Item 4 on the agenda is the debate on a statement on the draft budget of 2020 to 2021, and I call on the Minister for Finance and Trefnydd, Rebecca Evans.

I'm pleased to have this opportunity to make a statement on the Welsh Government's draft budget for 2020-1.

On 16 December, I laid the Welsh Government's draft budget before the Senedd. The decision to lay the draft budget in recess was taken with the agreement of the Business Committee and Finance Committee, and I'd like to put on record my gratitude for the co-operation of both committees in agreeing the exceptional arrangements.

The failure of the UK Government to deliver on its multi-year comprehensive spending review means that we do not have a budget beyond 2020-1. Instead, we were presented with a 'fast-tracked' spending round in September, setting plans for 2020-1 only. As a result, I'm only able to lay one-year revenue and capital plans.

Despite claims that austerity is over, the Welsh Government budget in 2020-1 will be nearly £300 million lower in real terms compared to 2010-11. Following months of uncertainty and a cancelled budget, the UK Government has announced today its plans for a budget on 11 March, a week after we are due to debate the final budget in this Chamber—another example of the UK Government's unpredictability when it comes to managing the nation's finances. But, despite this chaos, I plan to press ahead with our plans to publish the final budget on 25 February in order to deliver the certainty and stability that Welsh public services, businesses and communities need, and I will look to reflect any significant changes to our plans in an early supplementary budget.

Before Christmas, I wrote to the Chancellor calling for the UK Government to provide the sustained increase in funding that our public services require. The budget is an early opportunity for the UK Government to make good its promise to end austerity.

I will now turn to the major building blocks of this budget and the fiscal decisions that are now made in Wales. From 2019-20, some £5 billion of devolved and local tax revenue is raised in Wales and stays in Wales. This gives us the ability to consider how our tax policies can contribute to our wider ambitions for Welsh public services. In line with our manifesto commitment, we will not raise Welsh rates of income tax in 2020. I do not intend to make any changes to land transaction tax rates and bands, but I will keep them under review. Landfill disposals tax rates will increase in line with inflation.

For the first time, and in line with the longer term forecasting arrangements, the Office for Budget Responsibility has produced its independent forecast of revenues from devolved taxes for the Welsh Government's budget. I thank them for their work, and Members will have the opportunity to hear from the OBR directly at a briefing session on Thursday.

Turning to reserves, I have looked to make maximum possible use of the new Wales reserve. I plan to draw down the maximum annual amount of revenue from the Wales reserve of £125 million in 2020-1.

I now turn to borrowing for capital expenditure. Our approach to borrowing has been well rehearsed in this Chamber by myself and by previous finance Ministers. We will always look to use the least expensive forms of capital before moving on to other sources. In setting firm capital plans for next year, we are maintaining previously published plans to borrow £125 million of capital.

I'll now set out how our combined revenue and capital resources are to be deployed across Government. The draft budget will take this Government's investment in the Welsh NHS to £37 billion since 2016, proof of the priority we continue to give to Wales's most cherished public service. This is a budget that also delivers a new level of ambition in the fight to protect the future of our planet, which includes support for low-carbon housing and transport and the development of a national forest for Wales.

I am proud that this fifth—and final—budget of this Assembly term delivers on the key spending pledges we made to the people of Wales in 2016 on all-age apprenticeships, school improvement, childcare, help for small businesses, quick access to new treatments, affordable housing and much more. We are bringing our total investment in health and social care to more than £8.7 billion in 2020-1, with an above-inflation increase of more than £400 million.

The Llywydd took the Chair.

We have always looked to protect local government from the worst impacts of austerity. Delivering on the commitment for the best possible settlement, local authorities will receive an extra £200 million through the revenue and capital settlement next year. This brings total investment from the Welsh Government in core revenue funding and non-domestic rates to spend on delivering key services, including schools and social services, to nearly £4.5 billion. This means a real-terms increase for every local authority, acknowledged by the Welsh Local Government Association as an exceptionally good finance settlement. I am grateful to the WLGA for the positive engagement that they've had with Ministers and the co-operation shown in managing a challenging timetable for this year's budget.

Through the local government settlement and through our £1.8 billion education budget, the draft budget supports the national mission for a world-class education system, which includes more than £200 million for our educational infrastructure. Llywydd, with the new money for local government and the additional funding we are providing for schools and social care through other funding streams, we have matched the additional funding we received in the spending round in relation to schools and social care in England and we've gone further.

We have achieved this despite the burden of funding shortfalls delivered by the UK Treasury. I've previously updated Members on the £36 million shortfall that we received this year as a result of the UK Government failing to meet in full the increased public sector pension costs that we face. That shortfall will rise to around £50 million in 2020-1. It is entirely contrary to the UK Treasury's own principles set out in the 'Statement of funding policy', and removes £50 million that I could have otherwise allocated to our public services.

We recognise the vital role that local authorities provide in delivering preventative services. Prevention has been at the heart of the work in relation to our eight cross-cutting priorities of early years, social care, housing, employability and skills, better mental health, decarbonisation, poverty, and biodiversity. These are the areas where early intervention pays dividends, and where it's essential to delivering long-term outcomes. Through the new approach, we worked across Government, and outside traditional ministerial boundaries, to maximise our collective contribution to these priority areas. As a result, we're allocating new funding on top of existing measures, to help protect the future of our planet and to tackle poverty.

We know that there is no greater challenge facing Government, public bodies, businesses and third sector organisations and communities across Wales than climate change. That is why, in the first budget since our declaration of a climate emergency, we are allocating a new £140 million package of capital funding to support our ambitions for decarbonisation and to protect our wonderful environment.

Drawing on the advice of the UK Committee on Climate Change we are investing in the areas where we can have the greatest impact for our environment. This includes investment in active travel and an electric bus fleet, new ways of building homes, enhancing our most ecologically important sites, and the development of a national forest to extend the full length of our country. As recognised by WWF Cymru, this additional investment is a positive step on our journey to a greener Wales.

Llywydd, this draft budget also protects the significant ongoing investments we're making in support of our low-carbon delivery plan. This includes investments in our flagship £738 million investment in the south Wales metro and the additional £20 million we're investing this year in the north Wales metro. We're also making improvements in energy efficiency in 25,000 households through the Nest and Arbed schemes. By investing £240 million in this programme since 2010, we have been able to lift thousands of low-income households out of fuel poverty.

The greatest physical risks posed by climate change are increasingly intense storms, flooding and coastal erosion. In this budget we're committing £64 million to protect communities from the most severe impacts of climate change.

In terms of broader measures, we are also considering a public communications campaign around the climate and ecological emergency and a citizens' assembly, and we'll say more on this as our plans are developed in-year.

Building on existing cross-Government action totalling more than £1 billion, we are allocating an additional £19 million in a package of measures that are specifically targeted to help some of the most vulnerable people living in poverty in our communities. This includes new funding to extend pupil deprivation grant access for uniforms and other school essentials, ongoing funding to tackle period poverty, as well as extending funding for the school holiday enrichment programme.

Our mental health and early years priority work has also delivered extra funding for the whole school approach, to provide counselling and emotional support at school, as well as additional funding for Flying Start, allowing the programme to reach 3,500 more children.

Good-quality housing is central to supporting people in poverty. Together with an extra £175 million capital this year, we will have invested more than £2 billion in affordable housing over this Assembly term. And that is major investment welcomed by Community Housing Cymru.

Building on the steps we have taken in recent years and the 'journey checker' developed by the future generations commissioner, we have published for the first time a budget improvement plan, which sets out how we intend to take continuous steps to embed the requirements of the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 into the budget process. I welcome the commissioner's statement that Wales should be commended for being at the forefront of a movement towards well-being budgeting.

Despite ongoing austerity imposed at a UK level undermining our ability to deliver the investment our country truly deserves, I am proud to introduce a budget that continues to invest in our vital public services while supporting our ambitions for a more equal, more prosperous and greener Wales. Thank you.

Well, I have to say, we had some great hopes for this budget, because, of course, we know that Boris Johnson has already started to deliver on his promise to end austerity and to enable significant extra investment in the Welsh economy and public services. [Interruption.] And I can hear the cackling, but as a result the Welsh Government has received an additional £600 million, which brings the Welsh block grant to a record high level.

And, of course, in addition to that, the Welsh Government now also has the power to vary income tax levels, which of course could be a powerful tool, we believe, to create a low tax economy, to encourage businesses to set up here, and to create the well-paid, skilled jobs that people need. So, in the words of a former Prime Minister, 'You've never had it so good.' You've never had it so good. We've got a golden opportunity in this budget, a golden opportunity to invest in people's priorities, to drive a more dynamic economy, to deliver for working people, and to build on opportunities for Wales as they are presented to us as we leave the European Union. 

But, I'm afraid it's an opportunity that the finance Minister has, of course, missed. Where there was an opportunity to be imaginative, you've opted for the mundane. Where there was an opportunity to rise to the challenge and be ambitious for our country, all we've seen is you sitting back. Where there was an opportunity to be radical, you've stuck to the tried, tested and failed approach of Welsh Governments of the past.

Now, on the economy, one of the biggest barriers to growth and investment, particularly in south Wales, is the lack of capacity on our road network. Last year, the First Minister scrapped the M4 relief road, against independent advice, having already spent £144 million of taxpayers' money, and he did so without any alternative to the chronic congestion and air pollution that we see in south Wales. And as another Prime Minister recently said, the Brynglas tunnels are like the blocked 'nostrils of the Welsh dragon'. They deter investment west of Newport, dragging down the whole of the south Wales economy. The First Minister has even said that if the UK Government made the finance available to fully fund the project, at a cost of over £1 billion, he would decline to accept that money. It's shocking. 

And, of course, we don't just have problems in south Wales. We also face them in the north, and indeed in the west. The opportunity to upgrade the A55, to invest in dualling the A40, have been missed. Now, we're told that some of the reason behind not proceeding with the major investment in road capacity is because of the climate change emergency. And yet we're on the brink, First Minister—I can see you're paying attention—we're on the brink of an electric car revolution, ignored by your decision when you made the decision to scrap the M4. And of course, we all know that the evidence actually suggests that if you reduce congestion you also reduce air pollution. And ironically—. Yes, I'll happily take an intervention.

I wonder if he could clarify something from his own party's manifesto, where it said if there was a Welsh Conservative Government it would deliver the M4 relief road. But, on the A55, the manifesto just said, without any qualification, 'We will upgrade the A55' in north Wales.

