The following amendments have been selected: amendment 1 in the name of Darren Millar, and amendment 2 in the name of Siân Gwenllian.

We move on to item 4 now, the debate on the draft budget for 2023-24. I call on the Minister for Finance and Local Government to move the motion. Rebecca Evans. 

Motion NDM8194 Lesley Griffiths

To propose that the Senedd, in accordance with Standing Order 20.12:

Notes the Draft Budget for the financial year 2023-24 laid in the Table Office by the Minister for Finance and Local Government on 13 December 2022.

Motion moved.

Diolch. I'm pleased to open this afternoon's debate on the Welsh Government's draft budget for 2023-24. Since we first had the opportunity to debate the draft budget in the Senedd on 13 December, Senedd committees have been busy scrutinising our spending plans. I welcome the very constructive sessions that I have had with the Finance Committee and that my ministerial colleagues have had with their respective committees. Before I provide some early reflections on the themes arising from scrutiny, it's important to recognise again the challenging context in which this draft budget is prepared. This has been a year where we have seen the ongoing impacts of inflation, three Prime Ministers, three Chancellors, and the shocking mismanagement of public finances by the UK Government. We received an autumn statement by the latest Chancellor that fell far short of the interventions needed to meet the challenges that we face. But, despite this, and building on our three-year spending review, the draft budget balances our response to the immediate crisis alongside investing in longer term change. We have taken difficult decisions, but we did so in the spirit of collaboration and transparency and putting the people and communities of Wales first. 

Our main priorities for the 2023-24 budget are protecting front-line public services and our ambitions for the future, continuing to help those most affected by the cost-of-living crisis, and supporting our economy through recessionary times. Unlike what the Welsh Conservatives have set out in their amendment, we believe that those priorities—protecting public services, businesses and people—are the priorities of people in Wales. Building on the substantial increase in funding that I provided in our spending review, in this 2023-24 budget, I have allocated £165 million to the NHS, £70 million to deliver the real living wage for social care, and £227 million for local government. Core revenue funding for local government will increase by 7.9 per cent on a like-for-like basis, compared to the current year. No local authority will receive less than a 6.5 per cent increase. Alongside our support for public services, we will continue to support the economy and businesses with direct investment of £319 million for non-domestic rates relief. In response to the cost-of-living crisis, this budget targets support at those who need it most, including through investment in our basic income pilot and discretionary assistance fund. 

I'll now turn to the points raised in scrutiny. I was pleased to see the Finance Committee recognising the difficult context in which we are delivering this budget, and I will, of course, continue to call on the UK Government to recognise the growing impact of inflation and to uplift our budget accordingly at the upcoming spring statement. I will continue to call on them to provide us with the fiscal flexibilities that we need to make the best use of our resources in difficult times. I welcome the Finance Committee's support for this, and I will be raising it at the next Finance: Interministerial Standing Committee meeting, which will take place later this week. And alongside my ministerial colleagues, I will continue to call on the UK Government to deliver a range of interventions to support those who need help most. The joint review of inter-governmental relations includes a package of reforms as the basis for the conduct of inter-governmental relations. It's our hope that we can work pragmatically with the UK Government, through the new inter-governmental relations review arrangements, before needing to invoke the formal dispute resolution process. However, we will not hesitate to use that process when we deem it necessary. 

I'll now turn to the amendments put forward by Plaid Cymru on raising Welsh rates of income tax. We have been very clear that now is not the time to raise Welsh rates of income tax. Of course, we consider all of our tax levers as part of our budget preparations. However, the current tax burden is at its highest level for over 70 years. Rising inflation is affecting people across Wales, and we're in a cost-of-living crisis. We will not ask people to pay more at this time. Raising the higher and additional rates of income tax wouldn't raise enough money to make a significant difference to our spending plans. The largest contribution would have to come from the basic rate band taxpayers, and let's be clear that this would impact the lowest-paid workers in Wales. And these are the same workers who are seeking help from food banks, the same workers who are having to choose between heating their homes and feeding their families. The use of Welsh rates of income tax should be considered and strategic.

And turning to capital, there's no additional capital funding from the UK Government in the autumn statement, so there are no capital allocations within this budget. I'll be outlining further financial transactions capital allocations within our final budget, aligned to our priorities.

Turning to the information provided as part of the budget package this year, it's really important to remember that last year we delivered a multi-year budget up to 2025, alongside a zero-based review of capital allocations. This year was a single-year budget confirming changes to the budget settlement as part of the UK Government's autumn statement. These two budget packages—the multi-year and the single year—should clearly be considered together, and this will be the same for next year unless there are some fundamental changes to our budget settlement. The budget documentation this year focuses on the important changes that we've implemented for this budget round, rather than restating what's already been published, scrutinised and debated by this Senedd. I am, of course, open to further discussions to explore what additional information committees and stakeholders believe would aid scrutiny.

On the issue of pay, we recognise the strength of feeling that's been expressed by staff in these ballots for industrial action. We believe that all of our public sector workers should be fairly rewarded for the important work that they do. Unfortunately, our financial settlement falls far short of what is needed to meet the very significant challenges faced by our public services and workers across Wales. We cannot raise enough funding fairly enough through the limited powers we have to provide an inflation-matching pay rise to public sector workers. The autumn statement was a missed opportunity for the UK Government to give hard-working public sector workers a pay rise and prevent widespread disruptive industrial action across the UK.

But I am pleased that, in recent days, we have made progress in our discussions with trade union partners that have resulted in the current round of health strikes largely being paused while trade union members consider the latest offer that we have made to resolve the dispute. Hard choices have been required to find the money for the cost of this pay offer for this year. We've drawn down everything that we can from the Wales reserve and are seeking underspends from across Government to put this offer together. Using this money to increase pay now means that we face even more difficult choices in the future, but we are confident that it's the right thing to do.

In closing, I'd like to offer my thanks to all of those involved in shaping and scrutinising this draft budget. Scrutiny is a crucial part of the process, and, whilst I agree with the vast majority of the Finance Committee's recommendations, there are some that I will need to consider in the light of the limitations that I've set out today. I and my Cabinet colleagues will respond formally to the recommendations of all of the Senedd committee reports in advance of the vote on the final budget on 7 March.

To conclude, this is a budget for hard times and one where difficult choices have been made. However, in supporting public services, businesses and people, we have provided the certainty and clarity needed to navigate these difficult times. And I look forward to hearing from colleagues.

I call on the Chair of the Finance Committee, Peredur Owen Griffiths. 

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. It's a pleasure to contribute to this important debate on the Welsh Government’s draft budget for 2023-24. Before I turn to specific areas within the report, I would like to say that the committee fully recognises the difficulties faced by the Welsh Government in preparing its budgetary proposals. Inflationary pressures, rising energy costs and an increase in the costs of living are causing uncertainty and putting unprecedented pressures on already-stretched budgets. This has been exacerbated by poor communication between the Welsh Government and the UK Government, which is not reflective of an effective working relationship that is underpinned by smooth channels of communication based on mutual respect. That is why we support the Minister in pressing the UK Government to establish robust inter-governmental mechanisms, to ensure that it can effectively escalate disagreements and resolve funding disputes.

However, these challenges do not mean that we should let the Minister off the hook or that the Welsh Government's draft budget cannot be improved. In fact, as our report makes clear, we found that there are a number of areas where the draft budget disappoints and where improvements can be made.

The Llywydd took the Chair.

First of all, the committee felt that there was a lack of clarity and candour regarding the Welsh Government's plans, particularly in terms of identifying where decisions have been made in the draft budget to halt, postpone or reduce funding. As a result, we have made a raft of recommendations calling for greater clarity in the information provided alongside the draft budget. This includes calling on the Minister to provide a full assessment of the impact that high inflation will have on its funding position and capital programme and for changes to be made to the way information is presented, so that the draft budget provides an assessment of the impact of spending decisions across portfolios.

Furthermore, I would like to note, on behalf of all committees, that, although we always welcome both oral and written evidence provided by the Welsh Government on the draft budget, we believe that more can be done to ensure that committees are provided with such evidence in good time. That is why I will shortly be consulting with Senedd committees on their experiences of scrutinising this year's draft budget and asking for practical ways in which improvements can be made to the next budget round.

Turning now to our views on the Welsh Government's use of fiscal levers, although we understand the Minister's decision not to raise taxes, the committee is surprised that the Welsh Government had not carried out detailed work on the behavioural impact of varying Welsh rates of income tax across all bands. This strongly suggests that the Minister has not given serious consideration to changing the rates during this budget round, which we found disappointing, and ask for this to be properly considered in the future. We heard evidence that the Welsh Government's fiscal tools need updating. In particular, we support the Minister's continued efforts in pressing the UK Government to increase the Welsh Government's overall and annual limits for borrowing and reserves at least in line with inflation. We also heard that the nature of our tax-raising powers is more limited than those enjoyed by our Scottish cousins. Although we acknowledge that doing so is far from straightforward, we would like the Minister to undertake foundational work into the benefits and risks of devolving powers to modify Welsh rates of income tax bands and thresholds.

A key aspect of this draft budget is the support provided to help with rising costs of living. On accessing benefits, the committee has long advocated a 'no wrong door' approach. As the demand for such support, sadly, increases, we believe more can be done to ensure that accessing such support is as easy and straightforward as possible. That is why we would like to see the Welsh Government fast-track the introduction of a unified benefits system, a Welsh benefits charter, to make it easier and simpler. We also believe that the current financial support schemes need tweaking, particularly in relation to eligibility thresholds, to ensure that they remain at suitable levels and are not excluding those at the margins of support. The committee has also made concrete recommendations to improve what is already on offer. This includes encouraging the expansion of the free childcare model, considering an increase in the value of the educational maintenance allowance, which has not been increased since the mid 2000s, and prioritising the development of a replacement Warm Homes programme as a matter of urgency to prevent fuel poverty.

Llywydd, all of us in this Chamber are fully aware of the pressures that public services are under. The additional funding provided by Welsh Government through this draft budget to support such services is a welcome move, and we are particularly interested in the innovative methods being explored to increase the money available, including the introduction of a social care levy to fund the rising cost of social care provision. However, the Senedd needs to know whether this funding allocated for next year is delivering tangible improvements. We therefore want the Welsh Government to explain the outcomes it expects to be delivered by NHS organisations and social care providers. In addition, although the Welsh Government has outlined priority areas for the NHS, it has been less forthcoming in outlining the areas it expects to deprioritise. As one stakeholder told us, 'If everything’s a priority, then nothing is a priority.' Such efforts to identify spending priorities are futile if the Minister cannot also explain which areas are less of a priority and will receive less funding as a result.

