The next item, therefore, is the debate on the general principles and the financial resolution of the Local Government and Elections (Wales) Bill, and I call on the Minister for Housing and Local Government to move the motion—Julie James.

Motion NDM7307—Julie James

To propose that the National Assembly for Wales in accordance with Standing Order 26.11:

Agrees to the general principles of the Local Government and Elections (Wales) Bill.

Motion NDM7308—Rebecca Evans

To propose that the National Assembly for Wales, for the purposes of any provisions resulting from the Local Government and Elections (Wales) Bill, agrees to any increase in expenditure of a kind referred to in Standing Order 26.69, arising in consequence of the Bill.

Motions moved.

Diolch, Llywydd. I'm very pleased to open this debate on the general principles and financial resolution of the Local Government and Elections (Wales) Bill, which I introduced in November. It is most definitely true that this debate is taking place in unprecedented times, and I am grateful to Members for recognising that, whilst there are significant challenges at the moment, we must always have an eye to the future. 

I am grateful to John Griffiths, Llyr Gruffydd, Mick Antoniw and the members of their respective committees for their thorough and constructive approach to scrutiny of the Bill and their subsequent reports and recommendations. I wrote to all three committees on 23 March setting out my thoughts in response to their comments and recommendations. I will not, therefore, attempt to address each of the almost 60 recommendations in the time we have this afternoon, but I will reflect on Members' comments if and when we move towards Stage 2. 

When introducing the Bill, I said the provisions had been subject to extensive consultation. This is acknowledged by the committees. I am very grateful to all the stakeholders who have contributed and worked with us over the years on developing the proposals in the Bill. This includes the members of the working group on local government and the subsequent sub-group of the partnership council who have shaped the Bill and are helping to co-produce the guidance and regulatory arrangements created by the Bill. I am also grateful to the organisations and individuals who provided oral and written evidence during this scrutiny stage.  

The Bill contains provisions to enable electoral reform and establishes a new governance framework for local government. I am pleased that stakeholders are generally supportive of the Bill's provisions, as are the committees. I am, therefore, delighted that the Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee recommended that the Senedd agrees the general principles of the Bill. 

Turning then to the detail of the Bill, I am pleased the majority of the Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee's members supported the extension of the franchise to 16 and 17-year-olds and foreign citizens legally resident in Wales. I am also pleased the committee supports our view that each principal council is best placed to decide for themselves which voting system better suits the needs of their local people and communities.

I note all the committee's views on the proposed Stage 2 amendments that would allow prisoners and young people in custody from Wales serving sentences of less than four years to vote in local government elections in Wales. I will not repeat the reasons for introducing provisions on prisoner voting at Stage 2, but rest assured I have carefully considered all the points made by the committees on these provisions. Unfortunately, Llywydd, I've had to take the decision, as part of the Welsh Government's wider consideration of its legislative programme at the start of our planning for coping with the grave circumstances we are in, not to commit any future official resource to this proposed Stage 2 amendment. 

Llywydd, Members, I am sure, will be aware that today's debate will, if the motion is passed, allow us to continue to include future work on the Bill in our planning for matters that we will want to be ready to progress once the crisis that we now face has passed. I know many Members support the Bill and its policy objectives, and passing this motion today will allow us to plan future resources to work on those shared policy objectives. 

Turning then to the non-election parts of the Bill, local government have been calling for a general power of competence for many years. The Welsh Government will continue to work closely with local government and stakeholders to identify where additional powers or flexibilities have been helpful to them in achieving their objectives. 

I accept the Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee's recommendations regarding the duty to encourage participation in decision making in connected bodies. I therefore intend to bring forward an amendment removing the concept of connected authorities at Stage 2.

I acknowledge the Finance Committee's concerns, based on those of local government, around the cost and practicalities of the broadcasting provisions. I think we share a common interest in making the provisions work in the most sensible and pragmatic way. A working group has been established with the WLGA to consider these issues and to identify how best the regulation-making power these provisions contains can be used to exclude certain council meetings from the requirement to broadcast. 

I accept the committee's recommendation 19 in relation to the poor performance management of chief executives, and the Welsh Government is working with Solace and ALACE on a revised approach.

The committee makes a number of recommendations in relation to job sharing. I am committed to enabling flexible arrangements where possible within a principal council, and we are continuing to work with partners to consider the implications of expansion in this area and what action and guidance might be required.

Corporate joint committees will provide local authorities in Wales with a consistent mechanism established in statute for regional collaboration. I welcome the committee's comments on our proposals. As highlighted in the Finance Committee's report, I am happy to commit to providing full and robust regulatory impact assessments for each piece of subordinate legislation made as a result of this Bill. This is the best place to assess their specific costs and benefits.

I welcome the degree of consensus amongst those giving evidence on the need for and appropriateness of the provisions in the Bill that will introduce a new system for improving performance and governance based on self-assessment and peer review. As recommended by the Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee, I intend to bring forward an amendment to include a provision in the Bill that clarifies the timing of a self-assessment report.

I'm also pleased to announce today that I have published guidance: a prospectus for the voluntary merger of principal councils in Wales. The guidance was prepared by the working group on local government. It provides practical advice on the core issues that will need to be addressed as part of developing any proposal for a voluntary merger.

We have been working closely with the Welsh Local Government Association, local authorities and advice services to improve all aspects of council tax collection and the management of arrears. This work, which is focused on prevention, will continue.

The Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee have made a number of recommendations about the proposed procedures for the exercise of subordinate legislative and other delegated powers in the Bill. It has not been possible for me to accept all of the committee's recommendations in full, and I set out my reason in my written response to the committee's report.

I note and accept in principle the Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee's recommendation 32. I have committed to using the guidance on performance and governance in the Bill to highlight the importance of housing considerations in the discharge of local authority functions as an example of where councils should be striving to do better and not just meeting minimum requirements. This will ensure the provision of housing is considered alongside the range of powers and duties that councils have as part of a wider corporate assessment of the overall performance of the council, rather than in isolation.

In conclusion, this Bill provides the powers and tools local government have been asking for. It will enable them to deliver modern, accessible, high-quality public services for and with the communities that they serve. I do urge Members to agree the general principles and the financial resolution of the Bill today. Diolch, Llywydd.