We were very clear that we wanted to work with the UK Government to deliver improvements in various parts of our road network, including on the A55 and the M4.

But, in spite of the rhetoric that we hear from the Welsh Government on climate change, when you look at where they are investing in transport, it's actually in the most polluting form—air travel. Ironically, we will see that, this year, a further £4.8 million has been given to the state-owned Cardiff Airport, on top of a loan in excess of £21 million, and that's in addition to the £36 million loan that has already been given. And of course, last year, we saw the biggest ever losses that that airport has ever made—over £18.5 million, compared to the less than £1 million during the airport's last full year in private ownership back in 2012. And of course, we already heard during First Minister's question time that the net book value of the airport has fallen to well below the £50 million-odd that was paid by the Welsh Government for the airport.

Will you take an intervention?

I'll happily take an intervention.

I listened to what you said—I always listen to your contributions with great fascination, as you know. What is your alternative on the airport?

We produced a very detailed blueprint for aviation back in 2013, which set out our position on what to do on the aviation industry. I'll send you a copy of it.

Here's the reality: Ministers here in this Chamber should face facts—you don't have the expertise required to make a success of this venture and it should be returned to the private sector as soon as possible. It's further evidence in support of your own Deputy Minister for Economy and Transport's claim that the Welsh Government does not know what it is doing on the economy. [Interruption.] I'll happily give way to the former First Minister.

I'm grateful to the Member opposite. Just two things. Firstly, to remind him that when the airport was in private ownership it was on the verge of closure, and I was told that by the owners at the time. The only way of dealing with it was to buy it—take it into public ownership. Secondly, if he is saying the Government should not invest in air travel, does that mean he thinks that the airport—and of course Anglesey airport, which is now part of the same group—should close?

I think you paid over the odds for an airport if you thought it was on the brink of closure, frankly wasting tens of millions of pounds of taxpayers' money.

Now, if I can just turn—because I've got to make some progress—to business rates. Of course, we've missed an opportunity to address the fact that Wales has the least competitive business rates environment in the whole of the UK, taxing businesses off our high streets. It's no wonder we've got the highest high street vacancy rate in the whole of the United Kingdom. And of course, we believe that, instead of doing that, you should be taking the opportunity to reduce taxes on businesses, to coax them back onto our high streets, in order that we can improve opportunities in our town centres.

With regard to the NHS, the finance Minister described it as our most cherished public service. We absolutely agree, and that's why we're very pleased to see some additional investment finally coming through to our NHS. But, we must never allow the public to forget that it was a Welsh First Minister who presided over the only cuts ever seen in an NHS budget ever in the history of the United Kingdom. It is shameful that it was a Labour Government, a Labour Government—no Conservative Prime Minister has ever cut an NHS budget—it was a Labour Government here that took the decision to do that. And of course, the health Minister at the time is now the First Minister sat before us in this Chamber today. Is it any wonder that the performance of the NHS in Wales is behind that of England on many, many different measures? And is it any wonder that we have so many health boards in Wales in targeted intervention? And of course, we've got the classic example in my own area of the Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board, which has been in special measures for almost five years now and is showing only limited signs of improvement. In fact, in some areas, it's showing signs of getting even worse.

Now, if I can turn to education, just for a few moments. According to the NASUWT—not the Welsh Conservative briefing office, the NASUWT, a highly respected teaching union here in Wales—schools in Wales continue to be underfunded at a rate of around £645 per pupil per year compared to schools in England. [Interruption.] I know you dispute it, but you've never sent—. I'll happily take an intervention, yes.   

[Inaudible.]—this £300 million a year that we've been deprived of by the Tory Government amounting to a total of £4 billion, if we'd had that, do you believe that money would have rectified some of the flaws that you have identified? 

I think what I find extraordinary is that Wales receives £1.20 for every £1 and yet it's spending £645 less per pupil per year. There's no excuse for this underfunding at all. You might want to defend it, Mick, but I am not going to defend it, and I will challenge your Government all the way so we have a level playing field between England and Wales so that our children can have the same opportunities that children have over the border in England. 

Local government—we know that we've seen local government settlements that smack, frankly, of cronyism. We've seen local authorities in north Wales getting lower settlements than local authorities in the south, and it seems to be that the political colour of your local authority has a bearing on the proportion of additional cash that you might receive. [Interruption.] Again, I can hear the carping and I'm very happy to give some information to the Chamber on this.

Let's compare this year's settlement. Let's compare this year's settlement. I've taken plenty of—. I've got not much time left—[Interruption.] If I can just make a reference to this year's settlement, the proposed draft settlement. The funding increases vary from 3 per cent in Conservative-run Monmouthsire to 5.4 per cent in Labour-run Newport right next door—two local authorities right next door. And we know that the average increases for north Wales are far worse than they are in the south. 

So, can I urge the Government to consider introducing a funding floor so that we can even out some of these differences? Because, frankly, it's unacceptable that some parts—[Interruption.] There's not a funding floor in place for this year. If I can just correct your Cabinet colleagues, you haven't announced a funding floor for this year, as you well know, finance Minister. But, it will be interesting to see what that funding floor might be and perhaps you can put some more meat on the bones and tell us a little bit about it. 

You mentioned some of the pressures on the social care issues. You've talked about the integrated care fund, for example, in your statement. What you haven't done is ruled out any kind of social care tax, which we know that your party was sort of contemplating before. Perhaps you can give us some more information as to whether you're wanting to tax people in respect of social care, because we'd like some assurances that you're not going to increase the tax burden on the people of Wales in order to pay for that. 

In terms of the environment, we've heard that this is one of your priorities and yet you can't even get a decent network of electric vehicle charging points up and running here in Wales. We've got the worst record in the whole of the United Kingdom. What on earth are you doing? You've had some money as a Barnett consequential to improve the network and yet you can't plug in between north and south Wales sufficiently in order to get an electric car up and down our roads. It's not acceptable and we need to get things improved. 

So, in conclusion, Llywydd, if I may, I regret that, despite the great opportunities presented by this record-breaking budget that you have at your disposal, you are still failing to address the people's priorities here in Wales. We're failing to see the improvements in the performance of the NHS that people and patients need to see. We're failing to see you address the underfunding in our Welsh schools and we're failing to see you close that gap between England and Wales in terms of the per pupil spend per head. We're failing to see the ambition that we need to support businesses to improve the growth and the wealth of our nation. And we're seeing a complete inertia, frankly, in terms of the climate change agenda. I hope very much that you'll reflect on these things and change this budget before it comes back to this Chamber so that we can deal with people's priorities as we get Brexit done as a nation. 

What we have in this budget quite simply, I fear, is an opportunity missed. Yes, there is more money available to be spent on public services. Yes, we are in a position where every expenditure heading has seen an increase, I believe. And after a decade of continuous cuts in most areas, that is something of a relief. But, what disappoints me and us on these benches more than anything is the lack of any sign that this Labour Government is willing to take this opportunity to change direction in a meaningful way, to change culture in any significant way or to think in the longer term. What we have here is another budget that is managerial but demonstrates no innovation or imagination if truth be told.

This budget does see a loosening of purse strings, but there's no loosening of the apparent unwillingness of this Labour Government to think differently, to think innovatively about how today's budget decisions really impact on our tomorrows, and by that, I mean the medium to long term.

Now, recent announcements from UK Government have been hailed by some as the end of austerity. We've heard that claim again today, although, sadly, most assessments I've read suggest that this is more likely temporary relief. But if this is to be even a temporary step away from the kind of ideologically driven austerity, the deep cuts—let's give it its real name—of the past decade, then what we should be seeing with this budget is a pouncing on that opportunity to invest now for more sustainable services in future. I'll look principally at three areas: health, local government funding, and, in fact, the way health and local government funding should be interacting together better, and climate change.

For the life of me, I can't see in this budget a sign of a Government really tackling the climate crisis that it declared, and this Assembly declared—the first Parliament anywhere in the world to do so—with the real urgency it deserves. In fact, the signs were a bit worrying immediately after that Government declaration when the First Minister said, he doesn't believe that the declaration of climate emergency is a new policy for this Government or, indeed, for this National Assembly, because the environmental principles that have been important across this Chamber and across the period of devolution are summed up in that decision. But surely, such a momentous declaration, if it means anything, has to be seen as a significant turning point. And while later in the same session, I think the First Minister said he would support certain innovative responses to climate change—water quality and management, protection of biodiversity and unique local habitats and so on—the truth is, if we're serious about stepping up in our determination to address our environmental responsibilities, that should be seen running clearly right through this budget, and it isn't.

I've already mentioned that there are increases in departmental budgets across the board, but looking at the environment, energy and rural affairs budget, the increase in real terms is a measly 0.7 per cent—I think an issue that Mike Hedges from the Labour benches pursued the Minister on in a special meeting of the Finance Committee prior to Christmas. And looking at capital spending, committing just £140 million to environmental projects like the £29 million earmarked for electric buses, for example, is, whilst welcome in itself, clearly not going to drive the kind of wholesale change of direction that so many are looking to Government for leadership on at this point in time.

I'd ask the Minister: where is the evidence of a real step change? Do you have a formula, even, perhaps you could answer that, for working out the impact of spending decisions in the area of climate change? Do you even know what impact you will get from the elements of climate change prevention spend you do have in there? Where's the evidence of a culture change in Government that's running through, cross-departmentally, of climate change prevention measures? And whilst Government says the welfare of future generations Act is used as a guide in its budgeting process, since when has legislation been merely a guide? Preventing catastrophic climate change as much as we can, while playing Wales's part to its maximum in that job, is about as serious as it gets in terms of a need to focus on preventative measures rather than just short-term management spend. And just as this budget is lacking in its emphasis on the preventative in relation to the environment, I believe it's still woefully lacking when it comes to preventative spend in other areas too. I met members of the National Association of Head Teachers union this lunch time, as other Members did too, I know, highlighting an inadequate uplift, in their view, for education, and especially additional learning needs. I agree: funding special schools adequately, for example, has a huge preventative potential on wider education budgets, on social care, even on the health budget. I'll ask if I can, at this point, what assessment Welsh Government has made of consequentials that may be due to Wales from recent spending announcements for primary education in particular in England? That's a question coming directly from the NAHT representatives as they seek new funding for this sector.

But I'll turn to health now if I may.