During our stakeholder event at Llanhilleth Miners Institute last June, representatives from the health and social care sectors told us that workforce planning is crucial to ensure that services remain resilient and fit for purpose—a theme echoed during our evidence sessions. Although we welcome the overdue publication last week of the Welsh Government’s national workforce implementation plan, we would like this to be extended across the Welsh public sector to provide long-term stability for services as well as support and direction. We cannot expect services to improve if we don’t look after those working so hard to keep them afloat.

Lastly, I would like to make a point about the time given to scrutinise the draft budget. Although we accept that the Welsh Government has no control over the timing of UK Government fiscal events, we are concerned that the timetable for scrutiny of this draft budget was truncated for the fourth consecutive year. This is not fair on Members of the Senedd, stakeholders, or the public at large, and we regret the impact that this has on our ability to engage and consider the draft budget proposals.

Having said that, I welcome the Welsh Government’s intention to look afresh at updating our budget processes, and I'm glad that the Minister is open to looking at ways to enhance scrutiny opportunities in the Senedd. This includes holding pre-budget scrutiny sessions, when the publication of the draft budget has been delayed. We found such an approach particularly helpful this year, as we sought to understand the factors behind the Welsh Government’s budget formulation process.

To close, Llywydd, I told Members during last year’s draft budget debate that I view engaging with people across Wales and listening to stakeholders as a priority. I would like to thank all of those who provided evidence and shared their views with us through our work. This year, the committee has established a clear arc between our engagement work, the priorities debate, and our findings in this report. Our aim is to build on this work for next year as we look forward to the 2024-25 budget round. Thank you very much.

I have selected the amendments to the motion, and I call on Peter Fox to move amendment 1, tabled in the name of Darren Millar. Peter Fox.

Amendment 1—Darren Millar

Add as new point at end of motion:

Believes that the Welsh Government’s Draft Budget 2023-24 fails to deliver on the priorities of the people of Wales.

Amendment 1 moved.

Diolch, Llywydd. I move the amendment in the name of Darren Millar. First of all, I would like to thank the Minister for her statement. I recognise the difficult financial backdrop that this year's budget has been drafted within. There are, hopefully, though, some positive signs that the current high levels of inflation will now start to ease over the course of this year. Thanks to the decisive action taken by the Prime Minister and the Chancellor, the Bank of England is now suggesting that any economic downturn will be shorter and shallower than first thought.

Some of the decisions that were taken were difficult, we know, but they were the medicine that we needed to improve the health of the UK's finances. We now need Ministers here, in this place, in Wales, to start dealing properly with the huge challenges this country is facing and stop looking for other people to blame. Because challenges can be overcome, and if we're going to create the Wales that we all want to see, then the Welsh Government needs to step up and sort things out here. 

Llywydd, we know what the immediate issues facing our communities are. We debate these here week after week in this Chamber. This budget has to deal with the immediate pressures facing society, so we have to prioritise our actions and make sure that we deliver on these. I know that the Minister understands this, and there are areas in the draft budget that I generally do welcome, such as the additional money for mental health services, the additional non-domestic rates relief for businesses in the retail, leisure and hospitality sectors, and also the increase in the local government settlement.

But, despite this, there are areas of the draft budget where the Welsh Government are letting so many people down, as we've just heard from the Chair of the Finance Committee, such as the real-terms cut in the education budget. Then there's the real-terms cut in the health and social care budgets. And let's not forget that the only Government in Britain to actually cut the NHS budget was a Labour Government here in Wales in 2012. And we know that even before the pandemic, the Labour Government were only spending around £1.05 of the £1.20 that they received from UK Government for every £1.00 spent in England, in both the education and the health services here. The people of Wales need to know where that additional money has been spent.

There are well-meaning announcements, such as the real living wage for social care workers and teachers' pay uplift, but we know that councils will be expected to fund the vast majority of these increases from the revenue support grant, rather than the Welsh Government stepping in and providing direct funding to enable these, meaning much-needed resources will be directed away from front-line services. Again, this an issue that has been raised by councils on numerous occasions and where they will be told, 'It's in your settlement', which just passes the buck onto local authorities.

And then there's the usual funding of pet projects, such as: the constitutional commission—a one-way talking shop; millions being spent on unnecessary tinkering around the elections policy and more politicians, which take money from public services and focus it here in Cardiff Bay; and not to mention things like universal basic income pilots and blanket 20 mph default speed restrictions. For the Government that has called this very budget 'A budget for hard times', it doesn't seem as if Ministers are solely focused on these hard times, does it?

To put it simply, Llywydd, we need a plan that focuses on the immediate problems faced by the people and businesses of Wales, and this is where the Welsh Conservatives believe that the draft budget can improve. We know, as a result of the autumn 2022 budget, the Welsh Government will receive an additional £1.2 billion over the next two years. Let's spend that money on delivering on people's priorities instead of what I've mentioned earlier.

In its draft budget, the Welsh Government is looking to reprioritise some nearly £90 million from within existing departmental plans to, and I quote, refocus

'limited resources towards the areas of greatest need.'

In a budget of almost £23 billion, we believe that this reprioritisation work could have gone further to enable existing funding streams to do more. As a group, we have identified further funding streams worth over £100 million over the next two years that could be refocused in the immediate term, together with adjustments to some existing budgets that would be cost neutral, but help significantly towards helping people with the cost-of-living challenges, supporting businesses to create jobs and prosperity, and clearing the backlogs in our health service. Reprioritising some current funding streams is needed until the pressures we face begin to ease and services are on a more stable footing once again.

However, it's difficult to find out where all of the money here is spent. I’ve certainly found it difficult to get under the bonnet of this budget. In my previous role within the council, I could understand every element of the budget, but it's only Ministers here who know where the pockets of potential additional funding lie. But let's be honest, how much of the £350 million in central administration funding allocated in the draft budget is spent on actually delivering on people's priorities? How does spending £6 million on elections policy, £2 million on a constitutional commission, or over £8 million on international relations—

Will you take an intervention?

Yes, okay, I will do.

I say to Peter Fox, I'm not trying to score a political point here. I just would like to ask—[Interruption.] No, I'm really not. What is the Conservative policy now on universal free school meals? What is your current view on that particular policy?

I'm not reflecting on that at the moment.

I'd like to know what it is. I'd like to know what it is, that's all. And it's not—.

My personal view is that there are many people in Wales who can well afford to pay for meals for their children. Would you expect free meals for your children? Would I? I don't think so. So, let's just be honest, and I'll go back again.

So, how much is that? Where does the spending of £6 million on election policy, where does £2 million on a constitutional commission and £8 million on international relations—outside, of course, of the Wales and Africa programme, which we support—deliver a more sustainable health service, more jobs and pay some bills?

And the Welsh Conservative action plan does not seek to whack up income tax on hard-working people whose budgets are already stretched, which Plaid intend to do, and I agree with the Minister on this. They can pretend that their plans would impact on the highest earners the most, but we all know that it's the basic income tax payers, who make up the bulk of Welsh taxpayers, who will foot the bill under Plaid's plans.

Llywydd, with the funding that we have identified as a group, we have looked at six key areas that could be funded to better deliver on people's priorities. We would take immediate action to clear the bedblocking, open up hospitals and end the disgrace of ambulances queuing outside A&Es by introducing care hotels. These were introduced elsewhere in the UK during the pandemic—indeed, in Devon, they're still in use—and are designed to protect acute hospital capacity, providing step-down facilities for people who require support but not hospital care.

Surgical hubs would also be established in each region, to provide additional relief to the Welsh health system—they've been talked about, but they're not being delivered—creating more operating theatres, meaning we can begin to tackle the unacceptably long waiting lists, with one in four people in Wales desperate for treatment, especially around orthopaedics, which we know the professional sector have made a lot of suggestions on.

To support the economy, a microbusiness support fund would enable businesses to get off the ground and expand by helping them with paying the national insurance contributions of two new additional staff members. A trial scheme would be established to subsidise the cost of solar panels for small businesses, helping them to reduce their energy bills and contribute to Wales's net-zero ambition.

We would expand upon the Government's empty homes scheme by turning it into a help-to-buy scheme for empty homes and those in need of renovation, so that we can help people onto the property ladder and unlock almost 20,000 homes sitting empty in Wales.

Finally, we would unlock some of the eye-watering £2.5 billion plus of useable reserves currently sitting in local authority bank accounts, so that we can freeze council tax in the immediate future, helping those further to deal with the cost-of-living crisis.

Will you take an intervention, Peter?

To do so—. I'll finish this point, Mike, if I may. To do so, a formula would be used by the Welsh Government to enable an adjustment in the RSG where councils hold usable reserves above a set threshold. The money adjusted from the RSG over the threshold would be redistributed to create a sector-wide funding floor to enable all councils to retain council tax levels at the current levels. We're seeing some authorities with useable reserves of £270 million. That is unacceptable. I'm happy to take the intervention now.

I was going to say it's based upon the standard spending assessment, the rates support grant, taking into account the ability of councils to raise money. Would you have to also change the standard spending assessment in order to change the rates support grant?

What I'm suggesting here is something not dissimilar to what we would do if we were leading councils and we found our schools accruing huge balances and not using those for the purpose they were created for, that resource to help educate our young children. This is purely suggesting that where a council holds significant reserves above a threshold, a small adjustment of £150,000 per £1 million over that threshold would be held back in the RSG and distributed out as a funding floor to allow all authorities to be able to save people from paying the excessive council tax that once again is being proposed.

In summary, Llywydd, I recognise that the Welsh Government, like all Governments, is facing substantial challenges in the immediate term, but today we have brought the Welsh Conservative action plan forward, which will help to address some of the immediate problems our people and businesses face, and to deliver more resilient communities and public services, using existing resources, because we need to double down on our efforts to tackle the most pressing issues that we are currently facing and deliver a better tomorrow for the people of today.

Amendment 2 now, to be moved by Adam Price.

Amendment 2—Siân Gwenllian

Add as new point at end of motion:

Calls on Welsh Government to increase the basic rate of tax by 1 pence, the higher rate of tax by 2 pence, and the additional rate of tax by 3 pence for the purpose of increasing the budget available to deal with the health and care crisis and provide financial help for people in the greatest need.

Amendment 2 moved.

