Part of the debate – in the Senedd at 5:20 pm on 8 January 2020.
I congratulate the Member on his work, actually, over a long period of time, putting the case for seaside towns, and I congratulate the Conservatives, who are representing rather more, at least at Westminster level, than they were before. But not all seaside towns are deprived. I'm not sure whether we'll hear from David Melding—perhaps he'll be putting the case for Penarth, but I'm not sure that, as a category, seaside towns are necessarily under greater deprivation, and I don't understand the linkage to market towns. Perhaps expanding the reach of the motion gets more support from across the Conservative group, but overall, I don't associate market towns as being, on average, or the first word that comes to my mind to associate with market towns, as one of deprivation. I'm sure there are pockets of deprivation in market towns, and I'm sure some market towns are more deprived than others, but the idea of setting up a special new fund just for seaside towns and market towns I worry is, (1) bureaucratic, and a new fund and structure for doing this may be over the top, and (2) do all seaside towns and market towns—do we want to see that benefit spread on the basis that they are deprived?
So, what are the market towns? We need a definition. We have from Visit Wales a list of 21 market towns, and I have a rather wonderful book I've had at home for some years, Market Town Wales, from David Williams, and he also gives a list, in his case of 25, and some sort of definition. He says there are about 50 towns in Wales where you've got a medium size of lettering on the map. Some were defensive sites, and others—he specifically excludes the linear towns of the southern coalfield, the quarry communities of Snowdonia, and also the industrial centres of north-east Wales. So all those are excluded from his definition of market towns. I'm not sure whether the Conservatives want to exclude it from theirs, or from the benefit from these funds, but I would just question whether this motion as it is written is one that should have support, or whether it's as well thought through as it might have been. Thank you.