It is a serious concern to me that the attitude of this Government toward health funding focuses too much on the sum of money provided to the NHS today, despite the importance of that, of course, and isn't sufficiently focused on how to make health and care services more sustainable for the longer term. There is an intention to substantially increase the revenue funding provided to health, and on the face of it, who could disagree with that?

The problem, of course, is that most of the additional money available for 2020-21 is going to the NHS—an increase of £341 million, 2.6 per cent in real terms. We cannot ignore the fact that increasing the health budget continually at the expense of other areas does weaken those areas, and that, in turn, can add to the costs of the NHS ultimately. It is a vicious circle. Indeed, health expenditure has increased over the years of austerity by some 16 per cent in real terms, whilst other budgets have shrunk by a similar amount. And if we continue without making the investments and without making policy decisions that are innovative and preventative, as we should do now, then the part of the cake that needs to be given to health will continue to grow and now, surely, as the financial shackles are loosened slightly, then now is the time to make that innovative change.

So, when I see minor amounts praised in the budget in the statement made in December—£2.7 million to help primary school children become healthy and fit; £5.5 million for 'Healthy Weight: Healthy Wales'; and diabetes, much of it relating to obesity, costing some 10 per cent of the whole NHS budget—then I can't help but think that we are missing a trick in failing to invest health and welfare budgets in infrastructure for physical activity and sport to make us a healthier nation in the long term.

I see references to £190 million for preventative health measures in this budget. That is only something over 2 per cent of the total expenditure on health. The warmer words that we hear on the preventative agenda must be matched by funding too, and the same is true of mental health. There is still a lack of preventative spend in this budget, particularly for younger people. Also, we can't think in the longer term by continuing to sufficiently support the social care service and the services provided by our local authorities. Yes, there's a proposal to increase local authority budgets by £184 million, but the WLGA itself said that some £254 million would be required for a standstill position. Costs related to salaries weigh heavily, there are pressures from social services and children's services have also increased greatly, and we know that if local government doesn't receive the necessary support for providing social care, then it's the NHS that picks up the bill, ultimately—a vicious circle once again.

I could go on to talk about so many different areas where short-term management is the theme here rather than long-term innovation. The Welsh language is another example. We can all agree on the target of one million Welsh speakers, why, therefore, reduce the budget for the Welsh language specifically?

Llywydd, although we've heard today that we're expecting the first new Conservative Government budget on 11 March, I will make a brief comment on that. It's another example of us having to change our arrangements because of the whims of a Government in Westminster. A budget there decides on expenditure here after we've completed our budgetary process here. There is an alternative way of dealing with that and that is by taking responsibility for this ourselves. But we do know, because of the forecast of a slowdown in the economy and a pledge not to increase income tax, national insurance or VAT and so on and so forth, that there is very little scope for increasing public expenditure further. The economic uncertainty related to leaving the European Union is part of the problem, of course.

But to conclude, today, we are not talking about proposals from Government to change tax rates in Wales, but with the public purse likely to be under significant and increasing pressures to provide the kind of services that people require and insist upon in an uncertain economic context, the discussion on how we can use our limited taxation powers is going to have to become a more prominent issue of budgetary discussions in oncoming years.

I congratulate the finance Minister on her budget and the process she's used. I'm noting, just from Rhun just then, that his remarks were quite gentle in admonishing the UK Government for the shifts in timings of its budgets and how those have been communicated, which contrasts what we heard earlier in the Scottish Parliament, where there seems to have been a serious ding-dong about the complete disrespect for the Scottish Parliament, apparently and profound consequences and catastrophic risks that the change in timing will lead to for them, which appears to be that they expected their budget to come after the UK one but before 11 March, which is their legal date for the local government funding. So, I don't quite know how they're going to sort it out, but what we seem to be doing here seems to be more sensible and with somewhat less drama than what we're seeing there.

I note that the finance Minister says that she'll deliver the certainty and stability that Welsh public services need through doing this, and we then get the UK budget on 11 March. Given that she's bringing down the £125 million from the Welsh reserve, can I ask, is that a standard approach going forward or is that informed by her knowledge that the UK budget is coming later and, perhaps, an expectation that there may be further Barnett consequentials coming through following 11 March? 

I've criticised the finance Minister before for her emphasis on complaining about austerity when she's not complaining about Brexit. There was a bit less of that today. I did, though, note a tweet from BBC Wales Politics at 11 o'clock last night saying,

'The UK government must take responsibility, says @fmwales', and I sort of clicked through it to see what story he was commenting on or what he thought they should be taking responsibility for, and there was no story behind it. It was just a general comment of applicability. I wasn't even sure what it was meant to relate to.

But I think what people in Wales want to hear is what is the Welsh Government doing with the levers at its disposal. Of course, it doesn't have all the levers. Of course, there's been a period where public spending has been less than the completely unsustainable trajectory that it was on previously, but given the cloth we have, how are we cutting it and what are our priorities? And I'm not sure whether I saw a slightly wistful look on the First Minister's face in terms of the budget that his finance Minister's got to present is giving a lot more money to a lot more different areas than he was ever able to when he had that role. 

I think we need not just to look at the comparison to 2010, which the finance Minister is always so keen on making, but what's the increase we're having this year. There's a complaint about the £36 million or £50 million that's not coming through for pensions, but where in this statement is the reference to what is the overall Barnett consequential, the extra money we have to spend in Wales next year because of the decisions that have been taken by the UK Government and by the relative improvement in the economy compared to the unsustainable trajectory that we got on to spending before? 

I don't see in this budget what the Welsh Government is communicating on its core priority, particularly on the biggest spending areas. We hear from the Conservatives a lot of condemnation, but I felt that a few years back, at least, there was actually a Conservative critique of the Welsh Government's spending that had a degree of internal consistency about it, that relative to England, they had cut spending on health. I saw the First Minister's reaction to the suggestion of there being a cut, but, certainly, relative to England, in Wales, we or the Welsh Government have chosen to implement austerity by being less generous to health and more generous to local government than has happened in England, and that is by far the largest budget and financial decision that has been made. Yet, this year, when the restrictions come off, when we have significant money to hand out, the amount handed out in percentage terms is almost the same to health and to local government, so I can't determine from that where the Welsh Government's priorities are, and I note that there have been reductions, but the reductions that have been made in English local government are hugely greater than those that have been made in Welsh local government. I do ask whether there are further opportunities for efficiencies in Wales that haven't been taken that have been in England. I accept the comments that are made around social care and the interaction with the NHS. I think that is a fair comment, but it does not explain the whole difference in the approach that's been taken.

And I'd ask why, in Wales, are councillors paid, I think, £13,868 this year? Next year, will that be more than £14,000? Why are councils not allowed to make savings in that area? When I served in my local council in England that was facing big reductions in spending because of austerity, one of the first things we did was to cut the councillor allowances to far lower than those that we have in Wales. Yet we continue to have 22 councils, we continue to have a much larger number of councillors who are paid a very significant amount of money. Is that not an area where we should be looking for savings?

The Government talks a lot about its prioritisation of climate change. I recall the first budget of this Assembly, where I was wearing multiple hats, and the Welsh Government announced very substantial reductions to its spending on climate change projects. What I ask the First Minister and the finance Minister is: could we have, in comparable terms, what Welsh Government is planning to spend now compared to what it was going to spend then? I remember the uproar, a modest proportion of those cuts were put back. Where are we now compared to then and can we try and consider that on a comparable basis, both in capital and revenue terms?

I felt Rhun made a very good comment around the prioritisation of climate change spending, and I really am concerned that we do not know what is the relative benefit of those different types of spending. So, we've got investment in active travel, in the electric bus fleet, ways of building homes; what are the relative yields in terms of the impact we can have on emissions of spending in those different areas? Some electric buses—I'd love to see more of them, not least because of the impact on air quality, but they are very expensive, and there's quite good evidence that home insulation and looking at the energy efficiency is a very effective way of reducing emissions for relatively limited spending. But we have this national forest for Wales—sounds great, we're spending a certain amount on that, we're also spending a certain amount on planting trees in Uganda. What is the relative return from the spending in those areas? Surely, Welsh Government should be investing in research to try and understand that, looking at best practice elsewhere, making those comparisons so the money is, at least, spent in the most effective way possible, rather than looking instead to put it into a communications campaign so we can campaign back to those who are campaigning for us just to do more about climate change. What we need to do is look into what measures are most effective for the amount of money we have available, and I hope Welsh Government will push in that direction.

I wish them well with the budget, we look forward on the Finance Committee to looking in greater detail on Thursday with various interest groups, and I hope Welsh Government will take note of what is said by those. I also hope it will look to build a better and more effective budget process going forward. I believe that the process we have for spending in the Welsh Parliament now is better than the one that they had in Westminster. I am not convinced it is yet for tax, but I hope that the Finance Committee and Welsh Government will be able to work together in terms of looking at the medium-term plans for what is the best way for us to run budgets in this place in future. Thank you.

Can I just, in opening my comments, thank Welsh Government, even with the difficulties of not being able to do a long-term multi-annual settlement, even with the difficulties of having to wait till March, after we've actually done our final budget, and then bring forward a supplementary budget to accommodate what the UK Government is doing—even with all that, this is the first time I've seen my two council leaders smile for a decade? [Laughter.] And I want to thank you for that, because it's been darn miserable, and it's been miserable because, year after year—it was interesting following on from Mark's comments. It isn't only the health and social care interactions, and we've put money into social care. We've taken it up to £30 million, you're taking it up to £40 million now, and that's fantastic to see and so on, and that has an impact on the overall health and social care spending. But, actually, it's the planning officers and economic development officers and the environmental standards officers and the active travel officers, and so on—those are the ones that creak terribly behind the scenes. They're not there anymore. They've not been decimated, not one in 10—I suspect it's four, five, six, seven out of 10 who have now gone.

So, this at least gives the opportunity now for local authority leaders to lift their heads up and think not only with social care, but, generally, 'What are the priorities now, going forward?' It's still not going to be easy, because, regardless of this, we're still in extremely difficult times. We're picking up after 10 years of cuts, cuts, cuts within local authorities. You can't suddenly turn the taps on and expect everything to flow; things have been lost in that period, in this decade of austerity. But at least I'm genuinely now having interesting conversations with council leaders about where we can invest, as opposed to, 'Where do we now have to go and find another £30 million of cuts, or this, that or the other, in the local authority?'