Diolch. Before I call the next speaker, can I say that I am aware that Neil McEvoy was live broadcasting on Facebook during the proceedings? I have my phone to hand, and I was able to watch it, although not hear it. That is in direct contravention to my instruction at the start, and in contravention to our Standing Orders. I have asked for you to be removed from this meeting of the Assembly, and you will not be called during this debate.

Mark Isherwood—I'm sorry, I need to call the Chair of the Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee first, John Griffiths. 

Diolch, Llywydd. I'm very pleased to be able to contribute to today's debate as Chair of the Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee, and I'd like to thank all those who gave evidence to us to help inform our work. I note that the tight timescale for undertaking our scrutiny caused difficulties for some stakeholders, so we're even more grateful for their input.

Much reference has been made to the fact that this Bill has been in preparation for many years. It is substantial in content and encompasses a wide range of provisions relating to local government functions. Clearly, since the Bill was introduced, circumstances have changed very considerably, but it remains a significant piece of legislation, and its scrutiny should not be lost.

Having considered the evidence presented by stakeholders, we recommended the general principles of the Bill be agreed by the Assembly. However, we believe that the Bill can be strengthened in some areas, and our report contains 32 recommendations in total, outlining the improvements we would like to see during the amending Stages.

It is disappointing that only seven of our recommendations were accepted in full by the Minister, although I realise that several others were accepted in principle. Our recommendations were based on evidence from expert stakeholders, so I would encourage the Minister to reconsider her response to some of these.

On the provisions relating to extending the franchise to include 16 and 17-year-olds, we believe that effective awareness raising will be required to ensure that new groups of voters are aware of their rights and make use of their vote. We therefore recommend that the Bill should include specific provision to roll out an adequate level of education on politics and democracy across all our schools in Wales. We think this should be accompanied by clear lesson plans to empower teachers to deliver these lessons. Welsh Government has cited the extension of the franchise to include 16 and 17-year-olds as one of the main reasons for proceeding with this Bill at this time. It is, therefore, imperative that young people develop their understanding and awareness of their right to vote, otherwise these provisions will be rendered less effective than we would all like. 

Despite the reservations expressed at the approach in the Bill of allowing individual councils to choose their own voting systems, we recognise the potential benefits of proportional electoral systems, such as STV, particularly as a means of increasing diversity among candidates. We'd like to see Welsh Government work with councils to explore reforms to voting arrangements, including the positive impact STV could have on increasing diversity. There are a number of other provisions in the Bill aimed at increasing diversity, notably enabling job sharing and new responsibilities around councillor conduct. Whilst we welcome these, we believe the Bill could go further, as reflected in our recommendations. 

In conclusion, although we have recommended that the general principles be approved by the Assembly, we believe there is scope to strengthen the Bill in the ways I have outlined today and outlined in greater detail in our report. Diolch, Llywydd. 

I call on the Chair of the Finance Committee, Llyr Gruffydd. 

Thank you very much, Llywydd. I'm very pleased to contribute to this debate. The Finance Committee has made 19 recommendations, and I thank the Minister for her letter of 23 March, which sets out her response to those recommendations. Given the time available today for this debate, I will focus on our main concerns only. As a committee, we do acknowledge that this is a significant piece of legislation, but there are two areas where the committee has particular concerns.

First, when the Minister announced the Bill and introduced it, she said that she intended to bring forward amendments to extend the franchise to prisoners and to young people in custody. We were critical of a similar approach taken during scrutiny of the Senedd and Elections (Wales) Bill, when it was announced during Stage 1 that significant amendments would be brought forward in relation to the financial arrangements for the Electoral Commission at that point. So, the committee reiterates its view that inserting new provisions via amendment at Stage 2 reduces the committee's ability to consider the general costs of the proposed legislation, particularly as the opportunity for financial scrutiny of these changes is limited. Today, the Assembly will be asked to approve a financial resolution, but if there are substantial changes made during Stage 2, the Assembly will have voted to commit resources without being fully informed of the costs of the Bill. The committee believes that it's essential that the Assembly has the relevant financial information in order to ensure that it's able to make an informed decision when it's being asked to commit resources. 

Secondly, the Bill contains a significant number of enabling powers for Welsh Ministers, and these powers, of course, have not been costed. This is another issue that we have raised on a number of occasions, namely that the Member in charge should include the best estimate of the costs associated with subordinate legislation alongside the relevant primary legislation. Nevertheless, I am pleased that the Minister has agreed in principle to recommendations 1, 5, 15 and 17, which relate to the Welsh Government providing full and robust regulatory impact assessments for any relevant subordinate legislation made as a result of this Bill.

The committee is concerned that some costs in the RIA relating to voting, elections and awareness raising have been averaged across principal councils. They don’t take account of variances in local authority areas. We feel that some costs are likely to fall more heavily in certain areas. Our recommendation 2 asks the Welsh Government to undertake further work to identify the distribution of the electorate across Wales and to clarify the approach it intends to take to any funding allocated to support the provisions of the Bill relating to elections and voting. We are pleased the Minister has accepted this recommendation and is currently working with local authorities and stakeholders to consider how best the Welsh Government can manage the potential differential impacts on individual local authorities. We look forward to receiving an update in due course.

In relation to elections and voting, the committee is of the view that there are a number of areas where more information could have been provided. It is disappointing that recommendation 6, which asks for further information on the types of pilot schemes that the Welsh Government may wish to trial and the potential resources required for such activity, has been rejected. Whilst noting that the Minister does not intend to trial any electoral pilots at the 2022 local elections, the Minister has stated that there are likely to be cost implications because of changes to electoral management software, staffing, training, and so on. The committee believes that an estimate of potential resource required for such activity should have been included in the RIA.

The Bill requires local authorities to make arrangements to broadcast their meetings in the interests of transparency in the decision-making process. The RIA estimates that the broadcasting contract for Wales would cost a principal authority, on average, approximately £12,000 per annum. We heard evidence that this figure is significantly underestimated, and we are therefore pleased that the Minister has accepted recommendation 10, to consider whether an all-Wales broadcasting contract is feasible and whether this would be the most cost-effective solution. We are also pleased that her officials will be considering further the benefits and disbenefits of doing this.

