Now, everyone understands that the situation emerges from the financial settlement that local authorities receive from the Welsh Government, and that the Welsh Government's settlement derives from the settlement from the Westminster Government. But now, of course, the situation has reached a point where the impact on the profession and the pupils alike will be so detrimental that we must consider it to be critical. We must therefore raise our voice against these ongoing cuts, and we must see what we can do to work together more effectively to reduce these detrimental effects on our schools.

So, Plaid Cymru’s motion essentially calls for three things. The time has come for us to bring together all the key stakeholders in the education system in Wales to consider what options there are to, once again, review the way in which schools in Wales are funded. I say that because the second point in the motion, namely that the financial landscape for schools in Wales, as it currently stands, is very complex, multilayered and bureaucratic, and is inconsistent across Wales too. As a result, that isn’t in keeping with a system that is transparent, where one can ensure accountability and hold people to account. I will expand on that a little.

I’ve raised in the past the way in which the Government funds the education system and how the funding reaches schools in many different ways, but mainly through the local authorities, of course. Most of the funding passes through the revenue support grant, the RSG, and some, of course, is provided in grant form for specific purposes, which has been ring-fenced, very often. The Government also provides some funding for the education consortia. Some funding is provided more directly to schools through the grants and other programmes. Then, sixth-form funding happens through a different system again, and I think we start to see how confused and confusing that landscape can be. And then add to that, of course, the fact that you have 22 local authorities, 22 funding formulas, which are different in all counties, and the situation is exacerbated.

There are also inconsistencies to be seen in the Welsh Government’s approach to the way in which funding is targeted to improve educational outcomes. This is something that the education committee has referred to and highlighted on a number of occasions. We recall the way in which the Government scrapped the education improvement grant for learners who are Gypsy, Roma and Travellers, and those from ethnic minorities, and it was mainstreamed into the RSG, claiming that that wasn’t going to lead to the loss of the educational outcomes that the Government wished to ensure when that grant was ring-fenced.

But then, the Cabinet Secretary for Education strongly defends the need for specific funding that is ring-fenced for the PDG, in order to endure educational outcomes for those who qualify for free school meals. Therefore, those two views from the same Government are contradictory, to all intents and purposes, and I think that’s just an example of the inconsistency that we regularly find within the funding regime.

Let me be clear here: Plaid Cymru certainly isn’t calling for the direct funding of schools, in case anyone thinks that that’s my direction of travel in this area. We see a key role for local authorities in all of this as a means of ensuring that there is more co-ordination and coherence. It brings opportunities to share expertise, resources, all of the economies of scale, and all of these other reasons that have been validly outlined in the past, in order to ensure that there is co-ordination at a local level. But I do think there is room to look at a simpler regime that is also more consistent. Local authorities and schools have also been calling, for example, for longer term funding, which would allow them to plan more effectively and to use the funding more efficiently as a result of that, particularly in relation to staffing issues.

I do realise that time is against me. Some stakeholders, including some of the teaching unions, have called for a national funding formula in order to bring an end to that postcode lottery—I mentioned that £1,000 difference earlier—and to provide the same rights to all pupils, as they would put it, and fair funding. That brings us to the third point of the motion: what would represent fair funding? Does the Government have an idea of how much should be spent per pupil in order to ensure that every pupil receives quality education? I don’t know. People often compare England and Wales, and I think that’s a false comparison, but I will respond to some of the other amendments at the end.

The NAHT has said that there needs to be a national inquiry into school funding in order to ensure that sufficient resources are available in the system to enable schools to introduce this exciting agenda of reform that we all want to see. I believe that that would be a good idea. A national inquiry or audit would give us a more honest and a clearer picture of the current situation in all parts of Wales, and it would be a starting point for this national debate that we need to have on school funding in Wales.

As I said, I will deal with the amendments in concluding, having heard all of the contributions. But, as I said at the outset, this isn’t just a debate saying, 'Well, give more money to schools.' I do understand the reality of austerity, but I am also convinced that a time of austerity is the most important time to invest in our young people in order to empower them to build a better, more prosperous future than the one that they have inherited. And if this Government doesn’t prioritise education funding sufficiently, then we will all pay a price for that.