Diolch, Llywydd. There can be no doubt that the Welsh Government lacks the money it needs to do what is necessary to build the kind of decent society that we want to see. That is more true now than it has ever been, I think. Ultimately, that lack of money stems from our lack of power. We lack the powers necessary to grow our economy in Wales, which is one absolutely critical way by which we can generate the revenue necessary to create that kind of society. We also lack the financial powers to control our own fiscal policy—the borrowing powers, the tax-varying powers—to enable us to raise the resources we need, and to do so fairly. Our debate tomorrow, for example, is about giving Wales the power to set the income tax bands and thresholds so we can have the flexibility that Scotland currently enjoys. Our solution to this dilemma, of course, ultimately, and as soon as we can, is to become an independent nation, so we have all of the tools and levers available to us to create that society we want to see. But that is not currently our position. 

Will you take an intervention?

Yes, certainly. 

Given the uncertainty around that last statement about independence, isn't that one of the greatest risks you could take with the economy?

We totally disagree. We urge you to read the report by Melin Drafod, which was drafted by members of the Labour Party, as well as members of Plaid Cymru and people of no party, and came to the conclusion that there is no fiscal impediment to Wales actually becoming an independent nation, and that there are huge advantages in terms of the kind of fair and prosperous society that we want to see. But that is not what we're debating today, Llywydd. 

Currently, our position is this: the choice we face is whether to use the powers that we do have, or simply accept the financial envelope essentially passed to us from Westminster. The problem with the latter course is that, to all intents and purposes, we face either the worst-case scenario—austerity mark 2 under the current Conservative administration—or, at best, with a change of Government, a flatlining of public expenditure. Coming after a decade and more of austerity, when our public services are crying out for investment, Sir Keir Starmer has said, hasn't he, recently, that, apart from the admittedly ambitious capital commitments in terms of investment in the green economy, there will be no new money—not my words, his words—and that people need to think of Labour's agenda as that of a decade, because there will be no substantial additional investment in the first five years. That's a more conservative pitch even than New Labour in 1997, which promised to stick to the Tory spending plans for the first two years. Essentially, it's five years of no additional substantial money.

Labour and the Conservatives at Westminster are closer than they admit on the main fiscal challenge that we face; they just involve different kinds of wishful thinking. The Tories pretend that it's possible to cut taxes while maintaining the 'quality' of public services—I'm putting that in inverted commas. Labour says it can improve public services without spending or taxing more. Neither party is prepared to tell the difficult truth that even with reform—necessary reform—and innovation in our public services, the health and care required by a rapidly ageing population requires investment. We've had a social care system chronically underfunded, and it's been in crisis for a generation. We've managed somehow with a gradually deteriorating healthcare system up until recently. The NHS was fragile and getting worse—winter crises becoming the norm, the rise in life expectancy stalling, avoidable deaths rising, health inequalities worsening. The NHS at its core, though struggling, still was largely able to take the strain, largely because of the heroic efforts of the workforce. But the combination of the pandemic and the cost-of-living crisis, plus 12 years of austerity, means that the entire health and care system now is buckling, and unless we do something radical, it is going to collapse. That's the stark truth.

That's the deep truth at the heart of the current pay dispute, which isn't just about pay, or even mostly about pay, if you speak to the people on the picket lines; it's about a healthcare system that is brittle and a workforce in health and care that is exhausted and is at breaking point. Twelve years of austerity have meant declining real wages for the workforce and rising illness for the patients, and now it's the NHS itself that is chronically sick. With that rapidly ageing and ailing population, with a decade of underinvestment in technology, and now ballooning waiting lists, and a workforce that feels desperately undervalued, we have created our own crisis. It was there to be seen, wasn't it? We all know this. It was there starkly in the pandemic in the lack of capacity in the NHS, the shortage of beds, the shortage of equipment, the shortage of workers that led us to scrambling to make up for these deficiencies, that surely contributed to the higher death rates that we saw here than many of our European neighbours.

Difficult as it is, we believe now is the time, Minister, to be honest with the people. Money alone, we know, is not the answer, but without it, there is no way out of this crisis. The people that will end up paying the highest price will be precisely those on the lowest incomes—it is they that are always most dependent on the quality of our public services. Look at all the evidence the Welsh Government actually produces in terms of health inequalities. Cuts in health and care affect those on lower incomes more than anyone else; they can't escape their dependency on public service, they can't go private. They will pay if we do not act now. They will pay not in money, but with shorter lives and with more painful lives. That is the stark reality, and we must invest for them. 

I'm struggling to understand your ideation around this, really, because last week I saw in the press that Plaid Cymru want to raise taxes across Wales. How will that help the lowest paid people in the country?

I've just precisely explained to you. It's actually those on the lower incomes that stand to suffer most from the cuts in public services right across the piece, and that's true in health as well. So, if we don't invest, it is those people on the lower incomes that will suffer falling life expectancy, shorter lives, more painful lives. That's why we have to do it.

That is why we are making this proposal that, yes, includes an increase in the basic rate as well. We wish we had the powers they have in Scotland, so that we could have a starter rate, which would be lower, we could have intermediate rates, and that's what we're focusing on tomorrow. But we have to work within the constraints that we're under. But even then, if the Government disagrees with us, then, as the Future Generations Commissioner for Wales said, at least use the additional or the higher rate, as I said earlier. Raising it to the level of Scotland would actually raise £72 million next year, £76 million the year after. That would at least allow you to raise care worker rates to £12 an hour, which would make a significant impact upon the crisis of vacancies in that sector. I hear this phrase, 'the highest tax rates for 70 years'. It's strange to hear the talking points of the TaxPayers' Alliance on the lips of Labour Ministers. But I think, actually, in the history books, and doing the maths, 70 years ago was the Clement Attlee Labour Government—was that a terrible time in terms of what we were able to do, coming out of the second world war and the huge burden that we were dealing with? Just as we were deciding in the pandemic would we—[Interruption.] No, I won't take an intervention; I've taken one from you already.

We decided, didn't we, out of the pandemic, that we were going to build a better society, we were going to build back better, and we seem to have forgotten all that. We've forgotten all the clapping that we did to recognise the key workers. And when we look across the world, we have a lower rate of tax than the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development average, and yet we keep on telling people that you can get Scandinavian-level quality of public services and expect to pay an American level of taxation. We have to be honest with the people, we have to do it now, and we have to do it urgently, because there are no cost-free options here, Minister, and if we continue along the path that we're on, then I fear, quite frankly, for the future of our nation.

I will be speaking in my capacity as Chair of the Local Government and Housing Committee. I would like to thank the Welsh Local Government Association, the Minister for Finance and Local Government and the Minister for Climate Change for attending the committee's evidence sessions.

As a committee, Llywydd, we acknowledged that setting a draft budget in the face of extreme economic pressures is a difficult challenge for the Welsh Government. We welcomed the increase in funding for all local authorities, and in particular that the overall increase is higher than the indicative figures provided last year. But despite this, of course, the increases are lower than the rate of inflation, and we are concerned that inflationary pressures mean local authorities will still be facing difficult decisions that could impact on service delivery. 

Local government told us of an overspend of £200 million across Welsh authorities in the current financial year, which will have to be recovered from reserves, and that's despite the increase in funding provided at the start of the year. Relying on reserves to cover overspend is not sustainable, of course, and local authorities told us they are already fearful of the resources available for future years. We believe it is crucial that the Welsh Government and local government prepare now for sustained pressures on local authority budgets in order to mitigate further cuts to already-stretched services. We have therefore recommended that the Welsh Government outlines how it is working with local government to prepare for sustained pressure in future years. 

We have a particular concern around the capital funding for local authorities. We welcome the increase in general capital funding, but are mindful again that inflationary pressures mean that authorities won't be able to do as much with that funding. Local authorities told us that, once more this year, highway maintenance is still a pressure for most councils. It is therefore disappointing that there is no specific highways capital funding in situ. Before finalising the budget for the next financial year, we would like the Welsh Government to look again at the overall allocations for the local transport fund and ensure there is sufficient capital funding for local authorities to adequately maintain the highway and roads network.

Another recurring concern relayed to us by local government was the continued challenge to recruit and retain staff to work in the social care sector. The chair of the Health and Social Care Committee will speak, I know, of their concerns on this issue. We support that committee's recommendation that the Welsh Government should commit to providing six-monthly updates on the work of the social care fair work forum. 

Llywydd, we were concerned that the funding allocated to the Gypsy and Traveller sites capital grant is lower than in previous years, particularly as during our inquiry into the provision of sites we heard and saw that some local authority sites are in urgent need of maintenance or refurbishment. But, as a committee, we were even more concerned to learn that there has been no spend from the capital grant during this financial year and none is forecast to occur before the end of March. We believe this is a stark illustration of why we decided to undertake our work on the provision of sites for Gypsies, Roma and Travellers in the first place and shines a light on the extent of the problems in delivering sufficient and suitable accommodation for these communities. It does seem to be too low a priority for the Welsh Government and local authorities, and this has to change. We have made a joint recommendation with the Equality and Social Justice Committee and recommended the Welsh Government should urgently set out the reasons for the lack of progress on the use of the Gypsy and Traveller site capital grant and how it plans to work with local authorities to ensure take up of this important fund. It should also clarify what will happen to the underspend from last year's budget.

Homelessness and related support services is another area of concern for us in this draft budget. There is an unprecedented number of people currently in temporary accommodation in Wales, and this, of course, puts severe resourcing pressure on support services. An additional revenue funding of £10 million has been allocated for homelessness prevention, but we are concerned that this is not enough to deal with current challenges. The housing support grant allocation remains at £166.8 million in cash terms. This is a real-terms reduction. Services funded by this grant are critical to the prevention and alleviation of homelessness. We are therefore worried about the impact that this cut will have on these services at a time when we are relying on them more than ever. It's also worrying that front-line staff, who are working incredibly hard, are struggling to make ends meet.

We appreciate the challenge facing the Minister for Climate Change in setting the draft budget, but we recommend that the Welsh Government must make it a priority to provide additional funding for the housing support grant ahead of the final budget. It's a key area of preventative spend. We are also concerned with the number of people in temporary accommodation and the 22,000 long-term empty properties in Wales, and we believe that they must again be given more priority. And, of course, the 20,000 additional homes, Llywydd, even though these will not be all new builds, we are very concerned that it is going to be difficult to reach this target, given the cost of materials and issues with the supply chain and workforce.