The committee notes the general support of the WLGA for the proposal for corporate joint committees as a vehicle for collaboration. However, we consider that there could be potential start-up costs to establishing such committees as well as potential savings over time. The committee is pleased that the Minister has accepted recommendation 16, namely that the Welsh Government shares its analysis of the costs and benefits of establishing corporate joint committees when the review has concluded, and will consider accounting for this information in the RIA.

I recognise that this Bill will progress in unprecedented times and that we may see changes at the amending stages that may be less substantial than expected. However, I would reiterate my comments at the beginning of my contribution, namely that Bills should be as fully developed as possible on introduction and that amending stages should not be used to introduce new, extensive policy proposals that haven’t been subject to scrutiny at Stage 1. Thank you, Llywydd.

I call now on the Chair of the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee, Mick Antoniw.

Diolch, Llywydd. We reported on this Bill on 13 March and we made 12 recommendations, and, as the Minister has stated, she responded on 23 March. I welcome the acceptance by the Minister of recommendation 5 and the positive comments made in respect of our recommendations 4, 6, and 9.

I would like to make some general observations on the Bill, which has taken six years to prepare. It is a relatively complex Bill, and it includes 98 powers to make to make subordinate legislation. Now, many of the powers taken are justifiable, but we were concerned to hear the Minister say that many of them allow the Welsh Ministers to respond to future circumstances that could not yet be foreseen. So, we do not consider it appropriate for the Welsh Government to take powers to deliver policy that has not yet been fully developed or foreseen. We consider this to be a poor legislative practice. This approach provides too much power to the Government at the expense of the legislature.

Now, overall, the nature of many of the regulation-making powers taken in the Bill give the impression of it having been incomplete on introduction. This view is exacerbated by the clear intention of the Government to bring forward significant policy at Stage 2 of the legislative process in relation to prisoner voting, bypassing Stage 1. We note that the Minister has since provided draft amendments about prisoner voting in advance of the Stage 2 proceedings. However, this should not be seen as a substitute for Stage 1 scrutiny. The approach adopted circumvents the scrutiny and consultation with stakeholders that would have taken place at Stage 1. That the committee has to make such comments continually is disappointing, and we do so in order to ensure that legislation is properly and fairly scrutinised and good law is made.

I would now like to highlight three of the recommendations that the Minister has not accepted. The first, recommendation 2, relates to the need to introduce legislation that is fully formed on introduction. Section 18 concerns regulations to provide for a database of electoral registration. The Minister acknowledged the regulation-making powers were taken because of the lack of time to include information on the face of the Bill. We therefore recommended a superaffirmative procedure for these regulation-making powers in the first instance, followed by the affirmative procedure. The Minister rejected this recommendation, because it was not in line with the Welsh Government's legislation handbook on when to use a superaffirmative procedure. This, in our view, is not a strong or a persuasive argument, and I would ask the Minister to reconsider our recommendation. It would allow for more robust scrutiny of proposals that, by her own acknowledgement, would have been included on the face of the Bill if the Government's own timetable had permitted more time. Now, I recognise and welcome the Welsh Ministers' reference to guidance on good practice when putting forward their law proposals. However, our recommendation was based on our own analyses, which included the circumstances that gave rise to the provisions contained in section 18.

Recommendation 3 relates to section 26 of the Bill. Section 26 seeks to change existing provisions in the Representation of the People Act 2000. One of the key themes of the Bill is empowering local authorities and advocating decisions being taken at the lowest possible level. So, it is, therefore, surprising to see a provision in the Bill that permits the Welsh Ministers to direct a local authority to undertake a pilot electoral scheme against its wishes. It is even more surprising that a decision to issue an Order, as currently drafted in the Bill, would be subject to no scrutiny by the National Assembly.

The power in section 26 can be used to change electoral systems of a local authority, so this is not a minor or technical power. It could have a substantive effect on the political make-up of a local authority following an election, even if only for one set of elections. Any decision by the Welsh Ministers of any particular political party to use the power could, therefore, run the risk of being politically motivated and, therefore, contentious. Even if not politically motivated, this, certainly, could be the perception.

As we often highlight, it is important to distinguish how powers could be used by Welsh Ministers, rather than the intention of the Welsh Ministers currently in post when taking them. In the circumstances, we believe that the affirmative procedure should be applied to the making of an Order in question. The Minister's rejection of our recommendation on grounds that it is disproportionate is disappointing, given that the power is to be exercised without being initiated by a local authority, as is currently the case, and without scrutiny by the Assembly. In our view, this power does not sit comfortably in a Bill that seeks to empower local authorities.

Finally, I would reiterate our view that the regulation-making powers contained in section 109(2) of the Bill are too broad, and that, as we stated in recommendation 11, the word 'expedient' should, therefore, be removed from this provision. Diolch, Llywydd. 

[Inaudible.]—a cut-and-paste job including, possibly, 28 provisions contained within Mark Drakeford's 2017 local government White Paper, which was originally dropped. In his written statement on the Welsh Government's approach to legislation in light of COVID-19 last week, the First Minister asked this Welsh Parliament to work with the Welsh Government to explore novel approaches to scrutiny in order to allow it to progress its legislative programme under current circumstances. This statement omitted any reference to votes for convicted prisoners. It is also noted that the Welsh Government response to the Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee’s report on this Bill only accepts a quarter of our 32 recommendations, recommendations made after detailed evidence gathering from a range of expert witnesses and hours of deliberation by committee members.

The Bill provides that each principal council may decide for itself on the voting system to use, whether first-past-the-post or proportional representation using the single transferrable vote. However, 33 out of 35 respondents to its White Paper consultation disagreed and preferred to keep one voting system for the whole of Wales. Further, as our committee report states,

'the majority of the evidence received oppose the provisions that allow principal councils to choose their own voting system.'

