We will reconvene. Group 11 is the next group for discussion. This group relates to resources for the citizen voice body. Amendment 57 is the lead amendment in the group, and I call on Angela Burns to move the lead amendment and speak to the other amendment in the group. Angela Burns. 

Amendment 57 (Angela Burns, supported by Caroline Jones) moved.

Diolch, Llywydd. I formally move amendments 57 and 58, tabled in my name. This is about the duty to ensure sufficient resources, and the amendments seek to request that Welsh Ministers should ensure that those sufficient resources for the citizen voice body are put in place.

These amendments have been brought forward from Stage 2, as while the Minister outlined that they're putting in considerable resources for the CVB, this is to make sure that its functions and importance for the Welsh citizen are not lost or set aside in the future, and the regulatory impact assessment shows just an extra £600,000 in running costs compared to the CHCs.

I do accept the Minister's point that financial decisions have to be made carefully, and I also believe that the buck stops with the Welsh Government when they make these decisions every financial year, but this is not just about a budgetary choice; there are specific needs, including indemnity, public engagement, education and training. These are clear needs that the citizen voice body must continue in order for it to run well. It's of vital importance that the citizen voice body can carry out certain functions in order to be able to effectively scrutinise the Welsh NHS, and without a clear marker to continue this choice, we don’t have reassurance that this will happen well into the future.

The Health, Social Care and Sport Committee was clear about this at Stage 1, stating that it had shared witnesses' concerns about the level of resources allocated to the CVB, with costs associated with its establishment, work across health and social care sectors, and putting regional structures in place. Most importantly, the committee stated that it feels 

'there is a weight of expectation on the new Body, particularly given its extended role to represent the public interest across the health and social care sectors. We do not believe the resource allocation is sufficient to enable it to live up to these expectations.'

As I said, the RIA does outline some of these costs. It remains to be seen though whether these are sufficient, and I want to remind Members of the value that stakeholders place on resourcing the body properly and why it's so important to place that commitment on record.

Social Care Wales said,

'Promoting the new Body and ensuring that the general public understands its role'  is a key priority. They said it's crucial that volunteers to the body receive sufficient training and support from the outset, as well as receiving ongoing support. In their evidence, they said they noted that understanding the implications in terms of resources of a genuinely engaged citizen voice is one that's important to make, and their representative went on to say that they,

'suspect that if the ambitions of this are achieved we will actually see an increase in activity'  and hopefully, that, of course, will require more money.

The older people's commissioner, very clearly, said that as the social care sector is extremely broad, she feels it's essential that the CVB,

'has sufficient resources to develop its functions and to operate smoothly across both sectors'  and it's important that its role,

'is clearly set out and communicated to the public.'

Gelligaer Community Council stated that,

'The new body should be adequately resourced so that it can maintain a presence in local communities and so that the complaints advocates can hear from people who cannot leave their place of care.'

And that's a really important one.

The Royal College of Physicians said:

'this new body should receive the education, training and investment it needs to ensure it effectively delivers advice and support to patients, their friends and family, and the general public about the care they receive.'

We all say we want to support this new citizen voice body so that it can truly represent the voice of the citizens of Wales. In order to do that, in order to undertake that training, that public engagement, that education, an indemnity for volunteers, it needs to have sufficient financial resources. These amendments, 57 and 58, are there to ensure Welsh Ministers make those sufficient resources available.

As I've already noted, we have our concerns about the nature of the citizen voice body that the Government is proposing to set up. But if it is going to be set up, then we have to ensure that it has the ability to operate in a way that has force and power behind it. And, of course, having the appropriate level of resources is vital in that.

Once again, I think that I expect the Government to argue that there's no need for what the amendments call for, because the Minister doesn't have any intention to not provide the resources needed by the new body. But, of course, this legislation doesn't only relate to today's Government, but this legislation is going to commit Governments in the future, and we need assurances for the future. We don't have any assurance about what the health Ministers of the future will do, and, of course, the Minister will be very aware that bodies that are critical of the Government are ones that always carry the risk in terms of losing their funding. So, we need the assurance that's provided by these amendments.

The Minister to contribute to the debate—Vaughan Gething.