Decarbonisation is the final area of the committee's concern, Llywydd. But we are very supportive of the Minister's decision not to roll back on housing standards as a cost-saving measure. We are facing a climate crisis, and that is the right decision. Diolch yn fawr. 

You're lucky you're in the class of '99, John Griffiths [Laughter.] I was particularly generous there. Russell George. You're not—you're not. 

I'm in the class of 2011, Llywydd.

Thank you, Llywydd. I'm speaking in my capacity as the Chair of the Health and Social Care Committee. Now, last year, I opened my contribution to this debate by thanking everyone who worked in the health and social care sector, including volunteers and unpaid carers across Wales, for their dedication and their commitment. The winter months, as we know, are always challenging in the health and social care sector, and unfortunately, this winter is no exception at all—far from it. So, on behalf of the Health and Social Care Committee, I thank them very sincerely, once again, for all that they do.

Now, the draft budget includes more than £10 billion for health and social services, as well as, of course, the provision for social care within the local government settlement, and we, as a committee, have explored how the Welsh Government is planning to use these considerable financial levers to achieve its desired outcomes and ambitions for our health and social care. The financial context, of course, is challenging. That's got to be recognised, and constrained, of course, by high inflation and high energy costs, and the impact, of course, of the pandemic and the cost of living continues to affect staff and services. And our health and social care sectors, of course, are grappling with an increased demand, in terms of tackling the waiting times backlog and dealing with longstanding workforce issues. Inevitably, this affects the range of activities that can be delivered, and potentially the timescales of both activity and outcomes. 

We welcome, as a committee, the Minister’s six priorities for health boards. That's very welcome, and if progress can be made in these key areas, it should unlock capacity and free up resources to enable progress to be made in other areas in the longer term. However, if these are priorities, by definition, other areas are not priorities, and we have some concerns that health boards may not have been given clear guidance about which areas the Minister considers as politically acceptable for them to draw back from. So, the Minister said to us in committee that she will review the health boards' integrated medium-term plans once they have been submitted to see whether she is comfortable with the decisions that they have taken. But, we all know that decisions to reduce funding or focus may be challenging or unpopular as well as necessary, and potential opportunities to draw back in some areas at a local level may only be apparent if full consideration is given to regional or national options. So, our report therefore calls on the Welsh Government to update us on discussions with health boards, including any concerns that health boards have raised, and any further guidance that Ministers have given on how health boards are expected to mitigate any resulting impact on the areas that are not amongst the six priorities.

I referred to the pressures that we've seen in health and social care this winter, and we agree with the Minister that addressing these issues relating to patient flow and delayed transfers of care are vital to unlocking the gridlock we have seen in the system. Now, part of the solution has to be resolving the long-standing social care workforce issues that we're all aware of, and we support the Government's commitment to the real living wage for social care workers—I very much support that myself—but we agree also with the Deputy Minister that it will not be enough on its own to address increasingly acute shortages. So, I know that the Minister does understand the urgency of the issues, such as improving access to sick pay, embedding domiciliary care workers in multidisciplinary teams and addressing the discrepancies in pay and conditions for social care and health service workers. But we are not yet persuaded that the social care fair work forum work is being progressed at the pace that is needed, that voluntary measures for collective bargaining or pay structures are adequate, or that there is enough clarity about how the recommendations of the national care services expert group will be progressed to deliver the Welsh Government's longer term ambitions for social care. So, to help us monitor this area, we have asked the Minister to commit to providing us with regular six monthly updates, through our recommendation 9.

So, I thank my colleagues on the Health and Social Care Committee and also the clerking team and the wider integrated team as well for all their support in terms of drafting our report. And, Deputy Llywydd, as a good Member of the 2011 intake, you can see that I'm dead on five minutes. [Laughter.]

Okay. Delyth Jewell.

I’m very pleased to contribute on behalf of the Culture, Communications, Welsh Language, Sport, and International Relations Committee, and thank you to the clerking team and Members, and everyone who has given evidence and information to us who’s fed into our recommendations.

In our report on the draft budget, our main message is that it all comes down to money. Unfortunately, we are concerned that the current financial settlement will either limit, or worse, terminate several important services that a number of people in Wales are dependent on. Following our report on the impact of rising costs in November 2022, last year, it is clear to us as a committee that there is more that needs to be done. Additional support is needed by our culture and sports sectors to cope with the cost-of-living crisis. They continue to face the impacts of the pandemic in terms of participation and with regard to their financial viability, therefore they are not in a position to weather the storm that we are all currently facing.

The national library told us that the sustained reduction in capital funding would pose a lasting risk to our national treasures, whilst the arts council said that it would warmly welcome any additional funding that could be provided to the sector. At the same time, one of the most popular petitions on the Senedd’s website calls on the Welsh Government to support swimming pools by providing a package of hypothecated support beyond the final settlement for local government, to ensure that swimming pools can remain open.

The Welsh Government was deservedly praised for investing over £140 million in these sectors to ensure their survival during the pandemic. Unfortunately, we are of the view that the further support outlined for this year and the next financial year is insufficient, and unfortunately, our concerns don’t end with the culture and sports sectors. We are all aware of the fragile situation of the Welsh language following the publication of the disappointing census results before Christmas. We are concerned about the significant impact of inflation on providers of community activities through the medium of Welsh to continue with their current service levels. Bearing in mind the Welsh language’s fragile situation, and to aid recovery from the pandemic, we would wish to see the Welsh Government reviewing the level of funding needed to maintain and also improve opportunities for Welsh-medium activity in communities the length and breadth of Wales in the wake of a higher cost of living. The committee will return to the census results once more data have been published in due course.

So, as I said at the beginning of my speech, it all comes down to money. I would urge the Welsh Government to ensure that this isn’t the end of the story for these sectors by providing further support to boost these sectors and to ensure that the investment made during the pandemic is not wasted. Thank you.

I will be voting for this budget, despite having very serious concerns about it. If the Senedd was unable to set a budget, there's no shortage of members of the Westminster Government who would be only too happy to say, 'Devolution does not work. We can set the budget for them because they're incapable of doing it themselves.'

On raising income tax, as suggested by Plaid Cymru, while intellectually in favour of raising the rate of income tax on the top two bands, there are practical difficulties if we do it alone, including people registering as taxpayers in England. There are a lot of ways for high earners to avoid income tax, but the easiest and simplest is to be paid in dividends, as dividend income is taxed at a lower rate. This is, unfortunately, outside of the Senedd's control, but needs to be addressed by the next Westminster Government. Adding 1p to the basic rate would mean that basic rate taxpayers would pay an extra £5 for every £100 currently paid. This equates to, as my constituents would be able to tell you and I can tell you, a large loaf of bread, half a pound of butter and a large bottle of milk. At a time when people are facing a huge cost-of-living crisis, a tax increase that takes money out of the pockets of ordinary people is not a progressive move.

Where can the Welsh Government get extra money from? I have some suggestions. First, cap basic farm payments. This is supported by the farmers unions in Wales. This is a Brexit dividend, we are out of the common agricultural policy, so these payments are no longer needed to be paid. The average farm payment in Wales is £15,000, and I'm calling for that to be the level at which it is capped. I am unable to get a Welsh figure, but from published sources, over £100,000 is paid to many farmers in Britain, many in Britain who were not necessarily active farmers. How many farm businesses that involve current or former Senedd Members have received over £1 million since the Senedd was set up?

The second is not to give additional rate relief to large companies: fast food operators, coffee chains, hotel chains, pub chains and out-of-town shopping centres. Business rates are one of two taxes strongly disliked by businesses. You cannot avoid them, whilst corporation tax has become effectively a voluntary contribution by large businesses. Another way to save money would be to only introduce legislation that didn't cost the Welsh Government-funded public services money.

Finally, end enterprise zones. Central Cardiff and Deeside did not need the additional funding to attract investment, and the last figures I saw from the others showed very few jobs created and even fewer not from relocation. Having released this money, the priority should be poverty, housing and education. Education is the best economic development tool that we have. It is investing in our children and young people. Expenditure on schools and further and higher education brings more economic reward than any other expenditure on economic development. Why do those areas that have highly qualified individuals attract inward investment and start-up businesses? By providing skilled and highly paid employment without having to bribe companies to bring their branch factories, which are then fairly regularly closed after time runs out.

Gilestone Farm raises the further question: should the Welsh Government spend scarce resources on supporting events that do not benefit the Welsh economy, where the majority of contractors are not Welsh, or should the Welsh Government be using money at all to support tourist attractions? If people want a tourist attraction, they go to the bank, they borrow and they run it as a business. Far too often, the Welsh definition of capitalism is, 'How much money can we get out of the Welsh Government?'

Housing used to be under health in the immediate postwar period. Attlee and the 1945-51 Labour Government understood the importance of housing to health. Is it any surprise that people living in cold, damp conditions are more likely to suffer health problems? Building council housing, using transactions capital to support registered social landlords, will increase the quantity of good-quality housing for rent and improve the overall health of the people living here.

Finally, on poverty, a large number of people in Wales live in relative poverty and use food banks regularly, along with cutting back on heat and surviving on cold food. The Welsh Government has not got enough levers to deal with poverty, but there are things that can be done. As was said by Peredur Owen Griffiths earlier, increasing EMA in line with inflation would help children from the poorest families continue with education. Providing free school meals to all children whose parents are on benefits would help both health and education. And whilst not a budget matter, the Welsh Government need to continue to press for ending standing charges on days when no energy is used. This is something that even The Observer now has taken an interest in. Diolch. 

Today's debate is a crucial one. Having heard the initial headlines from the statement back in December, I thought that Welsh Government had finally had an epiphany and come to the realisation that it’s time to properly fund and support our education system after years of neglect. Alas, as it turns out, this isn’t the case, and, in fact, things are going to get worse for our schools, our educators and our pupils.

In November last year, we saw the UK Government’s autumn statement put young people at the forefront of their agenda, with an increase of funding for education. I called for this to be matched in Wales the week after the autumn statement was announced. So, initially, I was delighted to hear that, apparently, it would be matched in Wales. However, upon further reading, it became clear, Minister, that, if the £117 million figure in the budget is falling in with the £227 million for local government, the extra £117 million isn’t being ring-fenced specifically for education and therefore cannot be counted to go towards education—it can be spent elsewhere, and not necessarily go where it’s needed desperately, on the front line of education, at a time when school budgets are stretched to the max and there are a lot of extra pressures on education in Wales.