But I also want to reflect, in my opening remarks, on the fact that we sometimes forget what we've managed to do even with these austere times, this austere decade, that we've been in. We have been able to deliver on some significant commitments that we brought forward in the 2016 manifesto. We brought in just short of £600 million to actually fund quality apprenticeships, 100,000 quality apprenticeships, within Wales. I know that that is happening within my constituency with local employers, where I'm speaking to youngsters or people on the side of the playing fields who are saying, 'My youngster now is employed in a good apprenticeship down the round in manufacturing because of that funding that Welsh Government, our Welsh Government, has done.'

The rates thing—I know the rates relief on small businesses doesn't go everywhere, but I'll tell you it goes a long way in communities like Pontycymer and Ogmore Vale and even Maesteg. We're not the Cowbridge, we're not the Monmouth high streets. We are the ones where the turnover is low and the footfall is low on those things, and they are the ones that benefit from the exemptions that we've been able to give. They're the ones. That's why they're able to carry on trading. Because they're never going to make $1 million, frankly, on those streets, but what they do do is they provide really good local services, local sales, local support in that high street for a viable local high street, and the business rates help of just short of £600 million has been a real help.

And also the £100 million that's gone into school standards, driving school standards up—there is a quiet revolution going on here within education within Wales, and we've managed to do that and that was part of our commitment.

And of course the new treatment fund—£80 million for the new treatment fund. It's now cut waiting times for new drugs from 90 days, as it was, to just 10 days. And I want to touch on one area where I'd like to see us going more as well. Yes, we have actually brought in over £200 million to deliver the childcare for working parents. We've delivered it in advance of when we said we were going to do it. But, as I keep saying to the Government, if I had my absolute magic wand and money was no object, then I would look at that whole landscape of childcare provision. There's money in here for Flying Start—I recognise that. There's more money for other initiatives with young people. But look at the thing in its entirety, from early years education and childcare provision going through. If I had more money available to me, if we suddenly had more money actually delivered to us going forward in the next few years, then its in those early years and those children and young people that I would want to see it go, beyond the childcare offer but actually into that wider thing.

But we've done some great things within this budget already. We've looked at those key transition years at seven and 11, and we've put additional funding behind those. Now, that's going to make a huge difference, because we know it's not only the Flying Start, it's not only that very early years provision, it's also as they transition then into the school next door, and it's also as they transition up into big school as well, that makes the real difference.

And there are some great things within this as well. On things like—. It won't excite everybody, but I think the concept behind a national forest is quite an astonishingly ambitious one. I would simply say, in driving it forward—and I know the Minister will be very aware of it—we have to comply with that idea of this being the right tree in the right place, so we're not just delivering carbon reductions, we're delivering biodiversity gains at the same time in all the places that we have.

There's so much within this that is good, but I would ask, in closing, a couple of key things. I was disappointed to see Darren completely dismiss out of hand any future whatever for any additional funding within social care within Wales. [Interruption.] No, I find that—. I'll finish my point. You seem to—. I found that a very retrograde step, because we've been waiting on the social care Green Paper in London for such a long time. Are you ruling that out, because it really sounded like that to me?

If I can just make my point abundantly clear to you, because I don't think that you paid close enough attention, I welcomed the additional investment that the Welsh Government is making in social care, but I made it clear that my party wanted to know whether the Welsh Government was going to introduce a social care tax here in Wales. It's not something that we would advocate, and we certainly won't go into the next Assembly elections advocating it. If you want to do so, we'd appreciate some clarity on that. We've had no clarity from you, so give us some clarity.

Well, once again—. Llywydd, I can see I'm over time. Once again, I'm really genuinely disappointed, because the failure to move forward—[Interruption.] 

Allow him to carry on, Darren Millar, please.

Because the failure of successive Governments, but including the current Conservative Government, to be able to deliver a consensus in Westminster means that we are going to have to take imaginative, creative and difficult decisions about how we fund not just health, but health and social care together. One of the decisions, Darren, we will have to make as responsible grown-up statespeople is whether we think there is sufficient money in the system in order to give the terms and conditions that people deserve on the front line in order to deliver affordable and quality social care. Now, if you're not willing to have that discussion, then I'm afraid—[Interruption.] Then I'm afraid you are writing off generations of people.

I don't believe it's necessary to raise taxes to do it.

So, it's a shame that the politics of running up to a next election—[Interruption.] You are doing exactly the same as successive Conservative Governments have done—

You will now need to bring your comments to a close. You have had seven minutes.

Indeed. My apologies, Llywydd. It was an interesting digression. My apologies.

Thank you. I'm moving on to the next speaker.

Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Angela Burns.

Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. Thank you. The draft budget has announced an increase of more than £400 million into the health and social care budget for 2020-1, which I obviously welcome. Given this means that there is a total investment of some £8.7 billion in health and social care, which is almost half of the Welsh budget, therefore it is even more vital that this money is held properly to account and delivers effective health and social care for the people of Wales.

However, I have to say that accountability has never been the Welsh Government's strong suit. Despite the Government stating that it will focus on social care and mental health in the 2020-1 budget, there is next to non-existent detail as to how the budget will support and improve the day-to-day running of the NHS.

Minister, in the 2020-1 draft budget's narrative, the Welsh Labour Government claims that

'Investing in our NHS and social services is at the heart of our spending plans', outlining that £37 billion has been invested since 2016. Yet, for all of this investment, the latest figures show the worst-performing A&E waiting times on record for the second month in a row; some 23,000 patients waited for more than four hours in November 2019 and nearly 6,000 waited for more than 12 hours; the Welsh ambulance service's response target for red calls was not met; and Wales has not met its target for 95 per cent of patients diagnosed with cancer to start treatment within 62 days since 2008. Yes, 2008, Minister. I have to ask: are the recently merged urgent and non-urgent cancer pathways into just one 62-day target an exercise in smoke and mirrors? The 95 per cent target of patients waiting fewer than 26 weeks for referral to treatment hasn't been met and this is the worst since September 2017. Four out of the seven health boards in Wales are in special measures or targeted intervention—the highest level of Welsh Government intervention possible. And Betsi Cadwaladr services have continuously been in some form of special measures for more than four and a half years—longer than any other health board in the UK, and it's set to continue being in special measures for at least the medium term. And we had the Cwm Taf experience, which I won't touch on any further.

So, Minister, Betsi Cadwaladr has received nearly £83 million from the Welsh Government for intervention and improvement support and many millions in other areas. How will you ensure that further moneys deliver the changes the patients of north Wales desperately need? Will the budget simply be used to mop up the projected deficit of £35 million in this financial year? Will it just be spent on more £2,000-a-day consultants? We'd love to hear what you have to say about how this money in the budget can support Betsi Cadwaladr.

Workforce shortages, Minister, are also endemic within the health service. Whilst the health Minister is now acting, it is in a limited way. We are in a crisis. The Royal College of Nursing has outlined that there are severe gaps in the nursing workforce, noting that every week nurses in Wales give the NHS extra hours to the value of 976 full-time nurses. That's a shocking statistic. NHS Wales spent £63.8 million last year on agency nursing—a substantial rise of 24 per cent. Whilst the health Minister recently announced more training places for nurses, it's going to fall well short of what we need and it doesn't touch on paediatric nurses, district nurses, learning disability nurses, and neither does it touch on the chronic shortage we have in allied healthcare professionals. Given that the entire drive for healthcare delivery in Wales is about community-based services, what we need are more physios, occupational therapists, chronic care managers and the rest of it. I've no idea of how this budget is going to support that.

So, Minister, can you please outline to us how you will ensure the budget supports that workforce planning, and ensures we're not only recruiting the staff we need today, but also training the appropriate numbers for tomorrow? I have to say it would be remiss of me to not highlight that 42 per cent of GPs say it is financially unsustainable to run a practice. When asked why running a practice is unsustainable, 82 per cent of GPs said, 'Insufficient core funding'. Minister, can you tell me how this budget is going to support the GPs? Because we cannot afford to lose any of them.

Now, for the usual barracking from the back benches, I have actually got a very long list, which I'm exceptionally happy to share—at another time, as I'm running out of time—with the health Minister, of what the Welsh Conservatives would do. We have a very long and clear list of how we would support our NHS and our social services.

I would like to end just on one very quick note, about social care. It is one of the greatest challenges that we face. We have a very clear answer as to how we can do it. It may not be the same as the way you think we should fund and manage social services, but we do have a plan and it's very clearly laid out in the Conservative manifesto. So, rather than just shout and scream and say that we have no idea, and we haven't got a plan, may I please send to your office, Mr Irranca-Davies, a copy of our manifesto? And hopefully, it will illuminate you.

I certainly won't take the Chamber's time by reiterating points that people have made, but I'd like to expand on them, and I think I need to begin by saying that there is much in Welsh Government policy that is incredibly difficult to actually disagree with. We certainly don't disagree with commitments around climate change, and we certainly don't disagree with the policies around prudent healthcare, but I was always brought up to look not at what people said but at what they did. And there is that saying in Welsh, is there not, 'Diwedd y gân yw'r geiniog'/'At the end of any song, there has to be the penny'? And what is frustrating, as Rhun ap Iorwerth has already set out, is the extent to which we have a Government that can sometimes come up with policy that sounds innovative, but then doesn't do the most basic things to make that policy happen. I want to say a little bit more to expand on what Rhun has said, and in some senses to support what Angela Burns has just said about the health and social care budget.

It is a clichéd definition of insanity to keep doing the same thing and expect to get a different result. Now, nobody is going to complain about additional spending on health, but unless we break down the silos between health and social care, those pressures will come on again and again and again. I'm sure it is not a surprise to the Welsh Government that winter comes every year, and every year we find ourselves, one way or another—sometimes it's one health board, sometimes it's another—with a real crisis. This is what we've got in Hywel Dda. We've just had the press release today saying that they are continuing to postpone non-essential operations. Now, if we just keep piling more resources into the health budget itself—and I can see why that's tempting to the Government, because of course that's a budget that they control; well, should control—if we keep doing that, we are not going to change the fundamental problems. We have done some research in Plaid Cymru into this, and for £470 million a year, which sounds like a lot of money, but out of an £8 billion health budget it's peanuts, we could provide free social care in this country to everybody who needs it. Now, would that not be a step to freeing up that problem that we have where people are not able to go into the care settings that they need? [Interruption.] I will very happily take an intervention.

