7. How will the Welsh Government mitigate against any negative impacts the UK Government spring statement might have on households in South Wales East? OQ57904

I thank Delyth Jewell for that, Dirprwy Lywydd. In Wales, we have already provided a support package worth more than double the consequential funding we have received, as we seek to play our part in helping people who need that help the most. We will continue to press the UK Government to join us in doing so.

Diolch, Prif Weinidog. The Wales Governance Centre has found that the average Welsh household will still be £315 a year worse off, households with the lowest income will be affected disproportionately since they'll benefit less from the fuel duty cut and the increase to the national insurance threshold, and people on benefits will see a real-terms reduction of 4.3 per cent due to the UK Government's refusal to uprate benefits. Since incomes in Wales are lower than the UK average, benefit take-up is higher and we pay more for electricity, people in Wales will be disproportionately affected by the cost-of-living crisis. First Minister, while the actions you've referred to are welcome, I fear they won't be enough. What justification has the Treasury provided to Welsh Ministers for failing to do more to help people on low incomes in Wales, and don't they realise that their failure to take action reinforces the belief amongst the Welsh public that Westminster will never work for Wales?  

What I think the response tells you, Llywydd, is that it's the Conservative party that will never work for Wales, because here is a Conservative Chancellor who went about the spring statement on the basis of trying to burnish his own credentials as a tax-cutting Chancellor in order to improve his chances in the leadership election that he expects to fight any time soon. So, the Chancellor's eyes were not focused on helping the 5.5 million people who are economically inactive in this country, or the 11 million pensioners who find themselves significantly worse off as a result of breaking his own promise to up pensions in line with the triple lock. Twenty seven million people out of 31 million people will still be paying more tax after the Chancellor's election gimmick of a 1p cut in income tax in 2024, and that just tells you where the Chancellor and the Conservative party's interests lie. 

Here's what the Institute for Fiscal Studies said. I'm sure the Member will have seen it for herself. The IFS commenting on the Chancellor's promise of a 1p cut in income tax in 2024 said that the combination of increase in national insurance rates and a reduction in income tax will make the system both less equitable and less efficient—more unfair and more wasteful at the same time. It's an astonishing thing to have brought about as a Chancellor, but that's what we are left with, and people across the United Kingdom are left with, as a result of the deliberate decisions that the Chancellor made. It's not a mistake; he knew what he was doing. He decided who he would sacrifice and who he would protect, and those were Conservative party priorities.  

And finally, question 8—Russell George.