The regulatory impact assessment also notes that an additional cost would be incurred should a principal council opt to change its voting system, but that these costs are currently unknown. It is therefore deeply concerning that the Minister rejected the committee recommendation that the Welsh Government undertakes an engagement programme with the Welsh Local Government Association—WLGA—principal councils and communities across Wales around reforming voting arrangements of local government elections. Provisions in the Bill will enable the Welsh Ministers to establish and maintain an all-Wales database of electoral registration. The WLGA highlighted the benefit in reducing the potential for individuals to be registered at more than one address. However, our committee report notes that the regulatory impact assessment does not define any costs for developing an all-Wales database, and acknowledges concerns raised around the security of individuals' personal data. It is again, therefore, deeply concerning that the Minister rejected our recommendation that the provisions relating to registration without application are amended to ensure that individuals registered in this way are placed on the closed electoral register rather than the open register.

We support the Bill's provision to remove the power to enable imprisonment as a sanction for non-payment of council tax. As our committee report notes, however, 22 respondents to the Welsh Government consultation felt the removal should be supported by the introduction of alternate methods of recovery, including local authorities. It is therefore deeply concerning that the Minister rejected our recommendation that Welsh Government works with the WLGA to consider alternative measures for recouping debt accrued through non-payment of council tax. The Minister is right to focus on prevention, but a non-custodial penalty will always be needed for some.

Currently, Irish and Commonwealth citizens and relevant EU citizens can vote in local government and devolved elections, but this Bill will enable all foreign citizens legally resident in Wales to vote in local government elections. There is a long-standing reciprocal agreement between the UK and the Republic of Ireland as a consequence of the historic relationship between both countries, and the ability of Commonwealth citizens to vote in UK elections is a legacy of the Representation of the People Act 1918. However, this Bill proposes a step too far. At least most of the countries that allow foreign citizens to vote have a minimum residency requirement, but even that is missing here. As my colleague David Melding said when scrutinising similar provisions in the Senedd and Elections (Wales) Bill,

'their citizenship should determine where they principally vote, and if they make the choice not to pursue citizenship here, then it's their choice not to have political rights to the extent of voting in our elections.'

Even worse, although the Welsh Government did not include in this Bill a provision for prisoners to be given the right to vote, the Minister has confirmed that if Members pass this motion today, she will then table amendments to allow prisoners serving sentences of less than four years, such as for racially aggravated common assault, breaching a sex offender order, or courting prostitution of women, to vote in local government elections. In other words, at a time of national crisis, this Welsh Government wants for us to help them rush through Welsh Government legislation that will introduce changes that are massively unpopular with the people, and which we cannot support.

Before starting, I'd like to put my thanks to the Minister and the Government on record, and to express my support for the action that you've taken in extending the lockdown. On this piece of legislation, the Minister and her team have done a great deal of work already, and I'd associate myself with the comments made by John Griffiths, as a member of his committee.

When the Bill was first introduced, I thought there was a lot to welcome in it—I still do think that. Votes at 16 and the removal of barriers to participation in the political process, in particular, are really important provisions. Under normal circumstances, we would have been supporting this Bill today and looking towards strengthening it via amendments and testing the will of the Government with some new ideas. But these are not normal circumstances, and now is not the time to be discussing this Bill. There will be many people who will be wondering how this could be any kind of a priority for the Government at the moment, when people are dying every day. All of us should be resolutely focused on helping the nation deal with the biggest health emergency in decades, in which it would not be an exaggeration to say that we are pretty much on a wartime footing.

From a practical point of view, it's extremely difficult to communicate at this time, and impossible to scrutinise effectively. We don't actually know, with clarity, what the Welsh Government's intentions are with this Bill going towards Stage 2, as, clearly, thorough scrutiny of a piece of legislation that is this extensive would be impossible, at least in the foreseeable future. It is Plaid Cymru's view that if we can't legislate properly because of the circumstances, we shouldn't be legislating at all, and to do so would be irresponsible.

We have limited time today to scrutinise the Government this week, and all of this time should be devoted to the scrutiny of the Government's coronavirus response. It's dismaying that, of the scheduled time we were given, half of that was given over to this debate on legislation that we would argue isn't time-sensitive.

I do note that the Government has said that it needs to pass this legislation today in order for work to be undertaken in time for 2022. I'm not certain that this does completely add up. If we're really saying that a delay of a few months would jeopardise a project of many years, I'm sure that there are questions over the project management of that two-year project that has no slack in the timescale. It's also worth highlighting, I think, that it is legislative lethargy that has delayed matters already. Votes at 16 has been the express will of the Senedd on a cross-party basis for several years now. We are paying a price in a time of emergency for the Welsh Government's inaction during normal times. So, Plaid Cymru will be voting against the Bill today, not because we disagree with the general principles, but because we believe firmly that this debate and this vote shouldn't be brought forward under these circumstances.

But now I want to turn to some of the comments that the Conservatives have been circulating on social media in particular. All I'll say is that if it's wrong for the Government to be continuing with this Bill at this time, it's also wrong for the Conservatives to be misrepresenting this Bill and pushing some quite disgusting attacks on it. The Conservatives have been saying that—well, falsely claiming it contains provisions for votes for prisoners, when the Bill that we're voting on today doesn't contain those provisions. Those are amendments to be tabled at Stage 2 by the Government at an unknown date in the future, and certainly won't be applied to murderers, as some members of the party have claimed wrongly. The leader of the Welsh Conservatives made this claim himself, which was really delving into gutter politics, I would argue, when the leader of his own party is in intensive care. So, I would welcome Paul Davies having the opportunity to apologise for misleading the electorate for narrow party political gain at this time.

Furthermore, I understand that 10 prisoners have already died from COVID-19, and over 100, possibly many more, are infected. To attack them at this time is, frankly, appalling. I would suggest to the Llywydd that the standards committee may be the appropriate forum, if elected Members think this is a good time to promote fake news about this institution.

So, to close, I look forward to revisiting the Bill in the future when this crisis is over, but, for the reasons I've explained, it's obvious that we should not be discussing this today, when we should be discussing PPE, testing and saving lives. So, Plaid Cymru will be voting against. 

It's regrettable that the Welsh Government have chosen to push ahead with this legislation, and I feel it's extremely ill-judged to be diverting resources at this moment in time when we could postpone this until our country is better placed following the coronavirus pandemic. Because at this moment in time, pushing ahead with legislation is also hugely unpopular with the public.

