I'm very pleased that, at the last Senedd election, we had a large number of councillors who had been council leaders, like Sam Rowlands, deputy leaders and cabinet members elected to the Senedd—people who know first-hand the importance of local government services and the money needed to run them. I will not always agree with them, but I respect their knowledge and experience of local government. I agree we should thank councillors and local authorities and their staff throughout Wales for the role during the coronavirus pandemic. Councillors and councils played a remarkable role. 

Just dealing with one single issue, the issue of homelessness, the Welsh Government provided a £10 million fund that enabled local authorities to engage with all those sleeping rough, and ensure they had access to safe and suitable accommodation to meet the pandemic restrictions. But it was the local authorities and their staff who did the work. Within the first two weeks of lockdown, local authorities accommodated or reaccommodated over 500 households who'd either been sleeping rough or were in accommodation unsuitable for social distancing. This figure eventually rose to over 1,000. 

Local authorities reconfigured teams and redeployed staff to ensure effective provision of services and also found new ways of working with partners. The mechanism of a centralised co-ordination cell within each council brought together partners such as health, registered social landlords, police and probation, third sector organisations and others to collectively plan and deliver services—an example of Welsh local government in action. We had a serious fire in Swansea several years ago, and the local authority were the only people who could take control and ensure it was dealt with, while everybody else, including the fire service, were trying to find reasons why it wasn't really their responsibility, and they shouldn't be having to pay for it. The local authority stepped in and made sure it was dealt with. That's happened in local authorities the length and breadth of Wales, and I'm sure that colleagues here could talk about what was done in their own local authorities. 

The services provided by the 22 local authorities in Wales provide the basic services that people need. The funding formula, or aggregated external finance, which was previously known as the rate support grant before business rates were centralised, is meant to provide resources to financially support local authorities above their local council tax income. The local government finance settlement determines how much of the funding provided for Wales is given to each local authority. This funding contains the revenue support grant and non-domestic rates, and is distributed on the basis of a needs-based formula. I'm one of those people who thinks that the national non-domestic rates should be returned to local authorities. We talk often about devolution; devolution means that some things have to go down from here to local authorities and other places. Devolution should not stop in Cardiff and the Senedd.

Local authorities can raise money themselves locally—not just the council tax, but, depending where you are, things like car parking, fees and charges. But if you look at it, the distribution of properties in each band varies enormously. The number of properties in each council tax band varies. Some, such as Blaenau Gwent, have over half their properties in band A, and very few properties in the top two bands. Monmouthshire, by comparison, has only just over 1 per cent of its properties in band A and 6 per cent of its properties in the top two bands. Monmouthshire, with more high-value properties, has a greater ability to raise money through local taxation. 

Returning to what the Welsh Government funding is meant to be, it means that, if we intend to be fair, councils such as Monmouth should get less per person than councils like Blaenau Gwent from the Welsh Government. What we need is two things: business rates returned to local councils, which would have a huge effect, and a fairer system of council tax with either additional bands or, preferably, council tax based upon the absolute value of the property. You can take a property just over a band, and all of a sudden, people end up paying substantially more. But we also know, don't we, that if you are band A, you pay about half—two thirds, sorry—of band D, whereas if you're in band G or H, you pay about twice as much? So, it isn't based on the value of the properties, as such, and it discriminates against people with lower value properties. 

Council tax is regressive, but it doesn't have to be. It can be based on the absolute value of properties, and we've also got a situation—something we need to think about—namely, how do we make sure that everybody gets exactly the same level of service? Now, it's been said that Blaenau Gwent has much higher band D properties for council tax, and Monmouthshire has much fewer, but that's because of the distribution. If you live in a three-bedroomed semi-detached house in Blaenau Gwent, you're lucky to be in band A. If you live in a three-bedroomed semi-detached house in somewhere like Chepstow, you're probably in band D. So, there's that difference as well. But I think that we need to make sure that council tax is fair, it needs to be changed, and it needs to make sure that every local authority gets what it deserves.