Thank you, Llywydd. Unfortunately, I don't support the amendment in the name of Angela Burns. I've been clear on the importance that I attach to establishing a citizen voice body that represents the interests of people across both health and social services. One of the fundamental aims of the Bill is to establish a new national body to represent the citizen voice, with a renewed profile and status, and that is a principle that we are entirely committed to. And in order to achieve it, we will of course need to provide resources that are at a sufficient level. The wording in the Bill that

'Ministers may make payments to the Citizen Voice Body', is the same formulation that has been used when other Welsh Government sponsored bodies have been established, and I gave examples in Stage 2. And as I drew on in the Stage 2 proceedings, we've set out in the regulatory impact assessment the additional investment to be made in the new body at the starting point. These show that the per capita money we're proposing to spend on the body is almost three times the amount that the UK Secretary of State spends on Healthwatch in England. In addition, it's worth noting, and I reported in Stage 2 committee, that we already spend more on our current CHC movement than equivalent bodies in England, Scotland and Northern Ireland. On a per capita basis, the new body will have an increase to go up to £1.32 per head for the population. That compares with equivalent bodies in England that spend 54p per head, 48p per head in Scotland and 84p per head in Northern Ireland. This is comparatively a well-funded body compared to its counterparts right across the United Kingdom.

Welsh Ministers are wholly committed to making payments to the citizen voice body to enable it to perform its functions. Consequently, there is more than sufficient evidence, I believe, to demonstrate that we will be providing the body with the funding it requires to exercise its functions. The body will be a Welsh Government sponsored body. Welsh Ministers provide that body with funds that are sufficient for it to do its job and deliver its functions. Determining what sufficient funds are will be based on a dialogue between the body and Welsh Ministers, as we do with every Government sponsored body. They will of course be in a position to make their case to Welsh Ministers if it is of the view it requires additional funding to undertake their functions properly. Now, I believe that we've set out a case that places this in exactly the same way that other Government sponsored bodies are, in the way that undertake their functions, and I ask Members, therefore, not to support the amendment in this group.

Angela Burns to reply to the debate.

Oh dear, oh dear, Llywydd, I think I rest my case. Rhun ap Iorwerth made a very good point about the fact that these kinds of bodies are the ones that often are the first to lose their funding when times are tight, and, basically, the Minister's reason for not wanting to ensure that—. No, Rhun ap Iorwerth said that. The Minister's main case for not wanting to make sure that there's enough funding in place is the fact that they've already got loads, they've got much more than England, they've got much more than Scotland, much more than Northern Ireland. I don't care. I want a citizen voice body that does the job to protect the Welsh citizen and to be the voice of the Welsh citizen. The funding they have at the moment has to cover the creation of a brand-new body to ensure that it runs well across our very large landscape that we have in Wales. [Interruption.] Yes, of course.

Thank you very much. I'm grateful to you for taking the intervention. Would you also agree with me that, of course, this body is being asked to look at the whole social care as well as health, and that if they're going to be able to do that adequately, then, surely, the amount of resourcing they're going to need is going to be a lot more than what the community health councils use and need at the moment?

Excellent point, Helen Mary, and well made. We need to ensure that this body can do what it's supposed to do. We do not want it to be hamstrung by a lack of funding. We do not want it, in the years to come, to suffer a slow death by a thousand cuts. It's here to represent the citizen. It is their one and only true voice that belongs to them. You need to fund it, Minister, and you need to make sure that that's enshrined in law so that the next person who comes along after you, who may not be quite so generous-hearted, doesn't swipe their funding and use it for something else.

The question is that amendment 57 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] We therefore proceed to a vote on amendment 57. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 21, no abstentions, 27 against. Therefore, amendment 57 is not agreed.

Amendment 57: For: 21, Against: 27, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected

Amendment 58, Angela Burns.

Amendment 58 (Angela Burns, supported by Caroline Jones) moved.

Formally, Llywydd.

The question is that amendment 58 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] We therefore proceed to a vote on amendment 58. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 20, no abstentions, 27 against. Therefore, amendment 58 is not agreed.

Amendment 58: For: 20, Against: 27, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected