Thank you, Deputy Minister, for your statement and for the introduction of this Bill. However, despite your efforts, I do believe that there are overwhelming points of issue with it. Firstly, the social partnership council that is being proposed is likely to just consolidate existing social partnership mechanisms on a statutory basis, thus endorsing the status quo and removing the impetus to improve fair work through supply chains.

Secondly, there is existing legal duty on public bodies to protect people from discrimination in the workplace and in the wider society, as laid out in the Equality Act 2010, and so what this Bill will simply do is increase the regulatory burden on public bodies. This will be problematic, because public bodies in Wales are, in all likelihood, going to struggle with implementing additional regulation. We have heard in this Chamber that 5 per cent of public bodies still claim to have never heard of this Government's flagship policy of the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015, and many more have struggled to fulfil its requirements. So, I ask the Deputy Minister why this Government believes that this Bill will improve public body procurement, when public bodies, with the help of this Government and the commissioner, cannot fully implement regulation that has been in place for nearly 10 years.   

Thirdly, I believe that there is insufficient quantifiable evidence that this Bill will bring any significant benefits to fair work in supply chains, because it is grounded entirely in the faith that there will be a positive impact. As you know, Deputy Minister, previous efforts to increase the social impact of procurement, such as the European social fund project, revealed no tangible evidence of positive results to either local economies or fair work practices. Dirprwy Lywydd, the best-case scenario that this Bill can hope for is that public procurement contracts ensure fair work practices in those areas where goods and services are at present being procured, which is a rather limited exercise since public bodies already have the means to do this, and, for the most part, they already do it. Furthermore, this Bill will not be able to address unfair working practices in areas outside of public supply chains, which is where most of the support is needed. 

So, I wonder, Dirprwy Lywydd, what is the real purpose of introducing such a Bill. I believe that this Government's purpose for the Bill is to increase the power of trade unions by giving them an equal say over public procurement contracts, which is a dangerous scenario to be in, because it will mean that trade unions will now be able to withhold or slow down public procurement at their discretion and effectively hold public bodies to ransom by stopping consultation on procurement contracts until their demands are met. This will be challenging for public bodies during disputes, as trade unions will now have even more leverage to stop public bodies from functioning. 

On another point, we must be mindful that trade unions are not infallible to corruption. As we know, Unite, the Labour Party's biggest supporter, has employees being investigated for bribery, fraud and money laundering, and current investigations have recently seen Unite properties, including the headquarters, raided by several police forces. Dirprwy Lywydd, it is not a hyperbole to say that this Government's Bill could see corrupt trade union officials receiving funds from prospective suppliers to manipulate favourable places ahead of the queue for public procurement contracts, as well as being able to bully and coerce suppliers into meeting their own specific demands, putting suppliers' backs up against the wall with threats of losing contracts if they do not comply. It could even create the scenario that trade unions may receive generous campaign contributions from prospective companies looking to secure lucrative public procurement contracts. 

Thirdly, because trade unions are now going to have to scrutinise public procurement chains, it will mean more than just facility time payments will be needed. Trade unions will need personnel who are properly trained, and their time will need to be appropriately paid for, because, Deputy Minister, you cannot expect trade unions to scrutinise fair work and fair pay practices without themselves receiving fair pay in return. So, undoubtedly, trade unions have to receive, at some point, public money to carry out these regulatory duties. And, for those Members of Plaid Cymru looking to support this Bill, you need to be very much aware that this Bill will ultimately be ploughing public money into trade union coffers, who will then be donating more money to the Labour Party, which is certainly a conflict of interest.

Surely, Deputy Minister, it is glaringly obvious that an independent body that can hire the best people without political affiliation, and that does not pay contributions to the Labour Party, would be much better placed to scrutinise contracts to ensure fair pay and fair work conditions. They can then report back to Government and public bodies and the appropriate decisions can then be made. I argue that, given all the points I have made, there is very little ground for trade unions to take on this role within the public procurement contracts. In conclusion, I'd like to say that ensuring fair work throughout supply chains is an immensely positive step. However, the current system already allows for that. Legislation from this Government already places a duty on public bodies to review proper working conditions and fair pay through the supply chains. So, ultimately, this Bill comes about from the mistrust of this Government towards public bodies and their ability to effectively review their own supply chains, and a desire by the Labour Party to give trade unions a suffocating grip on public procurement in Wales. [Interruption.]