wales because of automation—or recalibrated to new roles, if we're streetwise enough to make sure that we are keeping up with that progress. By 2035, it will be 35 per cent of jobs here in Wales that will be lost or recalibrated. I hope it will be a recalibration, not a loss. But, again, the document does not offer any route-map as to how we will work with industry and how Government policy will seek to implement change and assist business to implement that change. Surely, again, any document that has a vision for where we're going to be in the future should be addressing that head-on.

If I could ask the Cabinet Secretary in his response—it might well just be a printing oversight in here, but I do notice that, where it talks of transport infrastructure projects that will be supported by the Welsh Government on page 37, it talks very specifically about the north-east gateway on the A494, it talks about the third Menai crossing; it doesn't mention the black route, Cabinet Secretary. It just says 'M4' full stop. Given what we know about the spiralling costs associated with that project, can the Cabinet Secretary confirm that that is an oversight and that it is in fact a key part of Government policy to deliver the M4 black route—not just improvements on the M4, but the M4 black route? I'm assuming it's an oversight, but it is something that, when I was reading the document, I did notice. Despite the detailed description of other transport projects, there's a rather vague note when it comes to the M4, and I think many people would gladly wish to understand exactly how the Cabinet Secretary is handling those cost pressures within his budget.

So, it would have been good to stand here today and endorse this document, but with little or no—[Interruption.] The Cabinet Secretary for rural affairs obviously sighs. As Hefin David said earlier, the real Russell George was in the last debate. The real Andrew Davies is passionate about making sure that economic development reaches all communities in Wales, and I fully accept—I fully accept—that the Government have a mandate till 2021, and the decisions that the Government take will impact on communities the length and breadth of Wales. It would be good to stand here and have confidence that this document does make a difference from its three predecessors.

But, as I said, with little or no economic intelligence going into this document that I could see or that I can find in the research notes to it, with little or no indicators to measure progress and the direction of progress that the Welsh Government wishes to undertake, and with little or no references to, at least as I see it, the three major challenges that any economic document should undertake—which are increasing wages here in Wales; working with industry to make sure that the agenda of automation is focused on and job security is protected and we continue to create quality jobs; and above all that we work across our borders with the economic opportunities that are there with the devolved economic development opportunities that the mayors and metro mayors have in England; none of those issues are touched on in this document—how can you have confidence in the document actually being any different from its three predecessors? And that's why I call on the Chamber to support the motion that is down in the name of Paul Davies today, saying that we lack the confidence that this document will make those changes that we would all wish to see here in Wales.

I have selected the two amendments to the motion. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected. I call on Caroline Jones to move amendment 1, tabled in the name of Neil Hamilton. Caroline Jones.

Amendment 1. Neil Hamilton

Delete all and replace with:

To propose that the National Assembly for Wales: 

Believes that:

a) the Welsh Government’s Prosperity for All: Economic Action Plan will fail to make any tangible difference to economic prosperity in Wales;

b) Wales’s economic prosperity is also hindered by the UK Government’s misallocation of public spending on non-humanitarian overseas aid, green subsidies, national debt interest payments and vanity projects like HS2; and

c) whilst spending on the NHS and other public services could be increased substantially if diverted from these mistaken priorities, Wales’s relative poverty as a nation will be redressed only by a long-term economic policy based on lower taxes and more proportionate regulation of business activity.

Amendment 1 moved.

Diolch, Llywydd. I'd like to move the amendment tabled by my colleague Neil Hamilton. UKIP tabled amendment 1 to highlight the situation we find ourselves in with regard to the Welsh economy.

Both the Conservatives and Labour blame each other for the dire economic situation in Wales, when in fact they're both to blame. Labour have been in charge of Welsh economic development for nearly 20 years, but failed to improve our economic performance. The inept handling of EU structural funds saw the downfall of Wales's first First Secretary. Unfortunately, lessons weren't learnt from this and, as a result, billions of pounds were wasted and failed to improve our economic fortunes. Objective 1 funding was supposed to be a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to improve Wales's economy. It’s a damning indictment of successive Welsh Labour Governments, propped up by other governments, that Wales continued to qualify for EU funding.

Labour’s first economic strategy promised to close the GDP gap with the rest of the UK. They even set a target of 90 per cent of UK GDP by 2010. Not only did we not achieve that growth, our economy went backwards. The target became an aspiration and became history when it was quietly dropped.

Various Labour Ministers now blame the Tory UK Government for Wales's poverty, but during the first decade of this Assembly we had a Labour Government and a Chancellor who believed in massive borrowing and spending, and in that time our economy went backwards.

We do now have a Tory UK Government who have massively curbed public spending because of the fiscal mess left behind by Gordon Brown. However, they are also partially responsible for the mess we find ourselves in. Since 2010, the UK Government have saddled our economy with more debt. Yes—debt used to fund—

She kept quiet about this when she was in our party.

She was, she was. That's why she left.

Debt used to fund vanity projects like HS2, which will cost the UK taxpayer over £70 billion and has been monumentally mismanaged—the row surrounding outgoing staff being overpaid by nearly £2 million just the latest in a catalogue of waste, which has seen the costs more than double, and some reports suggest it could be triple the initial costs by the time it's completed. Debt used to fund an out-of-control overseas aid budget, which now stands at over £12 billion.