I have made my views on the Local Government and Elections (Wales) Bill perfectly clear in the past, but even if I had fully supported the Government's aim, I would not support pushing ahead at this time of national emergency. We cannot legislate properly and we cannot just rush something through, because people are dying from a deadly and virulent disease, and in order to limit the number of deaths and reduce the strain on our NHS, the liberties of each and every one of us have been curtailed. We have shut down vast swathes of our country and our economy, and some of our constituents have lost their jobs and their lives, yet here we are debating legislation.

My view on granting rights for prisoners to vote has never been because it isn't the right thing to do. It has always been because I don't think that that is the priority that we should be looking at when we visit a prison. Having worked there, I've seen people for seven years going out with a black bag on a Friday with no roof over their head at all, no food, no clothes and no support mechanism, and this is why I think that our priorities on true rehabilitation are totally wrong.

Democracy has been put on hold to fight this virus and elections around the UK have been postponed, and we should not be using valuable time during an international crisis in order to extend the voting franchise. We can discuss this and postpone it until such restrictions are lifted and business reverts back to something that we don't currently recognise. Until then, and only then, should we think about moving forward with this Bill.

I have supported the Welsh Government. They've had my full support and that of my party during the coronavirus outbreak, and we will continue to support the Welsh Government as they forge ahead, but I cannot and will not support them on this legislation. Diolch yn fawr.

I've got few brief comments to make on the Bill, and in saying this, of course, I do recognise, as the Minister said, that this has been subject to immense consultation, and across three different committees in the Senedd, including the committee that I serve on under the eminent stewardship of John Griffiths. We looked at this in great detail, and I think my first point would be that, in recognising that the Minister has said in her opening remarks that she's bringing this Bill forward with an eye to the future, we should, of course, as Senedd Members be trying to keep an eye on what comes beyond this dire emergency that we are currently in. But with that eye to the future, I would urge the Minister to look at the recommendations that have only been partially accepted, or which have been rejected from the committee's extensive exploration of this with many, many witnesses in front of us. I'd really welcome, if she could, as this Bill progresses, going back to have a look at some of those recommendations.

But in taking this Bill forward, it has an immense amount of support behind it. It is something that local government has been calling for in broad terms for quite some time, in many of the areas within this Bill, including the areas of general competences and the ability to work together voluntarily and so on.

The power to extend the voting franchise to 16 and 17-year-olds is something that I know has had strong support within the Senedd as well as from those within, for example, the Youth Parliament as well. But we do need—the point has been made already—to make sure that, if we take that forward, then those who are 13, 14, 15 years old actually learn not only about the process of engaging in democracy, but also about the political processes as well, in a sort of citizen engagement. And I think that Minister does need to consider with other colleagues how that is best embedded within our education system.

There are great measures within this Bill as well in terms of openness and transparency. I do remember taking a cohort of students, when I was a lecturer in Swansea, to Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council. So, they sat in the galleries and watched a session in action. They were all tourism students. Unfortunately, the day we turned up was a day in which they were talking about grass cutting in the parks and cemeteries. However, it did show actually how local authorities proceeded and how they made their decisions and how they voted. But the fact that we could now be looking at extending the ability of people who can't attend in person to actually see these, and engage with it, potentially, as well, on screens and remotely, as we are doing today, should be something we are looking to take forward.

There were different positions on our committee in terms of the measures around STV and first-past-the-post. Now, I'll speak personally here: I'd be a supporter of greater electoral reform, but I think there is a balance to tread within this Bill. The fact that we actually have STV here as a possibility, if we're talking to the general principles of the Bill, I think is a remarkable step forward. But I would encourage the Minister, as John Griffiths has said as well, to explore with the local authorities where they felt there was a mood amongst the local public to actually take this forward and amongst members to enable them to do so, because, otherwise, as many witnesses said to us, we might actually never see the day when STV gets off the ground. And, of course, with STV, it's not simply the concept of it, but the fact that it can lead to each vote being more equal in the way that it weighs within the ballot box, but also the impact that STV can have on diversity as well.

And that brings me to my next point, about job sharing. I am one of those Members that would like the job-sharing proposals to go forward, although there is the great step forward within this Bill in terms of job sharing for executive members, and we heard evidence on this about how it can work. But, ultimately, I think we do need to move to that point where we can see job sharing when people stand for election, because, again, in terms of increasing diversity of candidature, that could be a major step forward. Now, I realise there are practical issues around all of these, and the Minister has to wrestle with all of these, but I welcome the fact this Bill is here.

In my final closing remarks, can I just thank John and all the other committee members for the way they've wrestled with some quite complex matters within this Bill, all the witnesses who came in front of us and engaged with us fully and frankly, and just urge the Minister again, in closing, to look at those areas that she hasn't yet been able to concede on and to engage with those areas as this Bill goes forward? It's a good Bill; it could be an excellent Bill if we have some movement. Thank you. 

During such a time of global crisis and very serious circumstances affecting many of our people in Wales, I simply cannot welcome the Local Government and Elections (Wales) Bill today. To concentrate, during this period of emergency, on this Bill, when we've seen our local democracy stifled, scrutiny has been downplayed as a result of us all working together to adapt to social distances—. So, for me, precious Plenary time is being lost due to this legislation. One only has to look at today, where nine Members were unable to raise very important serious scrutiny questions to the First Minister to give way for the time for this, and it's just something that doesn't lay easily with me. 

Now, in the first instance, you will be aware that the Welsh Government, local government and public sector response to COVID-19 is putting a remarkable and considerable strain on the financial resources available to our local authorities, and I would like to place on my record the work of our local authority and all the personnel in coping with this horrendous emergency situation that we have, but it is putting a financial strain on our local authorities. 

Now, many of those financial resources have had to come from their current budgets and things. So, for me, it does seem rather irresponsible for us to be considering a Bill, which, according to its own regulatory impact assessment, will cost over £17 million, and that includes transitional costs to local government of approximately £3 million. To make matters worse, the Finance Committee's commented that the Bill contains a number of areas that have not yet been costed and this—. I'm sorry, but this is happening too often with the passing of Welsh Government legislation. We know the removal of reasonable chastisement—only passed weeks ago—was underfinanced in terms of the impact that it's going to have. 

