Part of the debate – in the Senedd at 6:39 pm on 6 November 2018.
Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd, I move the amendments tabled in Rhun ap Iorwerth's name. But, before I address the amendments, I'd like to briefly address the issues around poverty outlined in this report, 'Is Wales Fairer?' The report shows that Wales has a relative poverty rate higher than England or Scotland's and that the relative poverty rate for 16 to 24-year-olds has increased by a staggering 17.7 percentage points. Now, it appears, because it says on page 57 of this report, that:
'In Britain overall, poverty rates have not changed significantly since 2010/11.'
That means, of course, that poverty levels are worse here than elsewhere. And if that is correct, as a Government, you need to get to the bottom of why that is. If this deepening of poverty is indeed just happening in Wales, then this poverty can't be explained by austerity, because otherwise we would see the same trends elsewhere. That means that we in Wales need specific solutions, and that starts by acknowledging and accepting that we have specific problems that need to be addressed, and it means having an anti-poverty strategy, and it means getting the basics right, like definitions—something that the Government is lacking on so far.
I now turn to the amendments, all of which are aimed at addressing poverty and inequality. Amendment 2 is an invitation to Labour backbenchers to support their own party's policy over what the whip says, but I won't be holding my breath. The Welsh independent living grant is being phased out, with responsibility being passed to local authorities. There's already considerable evidence that this is leading to reduced levels of support, significantly harming the most disabled people in Wales. So, I appeal to all of you: please don't vote against this amendment today on the basis of assurances of a review, assurances that these are only isolated incidents, or even that these problems don't exist, or that, somehow, disabled people are lying. Those points should be treated with the contempt that they deserve. It's absurd to suggest that local authorities are going to be able to provide equivalent levels of support, given the financial pressures that we all know that they face.
Turning to amendment 3, on the continued lack of funding for services that help survivors of sexual assault and rape, the First Minister of course says that he wants Wales to be the safest country for women, so I eagerly await details of how, in the context of austerity and local authority cuts, these services that can reduce the impact of adverse childhood experiences will receive the increased funding that they badly need.
Amendment 4 is tabled to ensure that all of us treat class inequalities as an equalities issue. Some areas of our political culture have just about grasped that sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia and ableism have negative impacts on the lives of the majority of citizens in Wales. Discrimination leads to poor decision making. Well, so does discrimination on the basis of social class, and this report clearly shows that poverty is deepening and we should regret that and be prepared to do something about it. That's why things have to change. Public bodies have a duty to ensure that we create a Wales where no-one is left behind, and all employers, public and private, have a duty to become a living wage employer—a real living wage employer—and this would have the impact on poverty that I've referenced earlier.
Turning to amendment 5, which is a broader point about why we are having these debates, it's a disappointment to all of us, I'm sure, that we've seen a growth of political movements seeking to roll back even the most basic human rights protections over the last decade. From Trump to Bolsonaro and the recent friends of the Conservative Party in Hungary, via a Brexit detour, we've seen attacks on the very concept of human rights coming from the wealthiest and most powerful. At least in the 1930s, ordinary Germans could use the excuse of not being able to predict the future if they tacitly tolerated the Nazis, but there is no excuse today for supporting these political movements. I can scarcely believe that we have to restate the case for human rights, but it's absolutely clear that we do, and, hopefully, we can maintain a progressive alliance here to do just that.