Says UKIP.

No, no, no. This is fact. This is fact. This fact.

In the last few days we learnt of a project—[Interruption.] No. We learnt of a project that is supposed to deliver wells, water pumps and irrigation across southern Africa, yet nearly 70 per cent of that funding did not go to the people it was supposed to reach. It went on consultancy fees, with staff being paid £600 per day.

How can we justify a foreign aid budget where the top beneficiary, Pakistan, spends over £2 billion a year on nuclear weapons, and the tenth largest beneficiary, India, spends £1 billion on a space programme? Come on. Let's get it right. We must use overseas aid to benefit the people who really need this aid, and it's not getting there.

Will the Member give way?

Yes, I will, David.

I'm unsure whether you're arguing for the aid budget to be used in a different way or whether you want to cut the aid budget. Because your colleague sat next to you often tells us how you'd like that part of the UK's budget to be cut dramatically.

Yes, but it's been in the paper, David, and on the news, that your party also wants to cut it.

No, we don't.

The UK Government must stop wasting the taxes of hard-working taxpayers and instead concentrate on ensuring that large multinationals pay their fair share. They should scrap HS2 and invest in infrastructure projects that truly benefit the UK, such as ultrafast broadband and universal mobile coverage.

The Welsh Government need to learn from past mistakes. They need to deliver a long-term economic policy designed around a low-tax economy and more proportionate business regulation, rather than pursuing an anti-business agenda. Every person in Wales and, indeed, the UK has a basic right and a human right to have a roof over their head and this is not the case and this is what I will fight to change.

Both Governments must work together for the sake and benefit of Wales rather than continue to blame each other and do nothing about it. You are both to blame and you both have the tools to fix our economy, and it's time you put the people of Wales before party politics.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Transport to move formally amendment 2, tabled in the name of Julie James.

Amendment 2. Julie James

Delete all and replace with:

To propose that the National Assembly for Wales:

1. Recognises the challenges facing the Welsh economy over the coming decade including productivity, automation and decarbonisation.

2. Notes the recently published Economic Action Plan and the ambition to stimulate inclusive growth across Wales through a whole government approach to economic development.

3. Notes the proposal to develop a new economic contract and ensure public investment drives a social purpose by increasing the availability of fair work, reducing carbon emissions and supporting a competitive environment for Welsh business.

4. Notes the calls to action contained in the plan designed to encourage new ideas and new partnerships between industry, government, education, trade unions and partners that can stimulate inclusive economic growth.

5. Calls on the UK Government to ensure the UK industrial strategy supports investment across the all parts of the United Kingdom.

Amendment 2 moved.

Formally.

Since coming into power in 1999, this Welsh Labour Government have brought forward a trilogy of three major economic strategies, and here we see another. Twenty years ago, weekly wages in Wales and Scotland were on par. Today, residents in Scotland earn £49 per week more. Twenty years ago, Wales was at the very bottom of the GVA league table for the United Kingdom's home nations. Today, it is still there. We have the lowest median gross weekly earnings in the whole of the UK, the joint-lowest growth rate of gross disposable household income per capita, and regional inequality remains stark across Wales. Incredible.

There are incredible disparities in terms of GVA per capita—a difference of £9,372 between Ynys Môn in north Wales and Cardiff and the Vale in south Wales. So, it's quite often, isn't it, that my constituents ask me, 'Janet, why are there these inequalities?', 'Janet, why does all the money stay in south Wales?', and it is a fact that we, as north Wales Members, have to shout louder and fight harder.

But we are prepared to challenge this Welsh Labour Government for the same economic benefits for our equally deserving businesses and residents in north Wales. It is little wonder that the 'Prosperity for All' economic action plan is viewed with scepticism by many. Maybe one should question this Government's enthusiasm for writing plans instead of supporting meaningful and tangible projects, such as the incredible work by so many on the north Wales growth deal. But, again, this does need the Welsh Government to put their hands in their pockets and ensure their support so that this just does not end up as another deal in document only, confined to the dusty shelves of Cardiff Bay.

The recent budget has undermined the action plan by cutting funding for business innovation by £1.2 million, innovation centres of research and development by £1.7 million, and the delivery of ICT infrastructure by over £1 million. To me, that is a complete contradiction of terms as regards ambition. Hardly a mention of the Development Bank of Wales. Instead, over £1.7 million now removed from its operating grant next year. Enterprise zones receiving over £221 million of public funding, in some areas equating to just one job created at a cost to the taxpayer for that job of around £250,000. It's scandalous. Annual spend on enterprise zones has more than quadrupled in three years, yet statistics released only today by the Office for National Statistics show that unemployment in Wales has risen by 0.8 per cent—the highest of all UK nations.

Meanwhile, our hard-working business owners face ever-rising business rates; one of my constituents now facing an increase of almost 2,000 per cent, fast making Wales the most expensive place in Britain to run a business—a 51.4p multiplier meaning businesses will have to pay over half of their annual estimated rent in rates, whilst those in Scotland and England will pay just 48p in the pound.