Now, I do agree with their recommendation that the Welsh Government commit to providing a full and robust regulatory impact assessment for any relevant subordinate legislation made as a result of this Bill, but would add that we all consider very carefully whether pursuing the legislation is considered reasonable, especially given such uncertain times that we see ourselves in at the moment due to COVID-19.

Given that this Bill is likely to be pushed through, and in an effort to be constructive however, I would note there are some aspects that I welcome. I do support the ability that Welsh Ministers will have to establish and maintain an all-Wales database of electoral registration information. However, the RIA does not define any costs for developing an all-Wales database. So, some clarity today would be welcomed on this.

Two: provisions to require a principal council to create a petition scheme. Now, as ERS Cymru have noted—and I know very well from our own Petitions Committee—petitions are a fantastic way to engage with the public, and I see democracy at its best when we're doing that. I would like to put on record Monmouthshire County Council's call for the Bill to be explicit in stating, though, that the petitions are not referenda, that they are only advisory rather than binding. 

Three: that the Bill provides for two or more principal councils to submit a joint application to the Welsh Ministers for the voluntary merger of their respective areas and councils should they wish to do so. Local accountability and decision making is key. So, should two authorities wish to merge, I would like some assurances that the Welsh Government would not have a means in place to block that plan and would work with them in terms of resources and guidance to help make that happen. Another positive that I have long campaigned for is the amending of the eligibility for local government candidacy to allow council employees to stand for election. However, I would urge the Minister to consider whether it really is necessary for individuals such as school teachers, cooks, swimming instructors to have to stand down from their paid employment should they be elected. If one looks at our education system, one can be a teacher and be a governor of a school. So, I think we need to be looking at that again.

Now, in addition to local government candidates, the Bill is set to bring major changes to those who can vote, and albeit at amendment stage, in amendments and at Stage 2 and 3, I am strongly opposed to giving prisoners the vote. I have consulted widely with a number of my constituents in Aberconwy, and the overwhelming majority of correspondence I have received is strongly opposed.

So, I would like some clarification—because I may have missed the point on this—from the Minister, in what you said earlier: is it correct now that at Stage 2 or 3 you will not now be proceeding with amendments that would allow votes for prisoners? Because I cannot support that in any shape or form. Bringing a Bill in, amendments at Stage 2, for me, that will allow for the right of prisoners serving sentences of less than four years I do not believe is in the interests of democracy. So, I would ask you to confirm, and indeed to rule votes for prisoners out today. I would like to suggest that I am dismayed that we have a Welsh Government that is prepared to believe such an issue right now to be a legislative priority.

Finally, whilst I do acknowledge and support the precedents set by the Isle of Man and Scotland for extending the franchise to 16 and 17-year-olds, I would ask for greater assurances today that there will be some confirmation that these young adults will be provided with a stronger education in politics, so that, when they do go to cast their first vote, they do so with a fair context of what democracy means and how they can play their part in it. Thank you. Diolch, Llywydd.

Well, I think this is an extraordinary time to be bringing this Bill forward. This is a constitutional measure, and we are in a highly attenuated forum in this debate today. Despite the marvels of modern technology, which have enabled us quite effectively, I think, to participate in proceedings in the last two weeks, I don't believe that it's right, when two thirds of the Members of the Assembly are not able to participate in this debate, to bring it forward today for discussion and for a vote.

The only reason that this Bill is being progressed—in my view, it's a desperate attempt by the Labour Party to shore up its dwindling political support throughout the electorate. We see in the recent general election how the electoral map of Britain, and Wales in particular, has changed. Labour has lost a great deal of its traditional voter support, and it's a measure of its desperation that it now seeks some salvation by extending the vote to children, prisoners and foreigners. If that's the measure of the Labour Party's desperation, I don't give much for their chances in the next set of elections. It seems to me they're in the same position today as the great silent film actor Harold Lloyd—hanging from the hands of the clock, desperate to try and stop himself falling into an abyss. And I don't believe that they will succeed in this respect.

As regards votes for people who are not citizens of the United Kingdom, I believe that that is wrong in principle, that if you are to determine the make-up of a Parliament and the Government of a country, then you ought to be as firmly committed to that by being a citizen as you possibly can. So, this is wrong in principle and there's almost nowhere else in the world where this has been done in the past.

Whether votes should be given to those who are 16 and 17-year-olds, again I think is a highly controversial issue, and it's improper, I think, for it to be brought before the Assembly for legislation in this way. It's notable that the Labour Party today derives a very large proportion of the support it retains from younger people and from migrant communities, and, of course, those are two of the major elements of the extension of the electorate that the Government in Wales is seeking in the course of this Bill. In my view, it's a squalid political manoeuvre for partisan purposes. It's the Labour Party's emergency that this Bill has been brought in to try to benefit, rather than the national emergency. We have suspended our civil liberties over huge swathes of human rights in the course of the last few weeks, and that would never be done in times of normality. This is an emergency, currently, in relation to the COVID virus, which we've not seen before in our lifetimes, and, in these circumstances, I think it is absolutely extraordinary that the Welsh Government should feel it right and proper to bring forward this Bill for consideration today. So, I hope that the Assembly will stand up for its rights and the rights of its Members who are not able to participate in the proceedings in the course of this debate, and throw this Bill out today.

Suzy Davies.

Diolch yn fawr. Excuse me a minute. Yes, thank you for the opportunity of speaking in this debate. I wanted to come in behind Mick Antoniw's earlier contribution and also part of what Delyth Jewell was saying about is this the appropriate time to be able to give this Bill proper scrutiny, so I want to discuss less the policy objectives of this, but to concentrate a bit more on our role as legislators in connection with a major piece of legislation. And I have to say that the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee is there to help us as Assembly Members with the singular and primary responsibility that we have, regardless of our political preferences, for making good law. I would say that the Welsh Local Government Association, whatever they want from this Bill, they want this law to be good and something they can use, and something they can rely upon. So, I'm not going to be talking about those policy objectives, except from an illustrative point of view.

I'm not embarrassed to say this yet again, that it is the Welsh Parliament that makes the law, not the Government. So, it's the very least we can expect as a first step from Government that it lays a Bill that is, first, complete; that is, secondly, fully fleshed out in terms of its policy objective and at least its initial delivery; and, thirdly, has been properly costed. I think the failure to accept certain recommendations from the Finance Committee on this is a mistake. I don't think that this Bill satisfies those three general principles. If it doesn't do that, I think as legislators we should reject it today, send it back and, maybe, reinvite it to be re-laid in a form that does satisfy those tests. That's notwithstanding the point that's already been made about the period in which this piece of legislation has been brought forward.

The Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee—the former version, of course, of Mick Antoniw's committee—said that amendments are for debating and suggesting improvements to a Bill, and not to deliver large and significant amounts of text and not to complete Bills that are not considered fully developed at the point of introduction. As an Assembly, of course, we ignored that when we passed the Senedd and elections Bill, and as legislators we shouldn't do that again. Fool us once and it's shame on you, Welsh Government, but fool us twice and it's shame on us. I'd like to say it's for the first time, but it's not. I think it is time for us to do our jobs and say why this is bad law now.

So, just to look back at the Senedd and elections Bill, one of the arguments put forward by the Welsh Government was that the unscrutinised inclusion of votes for resident foreign nationals would be to make it more consistent with this—the contents of, at the time, an unseen Bill. Now, this unseen Bill will, belatedly, be offering votes to certain prisoners, although I heard what the Minister said earlier, and perhaps she could clarify the position now and what she meant when she said that she would not be asking officials to devote any more resources to this. But, the point is that it was completely inconsistent with the Senedd and elections Act, already poor reasoning on the part of the Welsh Government, and now they're seeking to have it both ways, unless the Minister has something else to say on this. As legislators, we should, therefore, say 'no'.

The obvious question is why prisoner voting wasn't included in the original Bill. I'm sorry to say that the answers that the Minister gave to our committee in her evidence to us were particularly weak. We've known that responsibility for elections was to be devolved to this institution as far back as 2017, so there's been a good 18 months to prepare for a draft to be included at the beginning of the Bill on this. Citing the Hirst decision for a delay: you know, that's a decision that goes back, or the issue goes back, to 2005, so that's not very credible either.

If you want further evidence of incomplete preparation, I think it's the inclusion of the 98 powers that Mick Antoniw referred to earlier. You've been at this for six years now—it's a lot for a lengthy Bill. At this stage, we would need to know why you're seeking powers, rather than committing to duties in some cases, and then the circumstances in which you would use those powers. You've had plenty of time for scenario planning, and we don't have clarity on that.

We have some powers, as Mick mentioned, with no procedure attached to them, including powers material to changes in how councils conduct elections. Your justification for this is that it was done that way in legislation that predates the existence of the Assembly by almost 30 years. That's not a good reason. Those weighty powers relating to the operation of the single transferable vote: you should be clear now about how those should be used and they should be in a Schedule to this Bill. We've already heard about the creation of an electoral database. The problem with that, as you said, Minister, yourself, is that you hadn't worked it out yet.

Conversely, we have a situation where the Government is certain about what it wants to do about certain types of publication, as in Schedule 4—a couple of paragraphs there. But, rather than set it out, it actually seeks powers to do it instead, when there's no need for that.

So, rather than repeat what others have said, I'll finish by drawing Members' and Ministers' attention to the recommendations that have been refused by the Minister—they do require further ministerial response—but also to chapter 3 of the committee's report, and to take to heart what it says, so that Government can draft better law and that we can become better legislators, quite frankly. I hope the Minister, and us all, as legislators, will bear that in mind. Thank you.

I, again, say thank you very much for arranging this sort of Assembly meeting, which I've never experienced before, especially these days when the whole country is gridlocked. I, personally, think it’s a bit ill timed to bring this local government Bill in front of one third of the Assembly.

I wish to speak on one area clearly regarding this, this afternoon. I wish to speak against the motion giving the right to vote, in devolved Welsh elections, to Welsh prisoners who are serving custodial sentences of less than four years. Prisoners convicted of crimes such as paedophilia, racially aggravated common assault and breaking sexual offence orders would be allowed to vote under this legislation, which is very strange to my thinking. It is not surprising that this proposal is not supported among the public. A person in my office put it to public opinion, and not a single person supported this view.

Also, I believe, in principle, that law makers should not be the law breakers. If we produce in society a framework of laws setting out the standard of responsibility and behaviour that we expect our citizens to abide by and maintain, by definition, also, people who have committed crimes against their fellow citizens have not met those standards. By breaking the law, they have abdicated or forfeited the right to make laws for others. There has been much discussion about prisoners' civil liberties, however, by definition, sentencing someone to a term of imprisonment involves a suspension of the right to liberty. The right to vote in elections, in a democracy, is a civil liberty, combined with others such as freedom of association, freedom of assembly and movement, and the right to stand for election. By the consequences of their action, prisoners are deprived of their very liberties. It is a choice they have made in full knowledge of what imprisonment entails. There are two aims of imprisonment: to punish and to rehabilitate. I fully support the rehabilitation of offenders. The restoration of the right to vote should be regarded as an important symbol that the individual has paid their debt to society. It is an incentive to integrate offenders back into society; this will be lost if prisoners are given the right to vote.

Presiding Officer, there are also practical reasons why this proposal will not work. They create a bureaucratic nightmare that will place an additional unnecessary burden on our prison service staff and officials, but many Welsh prisoners serve their sentences in England. There is, for example, no Welsh women prison in Wales. The Welsh Government is, therefore, proposing to allow people to vote without the privilege of accessing Welsh media coverage to inform them of the issues, of their local issues. So, people will be totally unaware of the local issues while they will be voting. Elections entail the right of electors to meet the candidates standing for elections. It is totally impractical for candidates to travel to prisons, even within Wales, to meet electors, let alone to hold hustings on their premises. The risk to security is also obvious.

Presiding Officer, I repeat: there is no public support for this proposal. I urge the Assembly to assert the right of the public over the right of the criminal and reject this motion today. Thank you.

David Melding.

Llywydd, thank you very much for calling me. Am I being heard?

Yes, you are. You can carry on.

Thank you, sorry. I had 'unmuted' flash up on my screen.