Thank you for that, Helen Mary. I think that that sounds like a very interesting comment that you've just made, and I would be very interested in discussing that further with you, because we do need to find a solution to this. You've got one way of resolving this issue, we've come up with another way, I'm sure that Labour—somewhere—have got another way, and maybe that's something that we can all come together to discuss.

Well, of course, we were told by the health and social services Minister that we would be hearing from him about his long-term social care plans back in the autumn. I may lack a grasp of the Welsh language, but I don't think that January is in the autumn. But, where I would agree with Angela Burns—and I think, probably, we'd have agreement across the Chamber—is that we do need to solve this problem long term, and that we will best do that if we can talk to each other and, very importantly, listen to each other, listen to the people who are providing services, and listen to the families who need them.

But, of course, as Rhun has said, in terms of preventing people from getting ill in the first place, the place to spend the money is not in the health service, and it becomes a vicious circle. If we don't spend sufficiently on housing, if we don't spend sufficiently on the right bits of education, if we don't change education policy to make it compulsory, as the committee recommended, for primary school children, for example, to do a certain number of hours of exercise every day, every week, we will still keep finding people with the diabetes problems, with all the other health problems. So, we have to take a radical look at how our money is spent.

Now, I am not suggesting for a moment, Llywydd, that this is easy. It's one of the most difficult things in the world to make money follow policy; everybody knows that. But, as Rhun has already said, this is an opportunity where there's a little bit of a breathing space. How sustainable that breathing space is going to be, we don't yet know, but it is really, really disappointing that we don't know across portfolios how key priorities are going to be delivered.

I want to specifically ask the Minister today how all of the policies across all portfolios were proofed against the sustainability goals, not with what I think was referred to as 'guidance'. This is law. This is what is supposed to drive all policy. And I'm trying not to be skeptical about what ought to be a groundbreaking piece of legislation, but unless when we pass that groundbreaking legislation the funding then follows, we're going to be in trouble.

What impact has been made? What child rights impact assessment has been made in this budget across portfolio? There is some welcome additional funding directly for children and young people, of course that's good news, but have we checked how the economic development spend is going to influence children and young people? Have we checked how transport spending is going to influence children and young people at a time when we know that we've got young people struggling to get appropriate transport to school in some of our communities?

This is disappointing. This is a missed opportunity. But, please, let's not have any more of these. The Government has sometimes the right ideas. What they seem to lack is the guts to put them into practice. 

We've had confirmed by the Conservative Westminster Government that austerity was a political  not an economic policy. We're seeing real growth in the money available for the Welsh budget whilst the British economy continues to stagnate. The real-terms growth in money available has got to be welcomed. I think that any real-growth increase has got to be welcomed. It would be churlish not to.

I'm disappointed that neither the Conservatives nor Plaid Cymru have produced an alternative budget, not just highlighting their priorities, because we've had a lot of priorities—[Interruption.]

Have you produced your alternative?

I could give you an alternative. I'll give you an alternative: I'd take money out of the economy budget and I'd put it into the environment budget and I'd put it into the education budget. I'm only asking you to do top-line changes. But, I think, where you would take money off—. Because you have to take money off somewhere to put it in somewhere else.

Can I start off with a request that's very easy? Can we have the £1 million return for over-60s free swimming? I am told this followed an independent review that recommended it. Can the Government now accept the independent review into free over-60s swimming was wrong and reinstate the money? The belief in the infallibility of independent reviews and inspectors is to me incredibly worrying—that these people are not infallible. This is money that is really useful in that it gets people out and exercising—the over-60s—and keeps them out of hospital.

I welcome the real-terms growth in the health and social services budget, but I fear that if it's given to health boards, which vary from at best dysfunctional to at worst failing, then we'll see very little improvement in health performance despite the real-terms growth in expenditure. Some health problems are well known: an undervalued, underfunded, and in some cases underperforming primary healthcare service. A&E is a default rather than the GP far too often when people are taken ill, sometimes recommended by the GP, some of whom will not provide emergency appointments, including to very young children and babies. Unless primary care is adequately funded and all primary care provided to an acceptable standard, then A&E queues will continue to grow. 

Will you take an intervention?

Certainly. 

Thank you. Very grateful. So, would you therefore agree with me that we should use the budgeting process to ensure that some of those resources come out of some aspects of secondary care when we can and to put that directly into primary care? And would you agree with me that we clearly can't trust the health boards to do that by themselves? 

Yes, I would, and, yes, I said exactly the same thing last year and the year before. So, welcome.

An example of a large organisation not working effectively is the Welsh ambulance service. This desperately needs to be run on a series of much smaller footprints.

We've got long orthopaedic waiting lists, and these need addressing. I've got someone who's been waiting between four and eight years, depending on which list you look at, to have a shoulder operation.

Can I just—will you take an intervention?

Yes.

There was a report, of course, an independent report into the Welsh ambulance service a number of years ago that recommended splitting the ambulance service up between emergency transport and routine transport to hospitals. It was welcomed on all sides of this Chamber, but no progress has been made, actually—[Interruption.] No progress has been made. It was supposed to be split completely. That was what this Assembly agreed and that's what the Government's policy was at the time. Do you regret that that isn't the case?

Well, I'm not sure that splitting it would actually be particularly beneficial. I think that actually having it under the control of hospitals so they are responsible for the ambulances waiting outside, rather than it being somebody else's responsibility—it makes no sense whatsoever. The ambulances are waiting outside, and it's not in the health board's interest to get the people out because they're not responsible for it.

Individual hospital management and consultants need greater control over what they do. Social services needs additional funding to speed up hospital discharges. Money needs to go to the hospitals, not to management consultants.

On the economy, what we should have understood by now is that offering large financial incentives to companies to move branch factories to Wales does not work in the long term. If you must give financial incentives better than anywhere else—they don't want to come here, and they will leave when they get a better offer from countries like Hungary.

The best expenditure to grow the economy is educational expenditure. Companies come in because of the quality of their employees, and education is the way of growing it. How much do you think California is offering companies to go to California to grow? They don't. How much is Cambridge having to offer? They don't. If you've got the quality of education, you don't need to try and bribe companies to come in.

On the environment, the Welsh Government has called a climate change emergency and they're giving the smallest real-terms revenue increase to the environment portfolio. If the climate and climate change is a priority, then additional real-terms funding of the environment portfolio should be a priority.

Can I just try and finish off on income tax? It's not going to increase. Scotland didn't increase it, with all the opportunities they had, when they could move it up by plus or minus 3 per cent. I would guarantee that, in 10 years' time, no-one will change it one way or the other. If you take 1 per cent off, you lose £200 million, approximately. If you add 1 per cent, you gain £200 million, which is not going to make a substantial difference, but will annoy a lot of people.

This may, of course, be a one-off real-terms growth budget. As we leave the European Union, we will find out who is correct. Will leaving the European Union cause our currency and our economy to grow, or will it cause them to shrink? We're going to find out this time next year which one's right. 

The increase in the draft local government revenue settlement 2020-21 is welcomed, made possible, of course, by the UK Government's prudent economic management since 2010, when the UK budget deficit was the worst in the G20, behind only Ireland and Greece in the EU. If the UK Government had instead grown the big deficit it inherited, someone else would have owned the UK economy and required bigger cuts.

Last month, I again challenged the local government Minister here over the Welsh Government's local government funding formula, noting that, under this, nine out of 22 Welsh authorities received an increase in the current financial year, with Cardiff up 0.9 per cent and Swansea up 0.5 per cent, but Wrexham down 0.1 per cent, and Flintshire down 0.3 per cent, despite each having equivalent population increases.

Alongside Flintshire, the councils with the largest cuts of 0.3 per cent included Conwy and Anglesey, although Conwy and Anglesey are amongst the five local authorities in Wales where 30 per cent or more of workers are paid less than the voluntary living wage. Prosperity levels per head in Anglesey are the lowest in Wales, at just under half those in Cardiff, and Conwy council has the highest proportion of over-65s in Wales at 25 per cent, compared to Cardiff on 13 per cent, which has the smallest. It is great that more of us are living longer—I'm in my 60s—but this adds to cost pressures in those counties with higher populations of older people.

In her reply, the Minister again stated:

'The splitting up of that pot is done via the democratic processes of the WLGA.'

How does the finance Minister therefore respond to the statement made by the WLGA to Wrexham.com that:

'The WLGA does not play a role in deciding the settlement nor does it have full details of the settlement or authorities' allocations until it is published'?

Lo and behold, four of the—. Mike, yes, certainly, Mr Hedges.

Two quick points. Will you agree with me that what we should be seeing is the Welsh Government publishing the calculations so that we can all actually see how you get to those numbers? If those were published, then we'd see who was right and who was wrong.

The second point I would like to make, and I hope you would agree with me, is that the amount of money the Welsh Government gives—. It used to be called the 'rate support grant', it was the money that was given out to support local authorities after their rates were taken into account. And we know that Monmouth has an average band—a median band property in Monmouth is band D, and in Blaenau Gwent, it is band A.

I've always found that actually, the Welsh Government and WLGA have been perfectly willing to share those briefings on those calculations. The problem at core isn't the way the calculations are done, because I accept they're done correctly; it's the formula, which is now nearly two decades old and needs reviewing.

And, lo and behold, four of the five authorities to see the largest increase in 2020-21 are Labour-run councils in south Wales. The Vale of Glamorgan, previously Conservative-run, has gone from a 0.1 per cent decrease this year to one of the highest increases, at 4.9 per cent, now it's run by Labour. However, four of the five bottom authorities in terms of funding increases are again the same authorities in north Wales.

Compared with a top increase of 5.4 per cent in Labour-run Newport, Conwy is twenty-first out of 22, with a 3.4 per cent increase; Wrexham, twentieth, with 3.5 per cent; Flintshire, nineteenth, with 3.7 per cent; and Anglesey, eighteenth, with 3.8 per cent; while Conservative-led Monmouthshire is again bottom, with a 3 per cent increase. This massive distortion in funding will disadvantage the worst-funded councils when seeking to tackle the funding pressures recently identified by the WLGA. So, how does the Minister respond to the letter sent to her in October by Flintshire County Council, signed by its leader and the leaders of all groups, which said,

'Flintshire has engaged with Welsh Government to make our case over a series of budget-setting years. We still contend that as a low-funded council per capita under the Local Government Funding Formula we are more exposed than most', adding

'We would welcome a private discussion with you over our case for support'?