How wrong, then, for the Welsh Labour Government to even hint, let alone suggest proposals to introduce a tourism tax that has already succeeded in denting much confidence in our Welsh tourism sector. The Wales Tourism Alliance, the British Hospitality Association, FSB Wales, North Wales Tourism—just some of the people that have opposed this tourism tax, along with other countless businesses. Llywydd, the economy of Wales is vitally dependent on tourism, contributing £8.7 million annually and supporting 242,000 jobs. Please, Cabinet Secretary, will you put an end to this nonsensical proposal and confirm that you have no intentions whatsoever to pursue such a devastating tax for the economic health of Wales? Our businesses and our residents are relying on you to put this to bed once and for all. Let's have prosperity across Wales and for our tourism sector. 

In the absence of my colleague and the Plaid Cymru spokesperson on the economy, it's my pleasure to participate in this important debate and to make a few comments.

Without doubt, there are some elements of the strategy that we would welcome: a new emphasis on the foundation economy, decarbonisation and the decision to encourage businesses to be more responsible if they are to receive Government support. The strategy also refers to automation and the challenges that automation can pose for our economy. Automation has the potential to devolve jobs in important sectors to us in Wales, such as manufacturing and processing, but also retail, which is the largest sector in Wales in terms of the size of the workforce.

For our economy to grow and develop, we must understand what our unique, competitive advantages are as a nation. Wearing my hat as a health spokesperson, with a population that is growing older more swiftly than the rest of the UK, Wales is strongly positioned to innovate in that area, in promoting more use of technology, for example, in improving the care available. But I'm not here as health spokesperson today. In reading the strategy, you will see that there is a failure here to note where and how to make the most of the unique opportunities available to us as a nation. It feels somehow like a document that provides a commentary rather than a comprehensive strategy that explains how the Government intends to overturn our economic decline.

For an economic strategy to work, we need strong institutions to implement that strategy. When I was Plaid Cymru's spokesperson on the economy before the last election, I had an opportunity to outline clearly our vision and the steps that we would wish to see taken to build the Welsh economy. Having an economic development agency for Wales was a central part of the vision that I was espousing at that time, and at arm's-length, I think, is the best place to create that capacity and also to focus the expertise required to draw up and implement such a strategy. 

After the election, and specifically following the vote on our membership of the European Union, we called for a regional focus on the challenge of developing the economy in order to focus on ways and means of developing the economies of areas of Wales that quite simply have been left behind and know that they have been left behind. The Government strategy does commit to a model of economic development based regionally, and in order to achieve that, the Government wishes to develop three main regional offices to deal with this. Other than that, there is no talk of the other things that are required; the national institutions that would, in partnership, deliver the objectives of the strategy. I think the institutional hinterland that exists in Wales—the development bank is an exception perhaps—does mean that we as a nation aren't striking the right chord. Until this Government creates the kinds of economic institutions that other nations have—development agencies, promotion agencies, trade and investment, a national innovative body—as Plaid Cymru has been calling for, no strategy has any hope of delivering its objectives.

I will close if I may by making a few comments that would have been just as relevant to the previous debate this afternoon, on this uncompromising focus by the Conservatives and Labour on merging the regions of Wales with the regions of England. Across the globe, cross-border economic relations are very important, and that is true of Wales between the north-east of Wales and the north-west of England, and likewise in the south-east of Wales and the south-west of England, but don't be misled—

Will you give way on that point?

With permission from the Presiding Officer, yes.

Very briefly, I just think that was a very cheap shot and you're better than that. No-one is talking about merging economic Wales with economic regions of England; this is about closer co-operation, which, you know in your heart of hearts, is quite different.

The point I make is this: close co-operation is very, very important. You can look throughout the world at the importance of cross-border co-operation, but let's remember what the focus is here, and be realistic about the fact that it's not the interests of Wales that's at the heart of some of these developments, like those trumpeted by Alun Cairns this week. The fact, I think, that it's called a 'western powerhouse' tells me that that is something that is being thought up from a British perspective, because to me, Bristol is to the east, and I go further than to say 'British perspective', but an English perspective. And the same thing can be said for the Northern Powerhouse—it's the north of England powerhouse, just as Mark Isherwood said. Just ask somebody from Scotland what they make of the term 'Northern Powerhouse' and whether they think that is from a British context.

So, let's have a strategy that looks at the Welsh economy as a whole. Yes, looking for new partnerships, but looking at ensuring that no part of the Welsh economy is left untouched.

Well, it's a slim document. Andrew R. T. Davies has already given us a pretty good exposition of what could have gone in there, but it's still taken until page 4 for Welsh Government to admit that this strategy represents a significant change. I have to ask, has it really taken 19 years to reach the conclusion that significant change is necessary? 

Welsh Conservatives have been asking you to change tack for literally decades now, and for good reason: the lowest wages in the UK, the lowest GVA in the UK, the lowest growth in the UK, the lowest disposable income in the UK, the lowest investment in the UK, and the poorest PISA results in the UK, as well as some uncomfortable statistics around regional inequality within Wales, business start-ups and so on that I'm sure we’ll hear more about in this debate. 