If this wasn’t bad enough, it turns out that the draft budget for 2023-24 for education and Welsh language means a real-terms cut of £6.5 million to the budget. When you go over the detail, it becomes even more concerning, with a 6.3 per cent decrease in support grants for students. According to UK-wide data from the Sutton Trust, 27.8 per cent of students have skipped meals to save on food costs, and 16.4 per cent of students have travelled to campus less to reduce costs, which is likely to significantly impact on their educational attainment. This is even more worrying when coupled with the 24 per cent of students who believe that they are slightly, or much, less likely to finish their degree due to the costs.

We also see a 6.5 per cent decrease in the pupil development grant. The Welsh Government is reducing the only targeted funding available for low-income families. The cut is coming as the additional £100 given this year is being scrapped, despite the world being in a cost-of-living crisis. This is certainly not a budget for hard times.

We see a 3.9 per cent decrease in teacher and development support, even though, in the latest Estyn annual report, there was significant mention that there needs to be an absolute priority on the recruitment and development of staff. The budget has outlined a 2.6 per cent increase in education infrastructure, yet there are valid concerns over the extent to which this will support schools, especially with the roll-out of free school meals. Many councils are due to overspend significantly on the delivery of these reforms—far more than the first instalment of allocated funding. For example, Flintshire’s council is predicted to spend £1.8 million this financial year—more than £500,000 more than their initial allocation—Gwynedd is expected to spend £1.6 million, putting them close to a £500,000 overspend, and Newport council is set to exceed its allocated £1.3 million to ensure their delivery.

All in all, Minister, you have presented us with a budget that doesn’t just neglect Welsh education, it actively harms it, in its having a real-terms cut. This should have been a budget to start repairing the damage that you have made over 23 years in power, which has led to Wales languishing at the bottom of Programme for International Student Assessment ratings in the UK. PISA has been bad news for this Government since we joined in 2006, and we have been the UK’s poor relation in every tranche since. Every Minister, since we have joined, has had a PISA target that they always miss. The budget does nothing to stop the rot and does nothing to ensure that we're attracting the brightest and best teachers to our education system.

Let’s not forget that, in 2011, we've seen almost a 10 per cent drop in teacher numbers as they leave the profession in droves. This budget fails on all metrics, and I urge you today, Minister, to go back to the drawing board and try again, as you've failed Welsh education far too many times now. Wales deserves better. Our learners deserve better. And as Mike Hedges said, we should be investing in our children.

I thank the Minister and her colleagues for putting this budget together.

I’d also thank her for taking the time last week to chat about the budgetary situation. And I’d also actually like to thank the Finance Committee as well for its scrutiny work, and I’m not just saying that because the Chair of Finance Committee is sitting next to me. Turning to that work, there was a very clear lack of detail in the evidence supplied by Welsh Government to the committee relating to budget reprioritisation where this might have led to the scaling back of spending plans or even the shelving of original plans. This, of course, can have consequences further down the line, so I would be grateful if the Government could publish that detail. I’ll give an example: the bus emergency scheme funding. It was introduced to support the continuation of bus services during the pandemic, and it’s something that, in particular, rural services rely on. Now, the evidence supplied by the Government to the Finance Committee initially stated that the £28 million allocated to the BES in 2022-23 would be carried over to 2023-24 without any adjustment in funding, but it has come to light from correspondence received by me from stakeholders that this commitment is now in doubt at this very late stage. So, I would appreciate some clarity on this. Buses are vitally important as a service to our communities.

Moving on to green jobs, TUC Cymru has suggested that 60,000 new green jobs could be created in Wales if we invest properly. Unfortunately, limited access to funding, skilled workers and capacity on power lines are slowing a shift towards renewable energy. Seventy per cent of UK employers in a Construction Industry Training Board survey said they have a good understanding of how they will need to change their business to decarbonise, 88 per cent were willing to diversify to decarbonise, and 90 per cent would be willing to retrain if necessary. However, more than 78 per cent of employers that responded to the CITB survey believe there is a shortage of skills in the specific occupation to decarbonise at the present moment.

Now, the Government has always been keen to talk about the creation of new apprenticeships, and their creation is welcome, but, as I’ve said before, retention of students is key to addressing the skills shortage. Let’s take the construction sector as an example—the CITB estimates that, year on year, 1,400 students study a construction-based course. Now, conversations I’ve had with the sector all follow the same pattern—if that number of students year on year were to complete their course, we wouldn’t have a skills shortage in construction. So, very clearly, there’s a drop-off of students. Data, however, isn’t collected by the Government on how many students leave education mid course. That, of course, needs to change, but what will help is the support provided to students. The increase to student maintenance support was very welcome. However, it doesn’t catch students in colleges, in sixth forms, nor on apprenticeships. Now, the Minister will be aware of my campaign to increase EMA payments and the threshold. That would certainly help, especially during this cost-of-living crisis, where students are really struggling to make that £30 a week go far. Transport on its own wipes out that £30. Couple it with food, resources for courses, and in some cases—cases that I've picked up during my campaign—paying for household bills, and education becomes very unsustainable very quickly for so many.

Now, we tell students—and Mike touched on this—especially students from low-income households, that education is an investment and that they should look at what advantage that will give them in the future. Well, for low-income students, the future, more often than not, is tomorrow. It’s whether or not they’ll be able to afford to eat, whether they’ll be able to afford to travel, whether they’ll be able to afford to live—not in five years’ time. This isn’t just for full-time students studying on campus, by the way. This applies equally to those on apprenticeships, and I would urge the Government to consider the apprenticeship minimum wage.

Now, there is a clear case for boosting investment in this area. The Finance Committee recommended the Government consider increasing EMA. We received evidence in the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee around support for students—so too have other committees. So, it is unfortunate that this is not adequately reflected in the draft budget. But I would hope that the Government looks to address this when they bring the budget back, and I’m more than ready to play my part in making it a reality.

I’m going to speak initially in my capacity as Chair of the Equality and Social Justice Committee, and then move on to some things that are burning issues in my constituency. We looked at the social justice budget, obviously through the lens of trying to identify how we are going to support the most vulnerable in our society. 

One of the things that majorly concerned us was that the one-off non-recurrent allocation of £117 million as a result of the UK Government's decision to give everybody a handout to subsidise the energy companies' horrendously raised charges has serious implications for how vulnerable families are going to survive next winter, because that £200 Wales fuel support scheme has been really important for a lot of people, and if that doesn't exist in the next financial year, then we really do have to do some very serious thinking about how we're going to enable families to survive in what could be an even more critical situation next year. So, we want to see some serious thinking on how we're going to do this, and we want to see that by this July, because it's no use producing a plan when you're already in the middle of winter. 

We think that the discretionary assistance fund has been an important mechanism for ensuring that those who are in desperate situations, which can be caused by either having to flee a domestic violence situation or simply by a washing machine breaking down—. These really simple things I think have been fantastically important for people, and the fact that it's administered by all the single advice fund agencies ensures that everybody can get access to it. But we have very little idea what the impact of this fund has been, and therefore we really feel we need to know who's benefited from it in which parts of Wales, which local authorities have been successful in promoting it. As budgets are so constrained in this year's budget and it's likely to be even more difficult in next year's one, we really do need to have some clarity over who exactly is going to benefit and whether the DAF is going to be sufficient.

I think one of the things that concerns us is that it is still very concerning that a lot of people do not know what they're entitled to. Only yesterday I was sitting with some families who were with children with special needs. They simply didn't know about the £200 fuel support scheme that the Welsh Government is operating, because their social worker simply hadn't bothered to ask them whether they'd got it, and that is an unacceptable situation, just as it's unacceptable for health visitors to say they haven't got time to help families to fill in the Healthy Start vouchers. On what basis are they not focusing on the ability of a family to be able to buy food that nourishes their families, rather than junk food that can kill them? So, we really do need to ensure that every front-line worker, whether it's the school administrator, the caretaker, or whether it's those busy health and social workers—it's absolutely essential.

I was astonished to hear Peter Fox say that the basic income pilot for care leavers was a waste of money. This is an invest-to-save measure. This is our collective responsibility. That's what being a corporate parent stands for. So, we support the invest to save in the Equality and Social Justice Committee, and I think the continuation and the increase in that money is very welcome.

I just now want to refer to matters that are absolutely crucial to the well-being of my own constituents in Cardiff Central, picking up on what Luke Fletcher was saying about the continuation of the bus emergency scheme, because Cardiff Council has informed me that ending the bus emergency scheme, rather than having that £20 million transition money, could lead to cuts of at least a third of all the routes, or, alternatively, less frequent buses on all of the routes. And it will also have an impact on its ability to deliver school transport to schools. So, this is a really serious issue. This was discussed in the Climate Change, Environment and Infrastructure Committee, and the Deputy Minister acknowledged that transport poverty was a really significant issue. You have to remember that, in parts of my constituency, over half of households do not have access to a car and at least 25 per cent of bus users have a disability or a long-term illness, so getting on a bike is probably not an option for them. So, I think that this is a very significant issue and something that we need to put much more of the focus on. We need to think 'yes' about eliminating food poverty, 'yes' to having long-term solutions to fuel poverty, particularly with the need to bring forward the next iteration of the Warm Homes programme, but we also have to look at transport poverty; it really does stop people getting to their job or their education.

Obviously, I'd like to actually address my budget concerns regarding the portfolio. If we just take Natural Resources Wales, for instance, Welsh Government have completely ignored many warnings that we've seen in committee reports and inquiries that Natural Resources Wales is underfunded, and yet, they've chosen to maintain its current level of funding. So, it's continued to be allocated £60.1 million in the draft budget, yet in contrast, this body received £69 million in 2021-22. Despite these concerns of underfunding, the Minister for Climate Change has said that the body's funding was 'sufficient for their statutory responsibilities', though she

'would prefer to give them a bigger budget', during scrutiny of the 2022-23 budget. That's on record. So, with the need for environmental oversight more important than ever now, these words will certainly ring hollow for many.

In terms of the Welsh Government's environmental targets, clean energy funding is set to decrease by 6 per cent, despite the Welsh Government's own net-zero target. Welsh Government had planned to allocate £10.4 million to clean energy, though the budget now shows this has reduced to £9.8 million. The funding is used towards policy development, financial support for renewable energy, including the local energy grant scheme and the energy planning programme. So, whilst funding also goes towards pursuing devolving the management of the Crown Estate in Wales, I hope that the cut in funding is due now and that this ridiculous policy idea are being scrapped.