How does the Minister respond to the statement by the leader of Monmouthshire that,

'I am disappointed with this settlement. The UK Government gave sufficient resource to the Welsh Government to do significantly better than this and they have failed local government in Wales again. Furthermore,' he said,

'we yet again see massive distortions in the funding received by some councils in comparison to others. A differential between 3% and 5.4% is ridiculous in current times. Something needs to be done to address this variation'?

How does the Minister respond to the statement by the leader of Conwy council that,

'I am disappointed that yet again Conwy and North Wales is not receiving its fair share of funding'?

How does she respond to the constituent who wrote asking how Wrexham having the third lowest increase in Wales can be justified when Wrexham has

'three of the four wards with the highest poverty rates in Wales'?

How does she respond to the statement by the leader of Wrexham that,

'I am furious with the settlement from the Welsh government, it’s a disgrace the way Wrexham is being treated receiving crumbs from the table once again'?

And, finally, will the Welsh Labour manifesto for 2021 include the commitment that will be in the Welsh Conservative manifesto to an independent review of the local government funding formula to ensure that all local authorities are provided with a fair settlement that provides the sustainable resources they need within the pot available?

As the Member who leads on local government for Plaid Cymru, I'm very pleased to take part in this debate this afternoon.

We're all aware of the pressure facing local government services and the financial pressures that are increasing, and these were clear back in the days when I used to be a county councillor in the City and County of Swansea, and pressures are worsening and budgets are becoming even more tight. It's true to say that there is additional funding for local government in this draft budget, but it's insufficient to respond to the increasing demands for local government services, as Rhun and Helen have already mentioned. There is so much mention made of preventative services, and it’s in local government that a number of those services are placed, for example, environmental health, housing, education and, of course, social care.

Yesterday, as we've already heard, we heard about the challenges facing the health service in Hywel Dda with winter pressures meaning cancelling treatments that aren't emergency treatments. And indeed, winter after winter, if not year after year, a vast percentage of patients on our acute hospital wards are only there waiting for social care arrangements to be made. They're healthy enough to leave hospital but they can't leave. Six hundred pounds a day is the cost to be in a bed in a hospital. Six hundred pounds per week is the cost to be in a residential home. When close to have the patients on some wards today—. On some wards in Wales, almost half of the patients are healthy enough to leave those hospitals on a medical basis. That situation is appalling. We need to take steps now to change the situation—a step change is needed now. These people are in our hospitals and they shouldn't be there. The arrangements should be made for them. We need to make that step change now.

As well as the lack of beds and the lack of staff, those are the perennial problems that still pose challenges. As others have said, we've been dealing with these issues and we've been discussing them year after year. We need to step up to the plate and take action, as Helen Mary Jones said. So, bearing in mind all of the funding going into social care at the moment, but into a system that is failing and is piecemeal in nature, with patients still suffering, and indeed dying prematurely, a care system that is expensive and complex, with care staff on short-term contracts and zero-hours contracts, and with a lack of training and so on—we all know about these issues—isn't it time to have a radical scheme, a new plan, and have a social care service for Wales that is funded from general taxation, exactly like our national health service, and working in partnership with that service and funded from general taxation, a national care service for Wales, exactly like our national health service? Thank you very much.

Like others in this debate this afternoon, I want to give a welcome to the budget and the commitment that's running through the budget to providing the funding that is available to public services. I want to particularly welcome the £8 million additional funding for additional learning needs. It's something that I've spoken about on a number of occasions. The £20 million we allocated to additional learning needs in delivering the reform agenda, the transformational agenda, is not sufficient at present, given the time taken to deliver this reform. So, it is right and proper that there is money provided for additional learning needs education and it is right and proper that that money is ring-fenced for additional learning needs. And I welcome that very much. 

I also welcome the more general support for funding for education. We had an excellent debate, I felt, here some weeks ago, some months ago, on how we fund our schools and I'm glad that the Government and the Minister have ensured that there is additional support for education as part of this budget.

I also welcome the funding for climate policy. We've seen dramatically and tragically recently the impact of climate on people and our planet. I think it's right and proper that we do ensure that we do provide for climate policy within the budget.

Can I say, I regret very much the tone of Conservative interventions in this debate on the funding for local government? It's right and proper that we debate and discuss funding for local government and it is right and proper that we have a debate about whether the formula is sufficient and actually delivers the funding that it requires. It's right and proper that we have that debate. But both in the opening Conservative contribution and the more recent one, there was an allegation or an insinuation that funding is somehow fixed to go to one part of the country rather than another part of the country, that people in north Wales are pitted against people in south Wales or elsewhere. I regret that very greatly.

I think you'll find that, if you look at the average funding settlements over the past 20 years, the evidence is pretty clear in terms of which areas tend to get the larger increases or smaller reductions in the revenue support grant versus those that don't. It's for the Welsh Government to explain, but would you agree with me that one thing that we do need to try to bring, in order to have confidence in the local government funding formula, is that the Welsh Government should initiate an independent commission in order to look at this formula to get it right and fit for the future?

I've heard Conservative Members here over the years making this point and Conservative councillors telling us not to touch it— [Interruption.] The fundamental point—[Interruption.] The fundamental point I make, though, is a different one—that is, the destructive way in which the debate was framed. It's north against south, east against west, rural against urban. Blaenau Gwent was eighteenth, I think, in the current range of funding. It's never been first, it's never been top, but I've never, ever made an allegation of the sort that's been made from the Conservative benches this afternoon, and I would invite Conservative Members to reconsider their tone and approach to that debate.

Can I also say that I do regret that the Government is not finding the funding to support the continuation of bus subsidy at current levels? We heard at Finance Committee that there is going to be a cut in the subsidy available to provide for bus services. I will say very gently to the finance Minister that it's all very well to deliver electric buses for some of us, but if we haven't got any buses at all, quite frankly that's not very much of a commitment. So we do need to see—. And if the Government is able to look at the budget during this process, and to ensure that there is an increase in the subsidy available for bus services, that would be very much appreciated.

But the fundamental point I want to make, rather than simply looking at budget lines, is this: we have seen here not quite Theresa May's words become reality—that austerity's over—but we've seen a loosening of purse strings and we've seen additional funding for public services. I regret that we're not also seeing the radical reform of public services to ensure that that money is well spent. The debate we had on education funding wasn't simply about the amount of funding, but the complexity of the structure of that funding leaving this place and arriving in the classroom. There's no purpose at all in increasing the quantum of funding available if the system remains so complex as to ensure that teachers and others aren't able to access that amount of funding. So we don't simply need to increase the funding available in the traditional, old-fashioned way, but we also need to reform the way in which we operate our public services, and this is more important today than it has been in the past, because when you read the budget documentation, whether it's the chief economist's report, the Office for Budget Responsibility analysis, or even the Welsh Government's own tax policy report, the word that comes at you time and time again is 'uncertainty'—uncertainty about tax revenues, uncertainty about the tax base, uncertainty about future funding levels, uncertainty about future economic performance, uncertainty about our ability to both deliver the funding required and raise the funding that we need.

In a position where you have future uncertainty, where you have resources available, it is my view that the Government should have been far, far more radical in what it is producing today. It was the Conservative approach to simply increase all budgets by a fair degree, which we all welcome in the short term, but the radical budget would have been a budget for reform, a budget that would have ensured that our public services don't just receive the funding they require to survive next year and this year, but are in a fit state to survive in the long term. I agree very much with the point that Huw Irranca made earlier in this debate about the squeeze being faced by local government, but if we continue to fund the health service at current levels, as we all commit on all sides of this Chamber to do, then all other services will suffer as a consequence of that single decision.

You will need to bring your contribution to a close now.

And I will do so, Presiding Officer. You are very gentle and very sympathetic to me, I agree.

Don't push me. [Laughter.]

I ask the Government, in closing, to not only deliver the funding levels, but deliver the radical reform that a Labour Government should be doing to ensure that we have public services fit for the future.

This has been a fascinating debate. I hope the Minister is listening to this and bearing in mind that it's a debate on a statement and we're all looking forward to hearing some answers to questions in your response to this debate.

And I think the first of those questions I'm going to steal from Helen Mary, which is 'how?' And, unfortunately, Alun Davies has nicked all my thunder here because I want to talk about school funding, because I want to know how you intend to see that any increase in the budget reaches schools in Wales, something which, actually, needs immediate attention this year and can't afford to wait for the results of the Sibieta review. Because in the last decade—and we can argue about the amounts on this—Wales has seen a sustained decade of lower spending per pupil than in England. It's had effects.

We're in this position at the moment where we have a lower number of teachers hoping to train here in Wales. We've had a bigger drop in numbers of teachers than in other parts of the UK, and I see nothing in this budget about how to attract additional teachers. There is money in there; we're talking about CPD and how to get existing teachers ready for the new curriculum, but it doesn't say anything about we're going to increase the number of teachers. It doesn't say anything about how to improve teaching resources. The lack of those was noted in the PISA comments—sorry, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development report on PISA. It actually made a point that there's an issue in Wales about teaching resources, and I didn't see anything either, although obviously I could have missed it, about how schools who are not seeking twenty-first century school funding for brand-new schools, how on earth they're going to be able to afford just to carry on the day-to-day maintenance of the schools that they have when that's one of their major sources of complaints. And it goes back to a point that Mike Hedges made earlier about prevention. Oh, you're trying to take—

I've got a quick intervention. Of course, you know the money that local authorities hold, some of that is for some of these major repairs. If I talk about Plasmarl school in your region and my constituency, they've had a new roof, and they've had full electrical rewiring. So, that's what the money held centrally is partly used for, and it is what you've just asked for. 

But, of course, not all councils have that money, to that amount, held centrally.  I'm very pleased for Plasmarl school, actually, and I'm going to come on to the indicator based assessments here in a minute. Because the point that did impress me in your earlier comments was about prevention. And, of course, schools are not just about academic education; they're community builders. To me, they're one of the great preventative services, and as Mike himself mentioned there, if we educate our children in a way that we would all want to see, I think, they ought to become the engines of our economy as well.

