1. What assessment has the Welsh Government made of the impact UK Government plans to limit the right to strike will have on workers in Wales? TQ704

Thank you for the question. The Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Bill is an unjustified attack on workers' rights and trade unions. The way to resolve industrial disputes is by negotiation and agreement. It is not through ill-conceived legislation that will do lasting damage to industrial relations across the UK and interfere with devolved public services in Wales.

Can I thank the Counsel General for his answer there? And, Llywydd, I will declare an interest as a proud trade union member of Unite the Union and Community union. Let's be clear here; the decision by the UK Tories to bring a Bill forward aimed at sacking key workers is an affront to democracy. Llywydd, this piece of Tory legislation will mean that, when workers democratically vote to strike, they can be forced to work, and then sacked if they don't comply. We should be looking to work with our key workers and our trade union colleagues, not seeking to sack hard-working people. Counsel General, the Trades Union Congress say that this legislation shows that the UK Tory Government are determined to attack workers' fundamental right to strike. I wholeheartedly agree with the TUC. This disgraceful piece of legislation has shown the UK Conservatives up for what they really are—against the hard-earned freedoms of working people. Counsel General, can I ask you: what more can the Welsh Government do to protect workers’ rights in Wales?

Thank you for that supplementary question. The Bill is indeed misnamed. It is really a 'sack the nurses Bill', it's a 'sack the ambulance worker Bill', or an 'abolition of the right to strike Bill'. It removes the sacrosanct protections to workers and trade unions that were enshrined in legislation in 1906, legislation that was introduced after the Taff Vale case in 1900 that arose from a dispute that occurred, in fact, in my constituency in Pontypridd. It led to the Trade Disputes Act 1906, which established fundamental principles. What the Tory Government is doing would take workers' rights back 120 years.

What I can say on behalf of the Welsh Government is that there's been a total lack of engagement over this legislation with the Welsh Government. The first notice we had was last Thursday, just after the UK Government's press notice. The first correspondence I had was being copied into a letter to the First Minister from Minister Hollinrake on 10 January. That was yesterday. This isn't the way to resolve disputes. This lack of engagement is really just unacceptable. The legislation is wholly unnecessary. Where there are emergency issues that need to be put in place, they have always been put in place by the trade unions. Some of you may have seen the other day the coverage of a GMB picket line in Wales—and I'm a GMB member—of ambulance workers. The moment a message came that there was an emergency call-out, they immediately left the picket line; they went and they did that particular work. That has always been the case. It is a fundamental attack on freedom, and as Welsh Government, we will give it no credence or support. The legislation, also, in my view, is unworkable. It has not worked in other countries. It will not work here. It is an attempt to avoid dealing with the real issue in this country, and that is to provide proper funding to public sector workers in England and to devolved Governments, to enable our public sector workers to be properly paid. I say it is an act of desperation from a Government that is out of touch and has lost control.

Counsel General, as part of your assessment, have you considered the International Labour Organization's acceptance, which the TUC subscribes to, that minimum service levels are a proportionate way of balancing the right to strike with the need to protect the wider public? Secondly, yesterday, in her oral statement, your colleague the health Minister said that, and I quote,

'the impact on capacity as a result of recent industrial action...has placed additional pressures on our systems'.

Do you agree with your Cabinet colleague's assessment? If you do, do you not therefore also agree that guaranteeing minimum service levels, which doesn't limit workers' rights to strike, would be beneficial to both workers and the services that they deliver? Thank you.

Thank you for the question. Your interpretation of the ILO references to minimum service levels is taken completely out of context, as it refers to voluntary arrangements with trade unions, and those have always existed within the United Kingdom, and indeed within Wales, where they are necessary. This is not voluntary arrangement; this is statutory limitation of workers and the ability to respond.

It is, of course, right that industrial disputes cause disruption and pressures. That disruption and those pressures are put clearly at the door of the UK Government and its complete failure to properly engage, and its complete failure to honour the promises that it made during COVID—that, once we were through the COVID pandemic it would properly respect and reward our public sector workers.

With regard to the final point that you actually made—that it doesn't take away rights—I'm sure that you probably haven't yet read the explanatory memorandum attaching to the Bill. I'll just read out the one section on the purpose effect of the Bill: an employee who is identified in a work notice for a particular strike day and receives a copy of that work notice from the employer before that strike day loses the protection from dismissal. This is a 'sack public sector workers' Bill.

Today, I had the pleasure of co-sponsoring, with Carolyn Thomas, a drop-in event with Communication Workers Union members. As those who attended will know, what they had to say about Royal Mail's disregard for its employees was shocking: casualisation, pay cuts, hollowed-out conditions, even attempting to take away statutory sick pay, which is totally illegal, by the way—'Amazon on steroids', as one CWU member in Bridgend put it. Striking is central to protecting our services against this. It is central to the rights and bargaining powers of workers, and it is disgraceful, quite frankly, that, rather than actually address this systemic economic crisis, the Tories opt instead to attack workers.

It's clear to me, as it should be to everyone in this Chamber, that the rights of workers are not safe in the hands of Westminster. Workers can't continue to trust and rely on the goodwill or political make-up of Westminster, and as one CWU member put it to me, Wales might become the last bastion of fair work over the next few years. If the Government were serious about protecting workers' fundamental democratic right to strike, then the Government would support the devolution of employment law, so that we could ensure that those rights never come under attack again. Counsel General, will you?