Members may know that marine planning is an issue that I, along with my colleague Joyce Watson, have constantly raised, issues about marine planning and our legislative proposals for a full marine spatial development plan for Wales. So, we're disappointed that the Welsh Government has reduced the anticipated capital spending on marine energy for 2023-24. The capital funding is set to be cut by 30 per cent, with £10 million originally planned in the indicative budget, though this has now been reduced to £7 million.

The Deputy Presiding Officer took the Chair.

Will you take an intervention?

Yes.

With regard a complete lack of capital funding for Wales and the complete and utter lack of infrastructure funding over the last 10 years, how can you explain that?

Well, I disagree that there's a complete lack of this funding. At the end of the day, we've had devolution here in Wales for 25 years. We have just over 3 million of population. The billions that come into Wales—is it £18 billion? It's you that's out of order even asking a question like that.

So, the Welsh Government needs to explain how this has been reduced, despite the target to meet 100 per cent of its electricity needs from renewable sources by 2035. Funding going towards the tidal lagoon challenge, tidal lagoon project, ports infrastructure, wave and tidal stream, it is puzzling as to why the Welsh Government has now decided to reduce spending on this portfolio.

Now, let's turn to the issue of housing. Whilst the Welsh Government rightfully praises the support generated through the housing support grant, it fails to prioritise this as an area. The Welsh Government claims it is increasing its focus on the housing support grant. They say that in one breath and yet, in real terms, it's got a cut of 8 per cent. The funding is due to remain the same as last year, with £166.7 million allocated. This is particularly concerning, as the grant aims to help vulnerable people with issues they face, and we can see they exacerbate now the risk of homelessness. We can also see the risk of violence against women, domestic abuse and sexual violence.

Moving on to building safety funding: that's set to receive a 37 per cent reduction in resource from the indicative budget, despite the indicative budget setting aside £9.5 million for 2023-24. This draft budget now shows an allocation has dropped to £6 million. It makes an absolute mockery of the Welsh Government's claim that building safety is a top priority. If that's one of your top priorities, well, I wouldn't like to see anything else lower on that list. With 261 expressions of interest received for the Welsh building safety fund, and 163 of those requiring intensive surveys, the extent of fire risk in Wales is clear. Whilst the £135 million in capital for building safety is needed, the Welsh Government must match its words and treat building safety as one of your top priorities. It is only fair that our constituents have a safe place to live.

This, of course, the actions of the Welsh Government, now stands in direct contrast to the UK Government's tough new ultimatum on cladding, giving developers hard deadlines to pay up to fix unsafe buildings. The market housing national empty homes grant scheme will only bring 2,000 empty homes back into use. With 22,140 long-term empty properties in Wales, this is just—well, it's a non-realistic figure. There's no ambition, no aspiration to get those empty homes back into use by people who desperately need them.

Janet, you need to conclude now, please.

Yes. Twenty-five million pounds in capital funding towards the costs of remedial works to make a property habitable. The Welsh Government needs to outline how it seeks to promote empty homes. Too often, we're seeing the wrong priorities being afforded money.

Anyway, that's my take on it. I think this budget is very poor. I think it's not ambitious at all. We know that there are challenges, however, you really do need to be far more adventurous with your budget aims. Thank you.

In introducing the draft budget to the Senedd, the Minister mentioned that this was one of the most difficult budgets since devolution. This is because it is a time of austerity, a time of poverty, and a time of crisis, the likes of which we haven’t seen for decades.

In the Wales of the twenty-first century, nurses and teachers are amongst the thousands who are having to turn to foodbanks. More and more people are falling into debt, critical levels of debt. Citizens Advice Cymru say that they have never seen such a high proportion of people in deficit in terms of their household budgets—almost half of those who come to them for support. 

The number of those who are homeless or at risk of being homeless is another sign of a state of economic crisis. Citizens Advice helped more people with homelessness this year than in the past five years. Women, children, disabled people, people with health conditions, single parents, carers, people from black, Asian and minority ethnic communities suffer disproportionate levels of economic inequality.

Yes, it is difficult to ensure that the support is there for those who need it most, that the services providing this support have the resources that they need to achieve that, that the huge gaps that exist in the safety net, which has been torn to shreds by the merciless and unprincipled Conservatives in Westminster, are filled. Yes, it is difficult. But, taking the difficult decisions is the function of government, and the Welsh Government’s function is to serve the people of Wales, to consider their needs, to safeguard their health and dignity, and to ensure that they have equal access to every opportunity and service, including healthcare and social care.

It is through this lens that we will have to scrutinise the draft budget before us. That’s why our amendment calls for us to be given the resource to do more of what needs to be done. Those who are most dependent on the support that our health and care services provide and additional financial support are those in the greatest need, those who have no options, who have no reserves, who don’t have a second home, who don't have the means to keep their heads above the water that is so incredibly deep.

The Government has stated that this budget is one that prioritises those in greatest need. The way that every penny is spent is, therefore, of the utmost importance because people’s lives are now in danger. That's the conclusion of a Which? report on the impact of the cost-of-living crisis  in Wales, published yesterday and discussed by the cross-party group on consumer rights, which I chair. Seventy eight per cent of people in Wales are cutting back on heating, and 18 per cent are eating fewer hot meals.

During the same discussion, concerns were expressed that the increase in the level of the discretionary assistance fund, although welcome, is funding to help people in crisis, and that priority should also be given to preventative spending, for schemes such as the Wales fuel support scheme, which has been cut in its entirety. It was warned that although the scheme will come to an end, the need won’t come to an end, and the need indeed will be even greater next winter, according to Citizens Advice forecasts. The implications of this level of need, this depth of need, and the impacts on people’s health and well-being will be with us for generations. This budget does not contain a plan to prevent these impacts.

It's also disappointing to see the lack of investment in our most disadvantaged young people who wish to continue with their education. Our amendment would ensure that the education maintenance allowance, for example, could provide an appropriate level of support. And although the maintenance grant has seen an increase, students cannot access many of the other cost-of-living payments that are available. Talking about buses, if you're a student over the age of 21, you'll get no discount whatsoever on your bus ticket, and student rents, of course, continue to increase, leading to a cost-of-education crisis.

Our calls to expand and increase the EMA have been echoed by the scrutiny report published by the Children, Young People, and Education Committee, and speaking of the gap that exists in spending on cost-of-living support this year, namely £116 million, the Equality and Social Justice Committee's scrutiny report notes that there is

'a clear need to look at longer-term, sustainable solutions to the cost of living crisis', as Jenny Rathbone mentioned, our Chair.

I've argued and, indeed, I've received this Senedd's support for the call for a co-ordinated Welsh benefits system. Now is the time to accelerate the work to ensure that every penny of support reaches the pockets of those who need it, without fail and without fuss.

In concluding, I would like to draw attention to the most damning and serious conclusions of the two committees of which I am a member, namely this one by the Children, Young People, and Education Committee, that there is a lack of clarity as to whether the budget supports children and young people who are particularly likely to be impacted by the cost-of-living crisis. And this in the nation where the levels of child poverty are the highest in the United Kingdom.

With Westminster denying Wales—

Sioned, you'll have to conclude.

With Westminster denying Wales the resources and the powers that we need, yes, there is a need for difficult decisions to be made. The Welsh Government makes those decisions even harder by failing to secure the resources it needs through fair, proportionate and just taxation to help us overcome the shameful hardship that scars our communities. I urge Members to support our amendment.

Can I remind Members, please, from all groups, that as you go beyond the time, you're taking time away from your colleagues who wish to speak? So, please keep to your time limits. Hefin David.

I'll try and keep it short, Dirprwy Lywydd. I might not succeed. This is a debate in two parts really, isn't it? It's a debate that comes from the committees' responses to the draft budget, and the committees making reasonable points, cross party, that are well made. Pered was the first to speak from his committee, and a very impressive contribution it was. I think that is where this debate should be.

I wasn't going to make a speech, actually, until the amendments came in. I think the amendments are the second half of the debate, which is entirely political, entirely point scoring, and entirely pointless. What I wanted to do was to specifically speak, because I think, sometimes, there's an amendment that you want to speak to, because you want to explain to people who may be watching why you are voting against it, and I am going to vote against Plaid Cymru's amendment 2. The reason for this, I think, has already been laid out very well today on the Today programme by the Minister, who made an excellent contribution this morning, but also it's been laid out by politicians in Caerphilly. I'd like to read to you this statement.

'There surely can be no justification in the current climate for increasing the tax burden on hard-pressed residents of Caerphilly.'

That comes from Lindsay Whittle, the leader of Plaid Cymru on Caerphilly County Borough Council. And the leader of Plaid Cymru was a little bit grumpy when I tried to intervene earlier, so I'm happy to take an intervention now if he wants to put Lindsay Whittle right. But Lindsay actually said that. Go for it.

He's referring to the most regressive tax of all, of course, the council tax, which is why the reform of that is in the co-operation agreement, and we need to get on with that as soon as possible.

I fully agree with the reform of council tax, but, on a band B property, the proposed rise in Caerphilly—the lowest council tax in the whole of Gwent, if not the whole of Wales—is £1.91 a week. The proposal that he's putting forward for basic rate of income tax from the same workers is around £2.50 a week. So, actually, the consequences of his tax rise will be higher for those people who Lindsay Whittle says are faced with

'higher food, energy and mortgage costs and many are now having to turn to foodbanks'. 

[Interruption.] As he said to me, I'm not taking another intervention. [Laughter.] If he'd taken an intervention from me a second time, he could have come in, we could had a lovely debate, but let's play by the rules that he set.

Plaid Cymru are making it very clear in Caerphilly that they are not accepting any council tax rise at all. In fact, what they've said—. You might want to speak to speak to your Plaid Cymru group. We know that they're mad as a box of frogs in Caerphilly. But they've said:

'We propose a zero council tax increase' in Caerphilly, and that a council tax rise

'cannot be justified and bills should be frozen for residents.'

[Interruption.] Two seconds. I think what they are doing there is playing politics, and I think what is happening with Plaid Cymru here in the Senedd—[Interruption.] Heledd, I will come to you in a second. What they are doing here in the Senedd is proposing this council tax rise so that they can make as many uncosted proposals for the current budget as they want to, outside of the co-operation agreement, and then say, 'Yes, but we wanted to raise council tax to pay for it, so you should raise council tax.' This is where the co-operation agreement is falling down. It's power without responsibility. I think it should either be a coalition Government or it should be confidence and supply. What we've got from this deal is Plaid Cymru having the worst of both worlds and being able to make these points. Heledd, you can defend it if you want.