And, I’m sure that Labour Members and even you, Cabinet Secretary, will come back and point to all the spending that you’ve done and have a go at the UK Government for all the cuts and Barnett reform. But, can I just head you off at the pass there? You’ve had significantly higher sums from the European Union than any other part of the UK during this period. Those UK Government cuts have applied across the UK, not just in Wales, and while we do agree that Barnett isn’t right, you’ve benefited from a funding floor courtesy of the Conservatives and still have higher per capita income via Barnett than England does. You cannot persuasively use those arguments to explain why Wales’s performance compares so badly with other parts of the UK when you have had the benefit of direct advantage or, at least, no greater disadvantage than other nations and regions.

So, let’s have a look at the significant change that you’re promising. You say that, at the heart of this strategy, is a recognition that public services and voluntary partners want to work together towards common objectives.  Well, I’m absolutely not going to argue against this principle, as any strategy, economic or otherwise, should capture talent and ideas from all sources. That is why I want your assurance that 'public services and voluntary partners' is not Welsh Government code for public sector and third sector only. There’s a growing entrenchment in this Government against cross-sector provision of public services and I think that is a mistake. Historic bad private finance initiative and the high-profile idiocy as we’ve seen with Carillion, is not indicative of a wholesale reckless and rapacious private sector in this nation of SMEs. And, in this nation of SMEs, no economic strategy is going to succeed if we fear or demonise our private sector. 

We’ve had plenty of high-level idiocy in the public sector over the years, whether it’s bendy buses in Swansea or chucking money down the drain because of delays to M4 improvements, but no-one’s suggesting turning our backs on the public sector. If anything, Cabinet Secretary, what is needed is a more confident relationship with the private sector with some serious negotiating expertise. We should never worry that it’s Snow White around the table with Darth Vader. And you know that we support taking calculated risks when it comes to investing taxpayers’ money and we accept that some investment will fail, but our constituents—shareholders in Wales plc, if you like—will want you to protect their stake, but they won’t thank you for limiting your options for improving their lives.

They won’t thank you for floating ideas that compromise growth either. The document raises tax- raising and varying powers. We've mentioned business rates and the visitor bed tax. You know the Welsh Conservative and the industry’s position on the latter. 

Will you take an intervention?

Yes, very quickly, then.

In terms of economic policy, a number of us were this morning at the launch of the report from the airport, which was taken into public ownership, which is showing really incredible performance figures but, importantly, supporting thousands of jobs. Does the Welsh Conservative party still believe it was a mistake for the Welsh Government to take that airport into public ownership?  

Well, what about private enterprise? There's more than one option. That's the point I'm making here. What I'm seeing in this Government is that one option is the only way at the moment. 

I just wanted to finish off briefly on the tourism tax because, actually, that's a bed tax, a visitor bed tax. And I don't think it's—. If you're attempting to attract business to Wales, I don't think your primary message should be, 'Oh great, we can get an extra fiver out of you while we're talking.' Can you at least today tell us when the Cabinet's going to be making a decision on the tax proposals it's taking forward, and how that decision is reached? I think that would bring some certainty to this. 

Janet Finch-Saunders has already covered the point that I wanted to make on business rates. I think you're fooling yourselves if you think businesses thought that your offer was a tax cut, and I really hope, just for constituents' sake, that you'll reconsider the position of the multiplier and how all Welsh businesses are likely to lose out on that. 

I do want to finish on a point of agreement, though. Economic growth isn't an end in itself, but neither is consequent well-being a passively received consequence of economic growth. Good jobs, well-funded public services, safe neighbourhoods, faith in our care system—these all require a confident and capable citizenry empowered through education, freedom and encouragement for individuals to be primary actors in their collective future, connecting participation in economic growth with the benefits of that. Our people should be our greatest asset—they’ll bring Wales great returns. Use the economic strategy to invest in emboldening civil society, because social capital also pays impressive dividends. Thank you. 

I'd like to share the very grave disappointment that's been expressed in this Chamber today that we've never had a majority Labour Government in Wales. I think that partly explains some of the comments that have come from UKIP and the Conservatives, in particular. And I can see Russell George didn't contribute—I don't whether he is planning to in this debate—

I am. 

Oh, there we are. Well, we'll look to see if he's going to play good cop, but certainly we had the bad cop to start, which took the economic plan, which I think is a good economic plan, and dismissed it in the motion in one sentence. And I think an analysis that—. To be fair to Suzy Davies, she's engaged in a very detailed and in-depth—probably not my ideological position, but certainly a detailed and in-depth analysis of the economic plan that does it justice. I don't think the motion does, which is why I'll take pleasure in voting against that motion today. 

And also it's very rich of the Tory Government in Westminster, which has turned down the Great Western main line electrification, devolution of air passenger duty, and the Swansea bay tidal lagoon's yet to be agreed—. This Government in the UK could be doing so much for the Welsh economy and is failing to do so, and that perhaps could have been recognised in their motion too. And then you get the criticisms of UKIP. You know, I'm so far from UKIP that it's a very great distance that can never be bridged, but UKIP themselves are talking about managing the economy when they can barely manage their own group and as their party collapses. [Interruption.] You wonder where does—[Interruption.]—where does—[Interruption.]—where does the ideology actually sit within UKIP, which explains the way the party is collapsing. 