This is a very important constitutional Bill. We've heard that it's been six years in the making. It's a long time for the Government to get its priorities together and now we are going to see, it seems, a very truncated legislative process, despite the fact that the three committees that looked at this Bill made extensive recommendations for amendments, very few of which have been accepted by the Government. And I do note that the Minister has received next to no enthusiastic support from her own colleagues. It's been a very tepid C- approval when she's been able to get it. I think this should send a signal to you about the process you are following and that the legislative function is not being fully honoured in the approach that you've taken, and it's a problem, I think, when an Executive acts in an overbearing way.

I have to say that I think this is quite an ambitious Bill, and there are aspects of it that I do very much favour. I would have enjoyed the prospect of trying to work genuinely in the fullness of legislative time with proper consultation—we heard John Griffiths say that many stakeholders just couldn't engage in the timescale that was given. But, I think there's a really good, important local government Bill to be had here, and that this is really the tragedy of the fact that we are not going to see fully coherent proposals come through in a well-worked Bill that probably would have had cross-party support, which should be the aim of constitutional changes.

I very much support the franchise being extended to 16 and 17-year-olds. With apologies to my colleagues, I think local councils should be able to decide what their electoral system is, as long as they get support for that change amongst their electorate. I don't think that 22 systems, which is one choice or the other, first past the post or STV, would exercise our electorate particularly. They would just get used to wherever they were having that particular form of local elections. If we believe in local democracy, why not extend that principle to them to decide on how they are represented and how they constitute their councils?

I don't agree with extending council terms from four to five years. Our change in the Assembly to go from four to five years has not been successful, in my view, and I think a four-year term has a lot to recommend it at all levels of government.

There's much to be said about the general power of competence; the public participation strategy is something that would drag us into the modern age. Corporate joint committees between councils, I think that extends: we've seen how effectively city regions are working at the moment. There's a lot to be said for performance in governance reforms, and then allowing local mergers where councils want to do that.

There is good material here, but we have to face the difficulty that this Bill now requires very extensive committee stage work to look at the amendments. Those amendments are very comprehensive and will have to be crafted by the political groups in co-operation with the Assembly's lawyers. These are extensive meetings. This is serious law, probably one of the most important Bills in this Assembly term.

It's unfortunate the Government has been overtaken by a crisis they couldn't have anticipated, and I accept the challenges that has brought. But your timetabling was your decision, and to place major reform very late in the electoral cycle is always inviting trouble. I made this point when we discussed the Senedd Bill, around using two Bills to reduce the voting age. Also, I think some major things do need to be very well considered when we extend the franchise to people who are not citizens. That is clearly a huge principle that needs a lot of thought and examination, and similarly with the issue of prisoners, if that is brought forward.

Again, I don't completely agree with the very hostile view that no prisoners should receive the franchise. I think for lesser crimes—. We do imprison an awful lot of people in Britain, and have done so since the 1980s when we had roughly 40,000 prisoners, now we have about 90,000, many serving short sentences, and I think we have to be aware of the international organisations and treaties that we have signed, and some of the policy changes we might have to make are a consequence of international law, or decisions in international law, going against us. So, I don't condemn the Welsh Government for looking at that, because it's something that the UK Government has had to do as well. But it's still not elegant to bring in such a reform at Stage 2 and not have it fully consulted on.

So, I really think it would be an act of grace on the Government's part now to accept that, in the situation we find ourselves, which is not the fault of the Welsh Government, it is just not possible to give this Bill the extensive legislative scrutiny that it requires, and it's better to decide to postpone something than to rush something through that would not get cross-party support and may have serious deficiencies because of the unintended consequences. Thank you very much, Llywydd.

Finally, Jenny Rathbone.

Thank you very much. I hear the hostility there is from the opposition, but I just want to remind us all that when we did a cross-party inquiry into prisoners voting, it was notable not just for the support it attracted from prisoners, but also from prison governors, including one of the most senior governors in this country. So it's always possible to whip up hostility to prisoners voting. That is, unfortunately, one of the hallmarks of our criminal justice system, that it is so bedogged by the attitudes and prejudices of many of the newspapers in this country, which is why it's so difficult to have a proper debate on this subject. But I think it would be a tragedy if we missed this opportunity to introduce legislation that I think we can demonstrate will actually improve the civic engagement of marginalised people, many of whom end up in the prison system on relatively minor offences—and we are talking about a very limited franchise—and this would enable us to pay much more attention to improving our criminal justice system, on which we spend billions of pounds, and which is not effective at addressing recidivism.

The Minister to respond to the debate, Julie James.

Diolch, Llywydd. I'm very grateful for Members' comments today, and for all the work done by the committees, and I will reflect further on everything Members have said today, and on the full set of committee recommendations that are in front of us.

Sadly, Llywydd, I do feel the need to reiterate my opening remarks on two points, which seem to have been missed by a large number of Members today. As I said in my opening remarks, unfortunately I've had to take the decision, as part of the Welsh Government's wider consideration of its legislative programme, at the start of our planning for coping with the grave circumstances, unforeseeable circumstances, we are in, not to commit any future official resource to the proposed prisoner voting Stage 2 amendments, and so we will not be bringing forward those amendments, which I did say at the beginning of this debate. The Bill we are voting on today does not contain those provisions, so a large number of Members have taken up their time today on something that is not currently contained in the Stage 1 Bill.

I, too, seriously regret the discourtesy shown to the committee's thoughtful work on this point by the recent Conservative media, which I think they should really seriously consider withdrawing. And Llywydd, as I also said at the outset, Members I'm sure will be aware that today's debate will, if the motion is passed, allow us to continue to include future work on the Bill in our planning for matters that we will want to be ready to progress once the crisis that we now face is past.

I know many Members support the principles in the Bill and its policy objectives, and in passing this motion today, it will allow us to continue to plan to have that happen in the future. If we do not pass the motion today, we could not include it in the planning. That would be a serious disrespect to the Senedd. The Senedd's input is required for us to continue to do that planning. We cannot do it without that, as some Members appear to be suggesting.

So, Llywydd, on that basis, and on the basis that I will reflect seriously on the recommendations that the committees have made once more, I will urge Members to agree the general principles and the financial resolution of the Bill today, to allow that progress to be made. Thank you.

The proposal is to agree the motions. Does any Member object? [Objection.] I can see that Members are objecting, and I defer the voting under this item until voting time. [Interruption.]

Voting deferred until voting time.