As we've heard, the UK education secretary has committed this £14 billion for schools in England. It's over a period of time, for which there will be a consequential of £2.4 billion to be spent as you wish in due course, Trefnydd. That's on top, of course, of the £135 million education consequential from this year's spending review, again to be spent as you wish. And I make this distinction between the education budgets and school funding, because you will say, and I'm sure you will to say to me, that the education budget has been protected, more money has gone into it, and I'd be the first to acknowledge and welcome the additional money going into those departmental expenditure limits, but that is very different from saying that school budgets are being protected. They come, as we know, from local government. Local government's had an uplift this year as well, but as Huw Irranca Davies mentioned earlier, they have taken a real hammering over the last few years, and because of the obscurity of the funding formulas for schools, which Alun Davies referred to, it's been virtually impossible to understand how this can be repaired very, very quickly.

I think we all have to acknowledge as well that, this year, more than any year, we've seen councils, teachers, school leaders, you name it, speak in numbers and with one voice in a way that we haven't heard before. They need the money, and even though the school IBA figures used in this year have gone up, and I'm going to welcome that in principle, we all know that those are just indicators. There is no obligation on local authorities to spend that money on giving that money directly to schools, at all. And to nick your metaphor, Huw Irranca Davies, some schools don't have the opportunity to start turning taps on, and that needs to be fixed yet.

So, if we're going to be talking about something radical here, if you're resistant to the direct funding of schools, Trefnydd, how will this budget guarantee meaningful growth in core school funding, and actually, not least for children with additional learning needs, because the money that was coming your way was £35 million for that, and £8 million to £9 million is not a fair reflection of the money that you're getting for additional learning needs?

I just want to finish very, very quickly and pick up on something that Rhun mentioned: a very flat settlement, if you like, for the Welsh language, and some very vague comments in behind that. I would really like to know if there's actually going to be extra money for Cymraeg i Oedolion this year and whether the extra money for apprenticeships, which is to be welcomed, includes the work of the Coleg Cymraeg Cenedlaethol in apprenticeships, or is that from a different budget. And—I'm not going to have time to get a proper answer on this, I know—what exactly is the comisiynydd's budget going to be, particularly as it seems that the requirements of their office are going to be quite different from what they had previously? Diolch.

I contribute to this debate in my role as my party's spokesperson on the environment. And, as some people have already suggested, there is a feeling of business as usual to this budget. And that is disappointing, particularly given the declaration of a climate emergency. As you've already heard, we would expect transformation in the way that the Government is using its budget to address that emergency. But let's be honest, if you were to look at this budget, and compare it to last year's budget, do you see any fundamental difference, any real difference? Is there anything in this draft budget that gives a clear signal that there has been a fundamental shift towards tackling the climate emergency in terms of the Government's priorities? And if you can't identify that fundamental difference, then it does bring to question the credibility of that declaration of a climate emergency, and, indeed, how serious this Government is in tackling the greatest challenge facing humanity today.

Now, of course, there are some items of individual expenditure that are to be welcomed, and I wouldn't fail to welcome any additional funding, but it's not to the extent that we would have hoped for. This £140 million of capital funding for decarbonisation has been referred to—it's not the only item, there are others. One hundred and forty million pounds is to be welcomed of course, but let's remind ourselves that this Government spent £100 million on preparations for the M4 relief road that will never happen. That puts that figure in its context, in my view.

Now, the Future Generations Commissioner for Wales presented a 10-point plan last year to highlight where we needed to prioritise expenditure. And she talked about transport, housing, land use, and renewable energy. We have a hydro sector that is still waiting to hear from Government if there is going to be rate relief continuing for the next financial year, although, of course, they have made it clear that that would mean, without that change, many of those hydro businesses would be unsustainable. Now, the standards commissioner, sorry, the Future Generations Commissioner—there are too many commissioners, I fear— has outlined £5 billion over 15 years for retrofitting. That's a huge sum, but over 15 years it's a lot more affordable. But that isn't one-way expenditure, because it is spend to save, it creates growth. We can see how, according to the commissioner, Welsh GVA would increase by £2.2. billion by making that investment. It would save £350 per year for the ordinary family’s bills. It would also save more than £70 million a year for our health service in Wales, because it would help us in tackling some of the health problems facing people in Wales. So, we are talking here about the economic, the environmental and the social, and that’s the holy grail in terms of the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015. But four years after passing that legislation, we are still waiting to see that shift happening in the way that the Welsh Government draws up and prioritises its budget.

And as a Member representing north Wales, I saw in the narrative of the budget that there is a reference to £200 million capital for the south Wales metro and the north Wales metro. But I see that £20 million of that—just 10 per cent of that—will come to north Wales. Now, I assume the Government—certainly after the general election—will be aware that there is an expectation among constituents in north Wales that they should see the investment and the job creation that they deserve, not necessarily the investment that they've seen in the past. I would call on the Government to scrutinise its budget carefully in that context, in order to ensure equity in terms of investment across Wales.

And I'll just close, if I may—like others, I was disappointed at some of the opening remarks from Conservative contributions to this debate. You're more than happy to rock up here today and take the plaudits for any increases in budgets; of course, we couldn't see you for dust when it was about taking the blame for cuts. You have the audacity to tell us here, in this Chamber, that we've never had it so good. I don't remember you coming here two or three years ago, or indeed during any of the previous 10 years of the Conservative UK Government, telling us that we've never had it so bad.

I'm grateful to you for taking an intervention. Will you take the opportunity—

Well, I've finished.

That's more than an attempt to take an intervention—

Well, that was very uncharitable of you.

No, it wasn't uncharitable. Llyr Gruffydd had been succinct in his contribution, and I'm particularly grateful for that. We have three remaining speakers and I'll call you all, and I urge you all to be as succinct as Llyr Gruffydd. Joyce Watson.

I will be succinct, and I will carry on in the same vein. I want to welcome two particular areas that will have a significant impact on women's lives. Because we know over the years that, with the Tory 10-year austerity—. And I refuse to call it 'austerity': it was a political choice to not invest in people's lives. That's what it was. Let's call it out for what it was. So, for those 10 years, women suffered significantly from that choice.

One of the areas that we are investing in, improving women's lives, is the £3.1 million towards period dignity for free period products in schools and further education, which will allow 140,000 pupils and 53,000 students to access free products. This is unthinkable, that we have to invest Government money, which we do quite willingly, and I'm going to make that clear, because of the failure in the system that has been run—the benefits system primarily—by the UK Government and it still is. So, I hope you'll apologise for that.

Another area where we are also investing, which is going to make a huge difference to women's lives is the £40 million childcare offer for Wales. It is the best in the UK. I know that some other people are carers, and I know there are male carers as well, but 30 hours of early education or childcare for children of working parents does help those parents to go back to work.

I know that some people would like to see improvements on that—we all would. But let's be clear: we made a choice, with the limited funds that we had, to invest in that to make sure that parents had an opportunity to go back to work so that they could, if they were taking up 20 hours of free childcare, have £90 at their disposal, in their pockets, to spend in their households so that they could at least try to negate some of the cuts that have been visited on those households by the 10 years of political choice not to invest in their families.

So, my question to the Minister is this: can you assure us that, moving forward, we will retain the best childcare offer within the UK, that we will fund that because it is the best route? When parents are working, it is the best route that the children have to ensure that they can come out of poverty.

I'd like to ask two very specific questions to the Minister—questions that I've asked many times in this Chamber and I've even had to resort to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 in order to try and get answers to these questions, still to no avail. I have not received answers yet. But what I have asked on numerous occasions in the past is: how much has been allocated for improvements and job creation and economic development in the Valleys as part of the Valleys taskforce? 

I've also specifically asked how much and what type of investment we can expect to see in the Rhondda, over and above what you're already investing everywhere in buses, in empty homes and so on. Previous answers have mentioned expenditure planned for other parts of Rhondda Cynon Taf, but not the Rhondda. So, my questions are clear and specific and I'd be really grateful if I could have clear and specific answers this time. How much new money is the Valleys taskforce getting, and how much new money is the Rhondda—not Pontypridd, not Llantrisant, not Aberdare, not Mountain Ash, not even Blaenau Gwent—but how much money can we expect to be invested in the Rhondda as part of the work of the Valleys taskforce from this budget, and what can we expect to see as a result?

I think there's a lot to welcome in the Welsh Government's draft budget and I applaud Ministers for their commitment to invest in the public services that we rely on and indeed in the very future of our nation, and that's despite, of course, as other Members have referred to, Welsh budget is still feeling the consequences, very much so, of the impact of a decade of Westminster's ideologically driven and unnecessary austerity measures.

I just want to talk about one aspect of the budget that I know will be welcomed on high streets and towns and villages throughout the Cynon Valley, and that's the commitment to extend the Welsh Government's enhanced high streets and retail rates relief scheme for a further year. This support for retailers in Wales with a rateable value of up to £50,000 is a real benefit to the small businesses that I know are the backbone of the local economy in my constituency, and I'm sure it's the same in other constituencies up and down Wales. That's shops and retail units, but also the cafes, pubs and restaurants that lead to a thriving town-centre environment and that real community feel as well. We know that this intervention, backed by additional funding, means that over 1,500 small and medium-sized businesses in 2020-1 will receive help towards their rates. And importantly, I think, for businesses with a rateable value of up to £9,100, it means that their rates bills will be reduced to zero for retail properties. Higher values will receive a lifeline of up to £2,500, and that is, of course, in addition to the Welsh Government's permanent small business rates relief scheme.

Similarly, I think the additional discretionary rates relief allocated to local authorities to deal with specific local needs is really important, and it shows the Welsh Government's commitment to empower local government too. I welcome the Minister's announcement that she will double the money allocated to this strand of the package.

I think it's also important to remember that, combined, the Welsh Government's policy means that a higher proportion of small and medium-sized businesses receive support than is the case in England or Scotland. In Wales the scheme currently supports almost 70 per cent of small businesses here, and I think that's something we should be really proud of. The comparative figures for England are just 38 per cent, and 45 per cent for Scotland. All together, what this shows to me is we've got a Welsh Government that's on the side of small business in Wales and it builds on the pre-Christmas Non-Domestic Rating (Multiplier) (Wales) Order 2019. I'm proud to support the Welsh Government's draft budget today, and I commend the finance Minister for what I think is her first draft budget.

The Minister for Finance to reply to the debate—Rebecca Evans.

Diolch, Llywydd. I welcome the debate that we've had this afternoon and most of the comments and representations that we've had from colleagues. And as I outlined in my opening statement, this is a budget that's taking place amidst uncertainty and evolving circumstances, and it's also a budget set in the long shadow cast by a decade of imposed austerity by the UK Government and despite claims austerity isn't yet over. And it's also a budget set with no clarity on our exit from the European Union or a clear picture on the outlook for public spending beyond next year. And we'll also, obviously, need to mange the consequences of the UK budget after we've finalised our spending plans for 2020-1. This really is the challenging backdrop to the debate that we've had today.