Labour backbenchers have also therefore been acting quite constructively, but as constructive and critical friends to this Government. And what we've asked the Government to do is include in the economic strategy things that we wanted to see, and one of those things has been the foundational economy, and Rhun ap Iorwerth recognised that in the things that he said, and welcomed those  aspects, and it's pleasing to see that the foundational economy is recognised in it. Russell George said to me the other day, 'You always go on about business; you should be in the Conservative party', but actually—at the end of this speech, you won't want me—I'd say that the support of business, small business, small business that exists in our Valleys communities, and self-employment is actually all about the ownership of the means of production. And, in that sense, I'd say small business is a socialist construct and is recognised in this economic plan.

Thank you, Hefin, I'm grateful for that. Can you not see the fundamental flaw in this document, that, if you read it, there is no road map to say where we will be at the end of this process? In my opening remarks, I talked of where are we going to be on wages, where are we going to be on GVA—there are no parameters to what we're working to, so how can you say that this document can command confidence when there is no clear route for where we will be in five or 10 years' time?

I'd have more respect for that argument if it had been reflected in the motion that was put before this Chamber, rather than simply dismissing it in order to put a good line out on Twitter. But it's bizarre that those criticisms that you're making of this economic plan are so strong when the previous debate on the city deal was so constructive. I don't understand, because these things go hand in hand, and the only way that city deal is going to be effective is if this economic plan works hand in hand with it, and I think it certainly will.

Alongside that, we've got the south Wales metro, which will form part of it. We've got the city deal, and we've got the Valleys action plan. One of the things I would say regarding the foundational economy aspect, and it's a minor criticism, which I've raised with the Cabinet Secretary in committee, is that there are four foundational sectors in the economic action plan, but there are seven foundational sectors in the Valleys delivery report. And I think there needs—. The Cabinet Secretary may wish to clarify how those things will work together, and maybe also that may go some way, I think, to addressing the Conservatives' concerns, and maybe even persuade them, ultimately, to vote against their own very silly motion.

I'm grateful for the opportunity to speak in this debate, and I have to say I'm a little bit disappointed with some of the contributions so far. I was very surprised to hear Rhun ap Iorwerth, in his criticism of the Welsh Government, not reflect on the fact that, for four years in the past decade, we had an economy Minister who was a Plaid Cymru Deputy First Minister, and, during his period in office, we suffered the worst economic decline in the whole history of the Assembly.

The figures don't bear that up, and I'll remind you that, in those years, Wales took some of the steps that the UK Government failed to take to stand up to the worst problems caused by the financial downturn.

Sorry, I gave way to accept an apology, but clearly didn't get it. I have to say I'm also very disappointed that the Welsh Government doesn't seem to understand that it's businesses that create the wealth, which pay the taxes and pay the members of the public, which then pay for public services. So, you've obviously got to have a business base, both small, medium and large businesses, Hefin—not just small businesses—all of which do good for society. 

Now, one important aspect of business in Wales, which has been referred to in this debate, is the importance of the tourism industry, and it's particularly important in north Wales, as the Cabinet Secretary will know, because of his own constituency interests. The tourism industry has been absolutely spooked by this suggestion that there could be a tax on accommodation across Wales at a time when there are no such taxes elsewhere in the UK, and at a time when tourism businesses are already paying corporation tax, VAT, employers national insurance, and a whole host of other taxes such as business rates. That has spooked many of those businesses. Many of them in my own constituency are now holding back on making investment in their businesses. [Interruption.] It's not rubbish; I'll send you the e-mails. I'll send you the e-mails, Cabinet Secretary. People are holding back on investing in their businesses because they have no idea what's going to come next from the Welsh Government. 'Why are they out to get us?', they say. You've spooked them. You've spooked them, and I suspect very much that your Cabinet Secretary agrees with my point of view. So, when you finally end up ditching that ridiculous proposal, you'll hear lots of cheers on these benches, because it needs to be consigned to the rubbish bin as soon as possible.

And we all know the importance of infrastructure in order to create prosperity, the importance of decent access to broadband, which still many businesses and many homes do not have, particularly in north Wales and particularly in rural parts of Wales. We all know the importance of a decent transport infrastructure—it was referred to in the last debate—so that we can bleed some of the prosperity from those areas of the country that are doing very well, whether they be over the border in England, Rhun, or whether they be within Wales and we need to bleed that prosperity out. But I tell you what: I'm not for closing a slate curtain across our border, trying to ignore the fact that many people cross that border—[Interruption.] I'm not accusing the Welsh Government of wanting this; I'm accusing Rhun ap Iorwerth of wanting this. This is what he was referring to. The reality is that there are strong economic links between the north-west of England and north Wales, and between the Birmingham area and the Shropshire area and mid Wales, and between south Wales and England in terms of Bristol and the wider geographic area around there. Why can't you recognise that that gives us opportunities? You're willing to do business with countries many miles away and yet the country that's the biggest opportunity for our Welsh businesses is just over the border and you don't want to connect with it.

Which part of 'those relationships across the border are vital' did you not understand?

Well, I think it's very clear from your contribution that you don't like the fact that there's collaboration and discussion going on with other parts of the United Kingdom, particularly England, in terms of trying to create prosperity within Wales. Now, I welcome the fact—[Interruption.] I welcome the fact that the Cabinet Secretary has made his position quite clear. He wants connections with areas in England that will serve the interests of the people of Wales in terms of boosting our prosperity. I welcome that and I back you on that as a Cabinet Secretary because I believe that that's the right way forward. But what I am concerned about is that we haven't got our transport infrastructure right, we haven't got our broadband infrastructure right. I'm very concerned about the state of the A55, I'm very concerned about the disparity in terms of the investment in the south versus the investment in the north. One clear example of that is the south Wales metro, something that I welcome and we support—£2 billion-worth of expenditure, and yet the amount that you've allocated for the north-east Wales metro, £50 million. Fifty million pounds versus two thousand million pounds. What could be a bigger contrast than that? We need some investment.

One final point, if I may, Llywydd, on Cardiff Airport, which was referred to earlier on. I welcome the fact that Cardiff Airport is eventually going to lift itself into making profits rather than losses for the taxpayer. When Cardiff Airport was purchased for £52 million, in terms of the overall investment, that was predicated on that business making a profit much earlier than it's going to make a profit. And, actually, if you looked at the forecasts that were provided to the Public Accounts Committee during our inquiry— 

Will you take an intervention?

—it was quite clear that they ought to be having around 1.75 million passengers each year at this point, when the reality is that they are down at 1.4-odd million. Okay? So that's quite a significant difference. I welcome some of the change that's taken place at Cardiff Airport. I support that airport and want it to thrive for the sake of the Welsh economy. But we must face facts that the airport valuation was based on an entirely different level of performance than we're currently seeing.

Do you still—

Mick, I'm calling you to speak. Mick Antoniw.

Thank you. Llywydd—[Interruption.] Llywydd, I intend to rise above the cheap, shouty, banter of the opposition. I have now the high—[Interruption.] I have now the high moral ground and I intend to keep it.

I'd like—[Interruption.] I'd like to talk about what is actually happening on the ground because many of the matters raised in this document I believe are things that we've been working on for the past couple of years in Pontypridd and the Taff Ely area, and in Rhondda Cynon Taf. I hope, unlike the banter that we've heard, to actually provide a few bits of data and a few statistics on this as well. Because I think there is an exciting partnership that's occurred between a socialist Labour-controlled council and with a socialist Labour Government delivering a socialist Labour approach to policy, to economic regeneration and developing prosperity.

The investment and partnership of Rhondda Cynon Taf with the Welsh Government I think is going to be one of the models of success that we should look at. The devolution of Transport for Wales to the Taff Ely area is already having significant economic and regenerative impacts. I think that's an important model. The fact that, as part of that and the franchise, there's potential development of maintenance units in Taff's Well, and the apprenticeship programme, as a result of Welsh Government investment in Coleg y Cymoedd, I think, is very significant and really exciting. 

Can I say also—? In terms of education and skills and training and aspiration, by 2020, with the twenty-first century schools project, Rhondda Cynon Taf will, over that 10-year period, have invested around £0.5 billion in new schools, modernising schools and new educational infrastructure. It is the most exciting and the biggest development for educational capacity and facilities, I believe, in generations.

Since 2012, there are now 2,017 more businesses in my constituency, a 53 per cent increase in the number. It's a former mining area, an area hit by all the problems of industrialisation and then deindustrialisation, and yet one of the highest areas of business growth. Gross pay in my constituency increased by 10 per cent compared with a 5 per cent average at UK level. GVA is still an issue, it is lower than the UK average, but it increased by 21 per cent compared to 17 per cent for the rest of the UK. 

Unemployment for those aged 16 plus has fallen by 2.6 per cent in the past year and 5.1 per cent in the last five years. There are many significant challenges in the Taff Ely, Rhondda Cynon Taf and Pontypridd area, but the actual partnership with Welsh Government, the partnership of investment in decentralisation of services and using that as a target for regeneration, the development around the metro, the educational development, is transforming that community. I think the optimism is now beginning to appear there.

Can I say—? Perhaps on the down side, of course, one of the big challenges—and we know there's been a lot about that in the media recently—is, across the whole of the UK, the issue of social mobility. We have to recognise that we can do many things within our devolved responsibilities and the resources we have, but we cannot isolate ourselves or extricate ourselves fully from the mega-economic and the macroeconomic levers that the UK Government has.

So, can I say—? When so much was expected from the Social Mobility Commission, a commission that had commended and recognised the progress that was being made in Wales in terms of child poverty, that talked about the leaking bucket of welfare cuts and the impact that had, when you see the entire commission resigning because it has no confidence that the UK Government has any real interest in social mobility, when you have someone saying—the chairman and the Conservative vice-chairman—basically criticising the UK Government for indecision, dysfunction and a lack of leadership, and when you have in the resignation letter of Alan Milburn, the chairman appointed by the Conservatives to head that commission, where he says,

'I do not doubt your personal belief in social justice, but I see little evidence of that being translated into meaningful action', that is the backdrop against which we work to regenerate and develop prosperity within Wales— against a backdrop of a Government that is so committed to austerity that it has resulted in the UK now having the second from bottom economic growth in the whole of the European area and the growth of unsecured debt for the whole of the UK to £392.8 billion. That is the economic backdrop against which we are working—[Interruption.] I apologise, I would have—

You are out of time. 

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Transport, Ken Skates.

Diolch, Llywydd. It's a pleasure to respond to Members in this debate today and I'd like to thank everybody for their contribution. I'd particularly like to thank Mick Antoniw for occupying the moral summit and for taking some of the heat out of what has been a lively debate and drawing attention to some of the realities that many people in our communities face.

Before I address some of the specific points raised by Members, I'd just like to correct some of the history lessons that one or two Members have attempted to give. I'll do so by highlighting some of the data that is available to all Members—data relating to the period since devolution. Of course, many point back to the 1980s and the 1990s as though it was a glorious past for Wales. In my memory, the 1980s and the 1990s were a deeply grim period. Since then, since devolution, Wales has had the fourth highest increase in GVA per head compared to the 12 UK countries and English regions. In addition, since devolution, we've seen the unemployment rate in Wales decrease more quickly than the UK average. It's decreased by 3 per cent in that period compared to 1.7 per cent across the UK. During that—

Will you give way?

I shall in a moment. During that period, the employment rate in Wales has increased more quickly than in the UK, since devolution again: 6.5 per cent up compared to 3.1 per cent across the UK as a whole. The economic inactivity rate since devolution has fallen more quickly in Wales than the UK as a whole: down 4.5 per cent compared to 1.9 per cent across the UK. In terms of workforce jobs, we've seen an increase that is more rapid in Wales than in the UK as a whole since devolution: 21.5 per cent compared to 19.1 per cent. We've got 100,000 businesses, a record number. We've seen research and development spending by enterprises rise by 5 per cent in real terms, which is higher than the UK average of 2 per cent. All of these statistics show that we are on the right path, and it must be borne in mind as well that, during the period of devolution, we have seen some of the most cruel welfare reforms, particularly for people who are in work, the introduction of universal credit and a prolonged period of austerity that the Conservatives, I am afraid, still refuse to apologise for. I now give way. 

Thank you very much indeed. On the day that new figures show that joblessness across the UK has fallen, but risen in Wales, despite unemployment across the UK being at four-decade low, are you not ashamed that, compared with a year ago, Wales is the only part of the UK where unemployment has gone up?

I think the Member should look at the statistics, again, that I've just outlined and also the fact that the employment rate in Wales now stands at 72.7 per cent. That is 0.2 per cent up on the quarter and 0.3 per cent up on the year. I'm sure that the Conservatives in Westminster would wish to claim success each month when the statistics show that there are improvements, but today I noticed that the Secretary of State for Wales has remained quite silent on this issue, perhaps that same silence that we've heard over the Swansea bay tidal lagoon and air passenger duty as well.

Now, in common with other developed economies, we face a number of issues here in Wales, a number of issues that have informed our economic action plan. They include the challenges and opportunities of the fourth industrial revolution—the economic and environmental imperative to decarbonise, an ageing population, the changing nature of work in which wages have stagnated and insecurity is growing. These are compounded by the challenge of leaving the European Union. As a Welsh Government, we cannot and we will not stand idly by and leave our communities and our economy to flounder in the face of what is ahead of us. The threats we face require an approach that is focused on the future but that also addresses the needs of today—action for the short, medium and long term.

Reflecting the learning provided by international organisations like the OECD and the experience of successful economies like Canada, the action plan sets out an approach to inclusive growth that, yes, aims to raise growth in the aggregate but that also recognises that addressing individual wealth and well-being contributes to growth through raising productivity and competitiveness. The role of fairness, Llywydd, in supporting growth is clearly articulated in the economic contract. This drives the principle of public investment with a social purpose by seeking to increase the availability of fair work, reduce carbon emissions and support a competitive environment for businesses. In return, we will simplify finance to business and deliver a competitive wider offer.

Now, a key part of this is our response to a call from business and others for greater simplicity, which we are addressing through the creation of an economy futures fund. The fund will align with the financial support we provide through our calls to action, and these are designed to prepare businesses and the economy for the future, designed to address the productivity gap, and designed to drive up wages and standards of living. The economic contract, our calls to action and our economy futures fund—[Interruption.] I will shortly. And our economy futures fund will dovetail to change the way in which we approach, assess and monitor the provision of our direct financial support to business, and at the beginning of the new financial year we'll have that contract, we'll have the calls to action, and we'll have the fund in place.