I think there's a point of order necessary here, because we're not debating the co-operation agreement; we're debating the draft budget. And if anybody is trying to score political points, I would say that it is our colleague Hefin David. I don't see the relevance of this in terms of the draft budget. I would like to know why you think our amendment is pointless. It is a proposal. It's about using the powers we have here in Wales to do something, to do something differently. Why do you call that suggestion pointless when it is a serious suggestion?

I'll tell you what I'll do; I'll withdraw the word 'pointless'. I wouldn't want to be the subject of a point of order later on today. I withdraw the word 'pointless' and I apologise for that. What I should have said was 'politically convenient', because what they are doing is using this proposed rise in council tax, which will hit the poorest people, in order to justify uncosted expenditure through the course of the rest of this Senedd term, and I think that is something that needs challenge.

Let's just look at some of the proposals that they've had through the debates that we've had so far: comprehensive free school meals, universal childcare, a rent freeze, education maintenance allowance, and that big black hole that we don't know anything about—independence. These are things that they are bringing to this Chamber, and in spite of being in the co-operation agreement, in which they've got spending commitments, they are making these demands as well, which is, I believe, politically unacceptable. You've got effects, then, on things like, as has already been mentioned, public transport, apprenticeships, town centre development, local authority capital funding, decarbonisation and Natural Resources Wales. These are all consequences that are having a direct result, as a result of some of the decisions that have been made.

And my last point, Dirprwy Lywydd, if you'll allow me, because of the interventions: I did ask Peter Fox that question earlier on, how he felt about universal free school meals. When that debate was held in the previous Senedd and in the beginning of this Senedd, it was not a healthy debate. It was a debate held by social media. We were attacked, those of us who voted against it. I believe in universal free school meals, but I am still sceptical about it as a priority at this time. If we had extra money, it should go towards universal Flying Start, and if we didn't have that money, it should go towards those things that we already protect. I think there is a real danger in pushing that policy harder and harder when there are other priorities that we have to meet, such as the bus emergency scheme, that are not being met as a result of this budget. There is a lot of—

I have now given you the extra time you asked for.

There's a lot of difficulty, I think, with Plaid Cymru's approach to this, and it's inconsistent with what they're saying locally.

I've had a request for a point of order from the Member for Carmarthen East and Dinefwr. If it's okay, I'll take it at the end of the debate, rather than now. But I will give you the point of order at the end.

Will you give a ruling as well?

Probably. Tom Giffard.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I'm not quite sure how to follow that, but what I will promise is a short contribution. I know Hefin promised it and didn't quite manage it, so I will try my best just to focus on a few key points, which I hope will give the Minister some pause for thought.

Last week, we debated the Culture, Communications, Welsh Language, Sport and International Relations Committee report, which Hefin and I both sit on, on rising costs. It was clear from the evidence that we heard that more support should be given to amenities such as leisure centres to help with the increase there in energy costs and prevent those key services that many people rely on from closing. Whilst, in responding to that debate, there were warm words, I thought, from the Deputy Minister, targeted additional support is lacking, I think. It's also worrying that as a nation Wales spends only £18 per head on sporting participation, compared to £51 per head in Norway.

I do believe it's really important that we get to disadvantaged areas so everyone can get that regular physical activity, but it's disappointing to see that by failing to increase support for this in the budget, the Welsh Government is not intending to change its approach. I know Ministers will say, 'Well, where does this funding come from?' But colleagues on these benches, as we heard from Peter Fox, have identified £100 million that can be diverted from other areas to areas that matter, to those areas that are priorities for the people of Wales. So, I hope you'll listen, Minister, to Peter Fox's suggestions, and take them very, very seriously indeed.

And finally, I'm also concerned about the potential for stealth taxes that could strangle our tourism industry. This is an often-made but very important argument, but we've got to the stage where recovery from COVID-19 in this sector is incredibly fragile. Proposing a tourism tax at this point alongside changes to self-catering accommodation rules won't help the recovery in that crucial part of our economy. We do, in the end, have to receive the returns to be able to reinvest in these services in future years. I hope you'll take those points on board, Minister, and thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd; that was less than two minutes.

It was indeed. Heledd Fychan.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I think, very clearly, listening to this debate, there are two things that strike me: first, that certainly the biggest risk to Wales and its citizens is remaining part of the UK and not having these levers under our control, and secondly that all the Brexit dividend promises were lies. We're not seeing that reflected in the reality here in Wales.

Last night, I attended a public meeting organised by those that are opposing the proposals by Cardiff Council to close the Museum of Cardiff, privatise St David's Hall and reduce public library services. We heard a number of powerful speeches, in particular by those whose lives have been transformed by these wonderful facilities, proving that cultural assets aren't just nice to have, but absolutely essential for the health and well-being of our communities. When I have previously raised concerns about the potential loss of both cultural assets and leisure facilities—including swimming pools—in the Senedd, I've been repeatedly told that it is a matter for local authorities and that their settlement is better than expected in the draft budget. But I'm afraid that detracts from the reality that we're currently seeing across Wales, with—as everybody knows—Andrew Morgan, the leader of the WLGA, recently stating that the economic outlook for councils looks bleak, and councils are having to make difficult decisions to meet spiralling budget gaps due to energy bills, inflation and pay costs.

One question that was asked at last night's public meeting—and I think it is relevant for today's debate—was why are so many politicians both in our Senedd and in our local authorities not doing more to stand up to the austerity agenda, and not on the streets to reject the Tory narrative that no money is available. [Interruption.] No. Time and time again here, we hear Ministers state that it's the UK Government's fault that these difficult decisions have to be made, but one thing I'd like to ask today is: what are you doing in practical terms, beyond writing letters or making public statements, to demand the funding we need and deserve? Unless something significantly changes, and quickly, Wales will be stripped of many of its vital public services and facilities, and I worry that sometimes, we forget here that these are a result of political choices made by the UK Government. The UK Government follows a policy agenda that rewards the rich or super-rich and punishes the majority.

It's time for us to unite with our communities and send a clear message to Westminster that enough is enough and that we are unwilling to continue to implement an austerity agenda on their behalf. We therefore have an opportunity in this budget to outline the kind of Wales that we want to see, and use all the powers available to us to prioritise. My colleague Adam Price has outlined our priorities in terms of the NHS, and our proposal does mean that additional money can be made available. My colleague Sioned Williams outlined the very real challenges and the risks associated with some of the cuts that we are seeing in the draft budget, especially impacting children and young people living in poverty here in Wales, and there are more children and young people in poverty with every month that goes by.

I would also like to ask two other questions. Firstly, how does this draft budget address the issue of teacher recruitment and retention? It's something that Laura Anne Jones picked up on. We've heard warnings from headteachers that unless additional funding is made available, we will lose teachers and teaching assistants and additional support services will be lost. So, what considerations have been given to this in the budget?

Secondly, if I could turn to the Welsh language, this is the first draft budget since the publication of the census results, as Delyth Jewell mentioned, and we know that significant investment is needed in a number of areas if we're reach the target of a million Welsh speakers by 2050. However, a real-terms cut of 2.4 per cent in expenditure on the Welsh language is contained within this budget. So, what assessment has been done on the impact of this on the target of a million Welsh speakers?

Further to that, although there's been success in investing in free access to the Urdd Eisteddfod last year and 15,000 free tickets to the National Eisteddfod, is there an intention to provide further support to enable this to happen in the future? These kinds of events are extremely important, and we've seen a warning from the National Eisteddfod just last week that they will have to look again at the price of entry. So, how are we going to ensure that culture isn't just for those that can afford it? We have the Well-Being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 here in Wales; we must ensure equal access to all the wealth of life, and that includes culture. So, I'd like to know how this budget will secure that.

I’m speaking this afternoon in my capacity as Chair of the Children, Young People and Education Committee. As a committee, we are all very much aware of the significant financial difficulties facing the Ministers setting this year’s budget. We know that children and other vulnerable groups of people are disproportionately impacted by the cost-of-living crisis. An estimated 31 per cent of children in Wales are living in relative poverty.

In a survey of 7,873 children and young people last November, the children’s commissioner found that 45 per cent of children aged seven to 11, and 26 per cent of young people aged 12 to 18, said they worry about having enough to eat. This is the stark reality of how poverty affects children, and the backdrop against which the Welsh Government sets its 2023-24 draft budget. It demonstrates why it’s so important for the Welsh Government to give children and young people their fair share of resources.

At the heart of the Children, Young People and Education Committee’s scrutiny of the Welsh Government’s draft budget is this key question: has the Welsh Government allocated enough resources to children and young people? Unfortunately, we do not know for sure. Once again, the Welsh Government did not publish a children’s rights impact assessment of its draft budget. Our committee is clear in our recommendation on this: the Welsh Government must comply with its duty to have due regard to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child when setting its draft budget.

We asked for a lot of information in preparation for our scrutiny, and we are grateful for the co-operation of Ministers and officials on this. Sadly, not all of the written evidence we receive to support our scrutiny was clear, and we look forward to the Finance Committee’s forthcoming consultation. Despite those challenges in seeing what’s spent on children, we have made a series of recommendations to the Welsh Government this year, some of which aim to mitigate the impact of the cost-of-living crisis on children and young people across Wales.

The school holidays free school meals programme, which is due to end after the February half term, should be extended. Children in Wales should not have to worry about having enough to eat. The school meals programme is an effective way to mitigate the impact of food poverty on our most vulnerable. We welcome the Welsh Government’s decision to extend the scheme thus far and urge it to do so again.

A number of Members have already mentioned the education maintenance allowance, and we believe that the time has come for the education maintenance allowance to be properly reviewed. In its response to our draft budget report last year, the Welsh Government told us that it hasn’t reviewed the EMA in part because a 2014 review suggested that it was

'an essential source of financial support for only the minority of students.'

That review is almost now a decade old. An awful lot has changed since then. Meanwhile, since neither the EMA eligibility threshold nor the support rate have been revised since 2011-12, the EMA is of less real-terms value to fewer students every year.

These recommendations, alongside others, feed into the final recommendation of our report. This year, we join the children’s commissioner, Audit Wales and many others in calling for the Welsh Government to produce a child poverty action plan with clear, costed, deliverable, measurable and time-bound actions. We understand that the main levers for alleviating child poverty lie with the UK Government. But that does not negate the need for the Welsh Government to set out clearly how it will use the levers that are in its gift, and the money that it does have, to reduce child poverty here in Wales. And I know that we are not the only ones who will be paying close attention to the Welsh Government’s response to that recommendation, in particular.