Thank you for those comments. They're comments that I agree with, and I can say, certainly, that as we look at the Bill, as we explore and consider its detail far more carefully, we will look at every opportunity to ensure that it does not impact on the social partnership that we have in Wales, and that the fundamental protections in respect of those devolved public services are ones that we will abide by and commit to those standards that we have already embraced with our trade union partners. I'm not aware that there are actually any employers who want to see this legislation. In fact, all the information that I see from employers is that they see not only that this is unnecessary, that it is unworkable, but that it is actually a further disruption and distraction from good collective bargaining and proper engagement with trade unions. 

I see this legislation, in some ways, as having a number of motivations. I don't actually believe that the UK Government think that it is workable. I believe that it is firstly an attempt to sully the name and reputation—somehow they think this may break the support that there is from the public for those who are currently involved in these disputes, that somehow it will give them a higher ground in that. Or secondly, that it will somehow discourage people from the sort of support and solidarity. I think it will fail on all those particular grounds. I think it is a distraction from the real obligation of Government, and the real obligation of Government is to actually engage with those trade unions when you have a dispute of this particular nature. 

We have an umbilical link, I think, to the decisions that are taken—an umbilical financial link to the decisions that are taken at a UK Government level, and that impacts on the extent to which we can engage and the things that we can actually do. But, I know amongst all my colleagues and I know from all the people I speak to, whether they are members of a political party or otherwise, that there is considerable support and sympathy out there and recognition. And I believe that it is a recognition because of the promises that were made during the COVID period that we would do things differently. And this is an example of a UK Tory Government not only out of touch but that is reverting back to its old ways. And can I just make this one comment? I think it is a real disappointment that, at a time when we have legislation like this, when we have these levels of disputes, that we have a Tory Party in Wales that is content to act solely as poodles to the diktat that is coming out of 10 Downing Street, instead of standing up for the Welsh public sector, for Welsh workers and working collectively with us to achieve that sort of change. 

First of all, I want to declare my membership of Unite, the trade union. I believe, as others will, that this is an ideologically led attack on workers' fundamental right to strike. They have a track record on this, and they've brought in several pieces of legislation while this Government have been in power. Let's be clear about remembering that. They're going a little bit further than Thatcher did when she tried to destroy the miners' union; this lot are trying to destroy all the public sector unions. Perhaps we could have a legal minimum safety and service level applied to the UK Government, because the current lot are dangerously incompetent. Only an exhausted party out of ideas could think that a good way to solve labour shortages and low morale in Britain's key public services is to sack workers who strike for better pay and conditions. Who do they think would replace those workers? They created an economic crisis with Liz Truss—I don't know if you can remember her. She crashed the economy, and now they're trying to crush the workers' right to strike. It's an absolute affront.

I think you're right in saying that the public will see through this for what it is and that they don't have the level of support that they're hoping to gain by moving the blame for their failure to manage the economic crisis that they created by putting the blame firmly and squarely on the people who can now no longer afford their mortgages as a consequence of what they did, can't put their heating on and are unable to feed themselves. That's what these workers are striking for, and that is why they have joined a union, so that they can have a collective voice with which they can be heard.  

Thank you for those comments. It is an irony, isn't it, that the UK Government is a proponent of the free market, but the free market only when it comes to maximising the profits and directors' pay. When the free market dictates that we are actually not paying our public sector workers enough, the response of UK Government is actually to interfere with that free market, to undermine it and to actually impose legislative restrictions on people's ability to do anything about it. Can I say I very much welcome the comment that you made, that, in fact, we should have a minimum service level, and it should really apply to the UK Government? And perhaps for that reason, that's why I actually welcome the commitment by the leader of the Labour Party, Sir Keir Starmer, that the next Labour Government will introduce a ban on second jobs. Maybe that'll ensure that our MPs are working fully for the interests on which they actually have been elected.

Carolyn Thomas, finally.

Diolch. Can I declare also that I'm a member of Unite the Union, and I was formerly a member of the Communication Workers Union as a postal worker?

Counsel General, two years ago, we were standing on our doorsteps clapping the workers, and now we see what the Tories really think, by bringing forward a Bill to sack them. As you said, the Bill is known as a 'sack the workers' Bill. It's really important that we hear the voices of workers, because very often, what we hear is selected truth. To hide their contempt for key workers, they suggest that rules exist elsewhere, not admitting that Britain already has some of the most aggressively anti-trade union laws anywhere in Europe already, making it very difficult to strike. I want to ensure that we continue to work with our key workers, such as the representatives we met today—it was a really, really good session and we had 20 MSs that attended and listened to the CWU representatives. And Counsel General, doesn't this demonstrate the importance that we continue with the social partnership Bill in Wales and the social partnership to show that we're working with the workers? Thank you.

Thank you for those comments and I do agree with them, and I have the greatest of respect for the Communication Workers Union, and also for those postmen who deliver through all the bad weather. You look at the weather we have now and we have them out there in that appalling weather delivering—actually delivering now the Christmas cards that we didn't get before Christmas. I'm disappointed I wasn't able to be at that particular event, but I think that was an important expression of the support that people have in our society for the postal services, for the work that they actually do, and it is a pity that it's been being undermined and all the profitable parts of it have been, over the years, cherry-picked away and privatised, and I'm hoping that's something that will be addressed in due course.

Can I just say, in terms of the social partnership Bill, this is groundbreaking legislation that has been brought by Minister Hannah Blythyn? And I think it shows the real difference, that we will be the first part of the United Kingdom to create a statutory framework within which trade unions, employers and Government get together to solve these. It is one of the reasons why we just do not want this legislation; we do not want it to interfere in what are the relations, the constructive engagement we have to actually sort out those issues, those disagreements, and to work collectively for the common good of the people of Wales.

I thank the Counsel General. The next question is to be answered by the Deputy Minister for Climate Change, and it's to be asked by Luke Fletcher.