I reassure Suzy Davies that I always listen attentively to all contributions during my debates, and I will try and respond to as many of the points that have been raised this afternoon, but, of course, all of my colleagues look forward to attending their subject committees for scrutiny this week and next week, and there'll be opportunities to delve into some further depth on some of these issues as well.

Like Llyr Gruffydd I was really struck by being told by Darren Millar that we've never had it so good. I would love to see Darren Millar say that to the people who turn up at my surgery absolutely destitute and in despair, incredibly stressed and in anxiety with the situations that face them. People are struggling as a result of austerity and welfare reform. Tell that to people who are visiting foodbanks. Tell that to people who are working in the gig economy with zero-hours contracts and not knowing what kind of certainty they can plan on.

The Minister's inviting me to accompany her to her constituency; I'd love to have you accompany me to my constituency to meet patients who have been waiting 12 hours plus for attention in emergency departments, individuals who've been waiting two years for their hip, knee and shoulder operations, and to see the many people in schools who are concerned about the level of disparity between school funding in Wales—in Conwy and in Denbighshire—versus school funding over the border in England. I'd love you to come and explain to them why things are so bad here in Wales compared to over the border.

And I will come on to the issues of health and education as I move through my response to the debate, but I'll start off by saying that Welsh Government is really keen to do what we can to keep money in people's pockets. Some of the measures that we're taking across Government to ensure that we're tackling poverty actually mean that people in certain circumstances could be £2,000 better off in cash just because of the decisions that Welsh Government is taking to support them. Examples in the draft budget include £8.4 million for the pupil deprivation grant access, and that's funding for families to help buy school uniforms and sports kits, equipment for out-of-school-hours trips, and equipment for extra-curricular activities as well, and in the budget we're providing an additional £3.2 million to further extend the scheme to more year groups as a result of the success of that scheme so far. There's £7 million for free school meals in the draft budget, £2.7 million for the school holiday enrichment programme, opportunities for children between the ages of 7 and 11 to be more active, eat healthily, develop friendships, whilst also making the most of the local school facilities in disadvantaged areas during the summer holidays. An additional £1.8 million will be allocated in this draft budget to enable the extension of this programme to up to another 7,600 children, with £1.1 million for the Holiday Hunger Playworks pilot, providing an extension to the work that we're doing on this important agenda. Joyce Watson referred to the important funding of £3.1 million for period dignity; there's another £200,000 for the period poverty scheme as well. There's the work that we're doing to support people into training and employment. Joyce Watson also referred to us having the most generous childcare offer here in Wales, with £60 million in the draft budget for that, and that's an increase of £20 million on last year's funding for this scheme. And we have provided local authorities with the reassurance that, should the demand be even greater than that, we will look to fund any additional demand so that local authorities don't need to be worrying about that.

Would the Minister give way? Could I just say on that, when you actually humanise that story—I speak to constituents in very low-paid working families who, regardless of the criticism of how much further we could go with the childcare offer, tell me that they're £200 or £250 a week better off because they're not now paying for childcare and they've been able to expand their shifts in work as well and bring more money into the household. We don't have control of welfare, but things we can do are making a material difference. The danger, however—and I wonder if she'd agree with me on this—is it's a bit like when we introduced the winter fuel allowance for pensioners. It happens now, it arrives in the cheque, people say, 'Oh, we've always had that', but they only have these things because there's a Labour Government here or in Westminster.

That's absolutely right. All of these things that we're doing to ensure that people keep money in their pockets are political choices that we have made about the way in which we spend our budget, and the kind of draft budgets that we put before this Assembly year on year. So, other examples would be the education maintenance allowance—£30 a week for 16 to 18-year-olds living in low-income households. I hear Rhianon saying 'You won't get that in England', and she's absolutely right there. There's £4.4 million for the Welsh Government grant for further education, so that's up to £1,500 for a full-time course, or £750 for a part-time course for students aged 19 or over, again from those low-income households. And I could go on and on, including things such as the £244 million we're investing in the council tax reduction scheme. The discretionary assistance fund—£12.6 million, providing urgent financial assistance to people who really do find themselves destitute, to be able to buy food, pay for their gas and electricity and buy other essential household items. Again, we're looking to see what we can do always to bolster that particular fund, because we know how important it is to people who apparently have never had it so good.

So, across Welsh Government we can see that there is around £1 billion of funding that is going directly into anti-poverty schemes across all portfolios, and I think that's something that we should all be very proud of, because it does differentiate this as a Labour Government budget as compared to others.

There have been questions as to what we expect to achieve from our additional funding from the NHS. Well, of course, we continue to expect NHS Wales to make progress in reducing waiting times, and ensuring that the focus really is on those people who are currently waiting the longest. I know that NHS organisations are due to submit their budget plans for 2020-1 at the end of January, and we'll be looking for those plans to deliver improved performance for patients next year. And I know that the health Minister looks forward to examining those plans, and he'll then approve or not approve those plans.

Some of the specific things that you can see in our draft budget today in health includes investment from NHS Wales in the major trauma network for south Wales, west Wales and south Powys. And the aim of that major trauma network is to enhance patient outcomes and experience across the entire patient pathway from the point of wounding to recovery, and that network will improve patient outcomes by saving lives and preventing avoidable disability, returning more patients to their families, to work and to education.

We're also investing in new treatments, with £16 million per year being allocated to health boards to support our commitment to invest £80 million over the course of this administration, taking the time that people wait for those treatments from 90 days now just down to 10 days, and I think that's something that we should be very, very proud of.

We're also investing in precision medicine, through genomics and cell and gene therapies, and this approach to diagnosis and treatment will mean that patients will have access to more personalised diagnoses and treatments, with greatly improved outcomes. And, again, there was a question about primary care, and we'll continue to be investing in primary care, increasing the primary care cluster funding in the next financial year by £10 million, and that will be focused on implementing the primary care model for Wales and collaborative working through those primary care clusters.

In 2019-20 we announced an increase of £25 million in the general medical services contract, taking it up to more than £536 million. And in addition, the primary care development fund of over £40 million is supporting the primary care workforce and cluster working. And, of course, there's a really strong emphasis on prevention and early intervention in our draft spending plans, and some of the new spend includes the £5.5 million to support the 'Healthy Weight: Healthy Wales' strategy. And there are also a number of really important capital investments as well. So, we're investing over £374 million in the healthcare infrastructure in Wales in 2021, and some of that will support some really major projects. For example, the final construction phases of the Grange hospital in Cwmbran, and the next phase of refurbishment of the Prince Charles Hospital in Merthyr, and I think that that's exciting times for the NHS in Wales.

Questions were raised with regard to the local government settlement and how we arrive at the sums of money that local authorities receive. I think any suggestion that there is anything biased about the decisions that are made through the formula are absolutely shameful. There is absolutely no evidence that any authorities, any rural authorities or other types of authorities, are being disadvantaged through the local government funding formula. The core revenue funding we provide to local authorities every year is distributed according to a relative need formula, and that takes account of a wealth of information on the demographic, physical, economic and social characteristics of authorities. But it is a fact that, generally, the allocations to north Wales authorities this year are below the Welsh average, and that is due to the lower relative change in population and the pupil numbers in comparison to the rest of Wales as a whole. Now, that's a feature of the funding formula, and that funding formula has been developed in consultation with local government through the distribution sub-group, and that's a technical working group whose members do include senior local government officers from across Wales. It does include the Welsh Local Government Association and independent experts, to ensure the fair treatment of those different factors. And included within the formula are a number of indicators that account for the varying degrees of population sparsity across authorities, and they use schools as part of the formula. And all of these things are very, very closely overseen by the independent members of the distribution sub-group to ensure that there's no bias, either in favour of or against the interests of any particular authority.

In terms of making the information public, the details of the formula and its application is set out in the background information for the standard spending assessments, and that's commonly known as the Green Book. The Green Book is published annually, and it also includes the formula and calculations that are used to determine the standard spending assessments for each individual service area. It will be published here in Wales after the local government settlement has been published, which is the final publication, which is scheduled for 25 February.

I'm going to be really, really quick now, Llywydd, in addressing some of the issues on school investment. And of course, we are increasing our investment to local authorities, who are the primary way in which money gets through to schools. So, we have £1.8 billion going into education across local authorities and the education MEG. There was some specific questions relating to, for example, the three-year allocation of funding. Well, we're unable to provide the three-year allocation of funding; schools in England have been able to have a three-year settlement, but of course we only have that one-year settlement, so we can't provide the level of reassurance and certainty that we would like to. ALN—really pleased that we've been able to provide additional funding within additional learning needs, and the post-specialist placements funding as well. Both of those have increased, and those don't relate to the ALN transformation programme—that's extra, additional funding on top.

Decarbonisation has been absolutely crucial to our ambitions this year. And what I really want to make clear is that, actually, the additional £96 million, as part of that £140 million of capital expenditure, is just a part of the picture. So, where you'll see most of the exciting things happening, in terms of decarbonisation, they're already happening within portfolios within the rest of the budget. So, you'll see examples through the level of social housing grant that we're making available. All housing now—all social housing—is built to the Welsh housing quality standard. That's part of our decarbonisation agenda, but of course you won't see it in the additional funding. And the same for all of the items in our low-carbon delivery plan, and the work that Ken Skates is leading on through the economic action plan, which is driving sustainable growth and combating climate change. Because that's one of the calls to action for private businesses, which they have to do if they want to access the economic futures fund. And of course it plays a major role in the economic contract as well.

I just want to reassure Members there have been no cuts to the Welsh language budgets, and I know that the Minister will be able to provide further information on that. It's one of those situations where you see money moving between lines within the budget, but the sum doesn't actually add up to a cut, as it were.

So, I think I've already set out our approach to taxes in my opening remarks, and of course you'll have seen it in the documents. There are no secrets on the way, there's nothing that we're hiding, as Darren Millar was suggesting—that we might be introducing new taxes within the year; this isn't going to happen. So, despite all of the challenges that we've discussed, I want to re-emphasise that the investments that we've taken in this budget, and over the term of this Government, have protected our valued public services, and helped us to invest in our priority areas, with a view of supporting our ambitions for a more equal, more prosperous, and a greener Wales. Thank you.

I thank the Minister.