Thank you, Minister, for your statement. It's great to see that the Wales and Africa programme continues to benefit some of the poorest nations in the world, and that another round of small-scale funding has been launched. This has been a crucial source of income to provide help and support for many small charities and community groups on the African continent. And I would also like to put on record my thanks and support for all the work that they do.

Reflecting upon how best to maximise the grant funding, I would like to raise the issue of currency conversion and exchange, which is a vital component for funding projects abroad. As the Minister will know, and if we take Uganda as an example, the British pound over the last decade has been worth anything from 3,600 Ugandan shillings right up to 5,700 shillings, and this rather large difference will have a huge knock-on effect on the amount of money that a project is able to spend. Five thousand pounds, for example, can be worth anything from 18 million to 28 million shillings, depending on when funds are exchanged, and this means that projects may struggle to meet their full potential.

The Minister will undoubtedly be aware that you can't buy Ugandan shillings and many other African currencies in the United Kingdom, and the most cost-efficient way for charities to transport funds to these countries is to physically take it there themselves in cash and then to exchange it on arrival. Not only is carrying cash in such large quantities potentially dangerous, but charity and community projects are at the mercy of high exchange fees, which makes costing and budget management extremely difficult. With this in mind, can the Minister confirm if she has considered the possibility of allowing these charities and community groups to draw down project funds directly in their respective countries, rather than running the risks of physically importing their finances?

I'm conscious that the Minister hasn't mentioned it, but, last week, I was able to listen to some of the talks at the annual Wales and Africa Health Links conference, GlobalCitizenship2021, and I was struck by the discussion on the maximising potential for future benefit report, which analyses health partnership relationships in relation to the Wales and Africa programme and the international work carried out by health staff in Wales. Not surprisingly, the report has criticisms, and it highlighted several areas that need improvement, and I would very much welcome the Minister’s comments on two of those points.

Firstly, in a survey conducted by the report, participants highlighted their concerns over barriers that are in place that reduce the likelihood of diaspora comminutes in Wales becoming involved in health partnership work. One of the fundamental issues identified, and I quote, is 'a sense of exclusion from a too-white international development sector'. Indeed, if we scratch the surface, as they say, we can find some element of truth in this. For example, all nine trustees of the Size of Wales, led by a former First Minister, Carwyn Jones, are white; the Wales in Africa Health Links Network has four out of six white trustees; and on the Hub Cymru Africa web page, 10 out of 12 of those listed are also white. Whilst I have no doubt that there is engagement with diaspora communities in Wales, and you have specifically mentioned it in your statement today, it is obvious why communities believe that they have no voice at the top table. Reflecting upon the Welsh Government’s pronouncements on creating and encouraging greater diversity in public life in Wales, I am keen to know what the Minister is actually doing to address this issue.

Secondly, as the report outlines, the proposals of the Welsh Government are supported by patchy and fragmented policy implementation, which creates an obvious gap between what the Welsh Government intend and actual practice. This is an issue that seems to come up time and time again with this Government. For example, after eight years of adoption, the charter for international health partnerships is still not fully implemented, because Welsh Government has failed to provide sufficient resources for organisations to dedicate responsibility for international work within their organisational structures—quite ironic, given that ‘international’ is included within the charter’s name. Moreover, despite the charter’s perceived benefits, there is a lack of communication strategy, which means organisations have not built the charter into their forward work plans. In fact, there is very limited awareness of the charter beyond the board level, clearly implying that few people think it’s worth talking about.

We know the benefits that international work can bring to the NHS, and there are dedicated people investing their time and energy in trying to make this work and to develop international health partnerships, but they’re being let down by this Government’s unhealthy obsession with overcomplicating everything. The maximising potential for future benefit report is littered with accusations that the Government lacks a clear strategy in international health, with no co-ordinated aims or objectives. Furthermore, you seem to have an almost psychotic compulsion to create more and more partnership agreements in the face of duplicating effort and the pleading of those involved to reduce the number of meetings they have to attend. This is shown by the mind-boggling interdependency chart shown in the report, which would give nightmares to even the most hardened horror movie enthusiast.

So, it begs the question as to why you are involved in this at all. The report clearly shows that the health partnership community is crying out for leadership and political will to resolve these issues. Therefore, as Minister for Social Justice, who is responsible for the Wales and Africa programme, the responsibility for addressing these issues is upon your shoulders. How do you propose to tackle these concerns? Thank you.