But let's be clear: meeting the economic challenges and opportunities that we face is not just about what we do in Wales. The UK Government, I believe, through its macroeconomic powers, its approach to exiting the EU and through welfare policy is a significant influence indeed.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary. The document, as I said to Hefin David in my intervention to him, doesn't offer any scope to understand where wages will be in the future here in Wales, and does not offer us any scope to understand how these policies will drive GVA, which—I made the point—has only gone up 0.5 per cent over the last 20 years. How can anyone have confidence when you're not even giving us parameters that the Government is working to? Give us some numbers to work to so that we can then say either 'success' or 'fail'.

First of all, I've been very clear in conveying the national well-being indicators as a consistent approach for us to adopt across Government. But I've said on numerous occasions as well that setting targets can lead to perverse incentives, and can consequently lead to uneven economic growth. Setting targets for employment, for example, where you don't recognise the inequalities across regions, can lead us to create jobs where there is already a very high level of employment. Instead, what we are doing is addressing regional inequality by applying a new regional approach and by applying an economic contract that seeks to drive up their work—that seeks to drive up the security of work. These are issues that I think have stemmed from wide-ranging engagement with the business community, but also with people in the trade union movement who represent tens of thousands of people who wish to see improvements in standards of employment.

I'm going to address some of the specific points that Members raised, beginning first of all with the question of cross-border working. The leader of the Conservatives said that we do not mention this once. In fact, it's mentioned twice on page 23 alone. Why do I point to page 23? That's because we also talk about a certain Swansea bay tidal lagoon on that page, which is something that the UK Government remain silent on. On that page, we state:

'In the North and in Mid and South West Wales we will be able to use the new approach to strengthen and evolve important arrangements for cross border economic development and transport planning.'

Now, Darren Millar, in his contribution, rightly pointed out that cross-border collaboration is vital in terms of transport and planning and economic development, and for our part, in north Wales and along the border, we've already announced that we are committing to relieving congestion on the A494. We're investing heavily in the A55. We're going to relieve the pinch point that is the Halton roundabout on the A5. We're also going to be investing heavily in Shotton and Wrexham railway stations. We would wish to see the UK Government meet our investments by investing in infrastructure on the English side of the border at Chester, on the M56 at Helsby, and, crucially, on the A5 in the Shrewsbury area. These are huge problems that must be addressed.

Llywydd, as I reach the end of my contribution, Members will no doubt be aware of the UK industrial strategy, and I would wish to say that the UK Government needs to back up the warm words about redistribution in that strategy with investment across the whole of the UK, including here in Wales.

I call on Russell George to reply to the debate—Russell George.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. The real Andrew R.T. Davies has only left me with three minutes to close this debate, so I won't be able to namecheck all who took part, but I would like to thank all Members who have taken part in the debate this afternoon. I hope I can also reassure Hefin David that I will be the real and reasonable Russell George that he mentioned in the last debate, and I think the real Hefin David is a Conservative as well. I have to say that. 

But I think we all share the same aims here, in this Chamber: we want to see a prosperous Wales in the future, but as Andrew R.T. Davies pointed out in his opening remarks, the view is that the Welsh Government has no road map, of course, for taking and driving forward the long-term economic development across Wales. Now, the Welsh Government's latest economic strategy contains plenty of words—17,000 in total. I recently mentioned I'd taken this as my Christmas reading over the Christmas period. What it does fail to do is bring forward ambition. That's what this document fails to do. One thing that is absolutely crucial—what it does do: it doesn't give any targets. That's the job of an opposition party, and Labour backbenchers: to provide scrutiny to the Government, and it's difficult to do that if there are no targets in the document. So, in short, I think it fails to provide a comprehensive strategy for delivering economic prosperity across Wales.

Of course, Andrew R.T. Davies also, in his opening remarks, talked about GVA. We're at the bottom of the league table when it comes to weekly earnings, and we're at the bottom of the league table when it comes to regional inequality.

Now, if I come to UKIP's contribution and amendments, I'd say some of UKIP's amendments I can agree with. Your amendments were better than your contribution, I have to say. Caroline Jones spoke about the long-term economic strategy, and I'm pleased to say that that's exactly what the UK Government has done through the publication of its industrial strategy. Caroline Jones also talked about growing the economy of Wales. To grow the economy of Wales—you do that by backing the high speed 2 line, which actually grows the economy of north and mid Wales. I think that's important.

Janet Finch-Saunders and Darren Millar gave outstanding contributions. Darren got better and better, and as he got better and better he got redder and redder, but that was because of his frustrations with the tourism tax. Janet Finch-Saunders pointed out a list of organisations that are calling on the Government to take the tourism tax off the table. So, I would say: please, Government, take that off the table, and that will, of course, allow the economy to grow.

When it comes to this document here, there are plenty of warm words in it—17,000 warm words—but the document makes—. The Cabinet Secretary talked about things being left out. One thing he's left out in this document is any mention of enterprise zones and attracting foreign direct investment into Wales. Perhaps that is an admission about the complete lack of success that these measures have had despite the hundreds of millions of pounds that have been put into these projects over the last 20 years.

Presiding Officer, I think I'm about over time but can I just suggest that the Welsh Government devotes the same amount of time as the UK Government does to the industrial strategy to lay the foundations for improved living standards, economic growth and a more prosperous and equal Wales? I commend our motion to the Assembly.

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

Voting deferred until voting time.