And finally, I would like to thank my fellow Senedd committee Chairs and committee members for their support and collaboration this year. It is so important for the Senedd to be as holistic as possible in its scrutiny of the Welsh Government’s draft budget. As well as drawing on the expertise and excellent engagement work of the Finance Committee, I know that some committee reports this year—including ours—have joint recommendations with other committees that have shared areas of interest. I hope very much that we continue to build on this collaborative approach to scrutiny in future years. Diolch yn fawr.

I'd like to preface my contribution to this debate by saying thank you so much to the Minister. I have said on many occasions that it’s a job that I would run a million miles from—to set a £19 billion budget. I would like to thank her for the discussions that we have had, and for the opportunity to look at particular areas in detail. Thank you. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

What is a Government’s budget, unless it’s there to support our poorest and our children? There is a song—I won't sing it—and I think it goes something like this: 

‘I believe that children are our future’.

Indeed, they are, aren’t they? I’m really pleased to see so much in this budget that actually focuses on children. I echo many of the statements from Jayne Bryant. We have free school meals. That is about feeding our children—all of our children, it doesn’t matter what their background is. It’s about making sure that our care-experienced children whom we are responsible for—we are their corporate parents—do not go without anything through the wonderful pilot universal basic income for care-experienced children.

In education—and I’m bound to say here that Kirsty Williams worked on this—the pupil development grant, which actually looks at targeting those children who are the most vulnerable and need our support on education. That’s what a budget should be about. It is so tempting, isn’t it, to list exactly what we want in addition, but that’s actually what I’m going to be doing in the next few minutes. I will come to something else at the end, but I do want to talk about some of the things that I would like to see and that are already in the budget as well.

Dentistry. Many of you know that I have raised this on several occasions. In Powys, we have 5,000 people on the dental waiting list, with 800 children still not able to find an NHS dentist. We need to look at funding—that’s not the only issue—and I’m grateful, in my discussions with the Minister, to look at innovations that we’ve had. But it needs to go further and faster, and I look forward to hearing more about that.

Social care. We know that that is a really big issue. I’m pleased to see that the Welsh Government has committed £70 million to the social care sector, which will fund that living wage commitment. But, as I’m sure everybody in the Siambr here today knows, it needs to go further; it’s only a step to helping to mitigate many of the issues in relation to social care.

The third area is around decarbonisation. The climate emergency is the most important thing that we face. I am interested to learn what plans the Welsh Government has for the new iteration of the Warm Homes programme. We have been waiting a little bit of time for that, but that is essential in order to make sure that people’s bills are lower, and that we address our climate emergency. You have heard Luke Fletcher talk about the bus emergency support scheme and concerns around that, and I do share those. But we want to see free public transport for all under-25-year-olds. That would help to tackle the climate emergency and to help our young people.

I would just like to finish by saying that we have all talked about—including me—what more we want to see being spent. But we need to look at income as well. We need to look at how we are going to fund what we need, particularly in the light of a disastrous Conservative Government and an absolutely shameful Liz Truss budget, which put so many people in a precarious position. We need to look in Wales at what we can do. And although I won’t be supporting the Plaid Cymru amendment, I do think that there is a discussion to be had. My concern is that I cannot support a proposal that seeks to add an additional tax burden to the lowest earners, particularly at this time of a cost-of-living crisis. But I do think that there’s a discussion to be had, and I hope the Minister’s open to that, to look at how we can actually tax the highest earners, because they are the people who can afford to support everybody in Wales. And, of course, I won’t be supporting the Conservative amendment. It’s clear to everyone that their Government is not delivering on the people of Wales’s priorities. Thank you very much. Diolch yn fawr.

Can I also thank the Welsh Government Minister for bringing forward today’s debate on the 2023-24 draft budget? Of course, it has a really important impact on our communities, on everyone in Wales, and it’s something that, I’m sure, everyone’s been eagerly anticipating. It’s clear from our side of the benches and throughout contributions so far, along with our amendment to today’s budget debate, that this Welsh Government budget does not go far enough in delivering for the priorities of the people of Wales. And one of these priorities is the services delivered by our fantastic councils and councillors up and down Wales. It’ll be no surprise to us here that I’ll be starting my contribution in this regard.

As has already been outlined, the local government settlement is proposing a 7.9 per cent increase, which is around £227 million being provided to local government, which, of course, those councils have welcomed cautiously. But it’s clearly not enough for them to deliver the services that are required. It’s really difficult to see how this increase in the settlement will actually lead to local communities receiving better services. We know that councils are currently having to grapple with budgets and difficult decisions just to survive and deliver business as usual, let alone see additional services delivered.

But we are living with and dealing with a bit of a paradox on this issue, because in light of this funding settlement of 7.9 per cent, many councils up and down Wales are planning huge council tax rises to deal with it, but this is despite them sitting on massive reserves, which my colleague Peter Fox pointed out. In my view, it’s simply not right that residents across Wales are likely to face significant council tax rises, especially during a time when their pockets are already being hit, when some councils are sitting on hundreds of millions of pounds’ worth of reserves. The moral position on this is difficult to justify, and I hope the Minister will consider the thoughts that Peter Fox presented in respect of this as well.

Secondly, other Members have mentioned this point, and it is in relation to the housing issues and challenges that our councils are facing. I’ve received significant correspondence on this, and I’m sure that other Members have as well, and it’s in relation to the housing support grant, which we know funds the vast majority of support for our homeless and housing support in Wales, with around 60,000 people every year being supported. Really important support was provided throughout the pandemic, but it’s currently under more pressure than ever. We know that, over the past decade, the housing support grant has reduced in real terms from where it was at £139 million around 10 years ago, which should equate to about £181 million today. But in actual fact, it is £167 million, so it’s about a £14 million real-terms cut to an area that has seen a significant increase in demand. And this real-terms cut is having a significant effect on the housing support grant workforce, and it’s clear that the absence of any increase to this budget means that service delivery is at risk, and ultimately it will cost the taxpayer more in the long run, because this preventative service is not being properly supported.

In addition to this, we’re seeing a huge challenge in recruiting and retaining staff in these services, and we’re told that 29 per cent of staff working in housing support will be getting paid less than the new real living wage. It can’t be right that the Welsh Government’s own budget for housing support services is not enabling them to pay the real living wage, despite the Welsh Government’s own commitment to pay the real living wage. There’s a real hypocrisy there in the budget setting for housing support services from the Welsh Government.

Will you give way?

Certainly.

Do you share my concern that cuts or freezes in the housing support grant have been offered almost as a sacrificial offering in almost every Welsh Government draft budget for at least the last decade, despite the consequences of increased pressure on the NHS, accident and emergency departments, and blue light services? And do you agree that the Welsh Government should not be pursuing these false economies, and instead should be removing the millions of added cost pressure on statutory services that they would cause?

Absolutely. Mark Isherwood raises an important point from his experience here in the Senedd, and I absolutely agree with every point that he's made there because there's a broader point here around preventative services not being properly supported, and the consequential effect on budgets elsewhere within the Welsh Government's control. 

Of course, it's fair to say that this budget has come at a challenging time. However, I believe that there are clear aspects of this that are letting many parts of Wales down, and need to be urgently addressed. I've highlighted just two here this afternoon. So, in closing, I'd like to thank the Minister again for bringing forward today's debate, along with her continued engagement with members of our committee—I sit on the Local Government and Housing Committee. I look forward to further contributions from across the Chamber and call on all Members to support our Welsh Conservative amendment 1. Diolch yn fawr iawn. 

Now, I understand that it's impossible to draft a budget that pleases everybody, especially in the current climate. A budget is a reflection of your politics, and politics, after all, is about priorities. And I'd like to speak to one of those priorities that is often espoused—that of tackling homelessness. Homelessness is a scourge and nobody in an advanced and fair country should be left homeless, but the sad truth is that people are homeless here in Wales. Only last week, my surgery was full of appointments of people who were presenting themselves as homeless, from young families to octogenarians. Tackling and preventing homelessness is not only a good thing in and of itself, but it's also a preventative measure that saves money, be it money in our local authorities or money in the health service and elsewhere. Research has demonstrated that the housing support grant services deliver a net saving—

Will the Member take an intervention? 

Yes, go for it, Janet. 

Thank you, Mabon. Thank you, Mabon, very much. There's some irony here, isn't there? The reasons that the homeless numbers are increasing are, in fact, as a result of many private landlords—and I declare an interest—actually now serving section 21s. You've supported all those extra regulatory burdens that have been placed on private landlords that are now forcing people out of comfortable homes and into hotel rooms; 19 hotel rooms in Conwy county now have many homeless living in temporary accommodation, but they're there for months. 

There's no evidence at all to suggest that the new regulations are contributing to section 21, but I'm here to talk about homeless people, not to defend the landlords. 

So, there's evidence to show that the housing support grant, the services delivered by the funding for the HSG, provides a net saving of £1.40 for every £1 invested by preventing homelessness. The housing support grant funds the vast majority of homelessness and housing support services, supporting over 60,000 people every year by providing tenancy support that prevents homelessness and keeps people in their homes; supported accommodation for a range of client groups, including refuge for survivors of violence against women, domestic abuse and sexual violence; housing first projects that support people with a history of repeated homelessness to access and maintain a tenancy. 

The homelessness sector is under more pressure than ever before, with around 9,000 people in temporary accommodation and nearly a third of them with dependent children. But the housing support grant, as things stand, will not see an uplift this year. This is a real-terms cut at a time when demand is increasing exponentially. Service delivery is now at risk. Local authorities and support providers are seriously concerned about the cost of running services and their ability to recruit and retain staff, and support providers are now actively considering walking away from existing contracts and may be unable to bid for contracts when they are re-tendered. So, will the finance Minister look again at the funding for the housing support grant and ensure that it sees an increase, so that the crucial services that it funds can continue and keep Wales on track to eradicate homelessness? 

Secondly, we all know of the serious challenges facing society on several fronts. Climate change means that we need to rapidly decarbonise and poor housing is threatening the health and well-being of many of our citizens. If we're to reach our targets and decarbonise our housing stock while ensuring that people have good-quality housing, then we should expect to see the Government fund this decarbonisation project to the tune of some £170 million a year. But, as things stand, this budget will only provide £184 million over two years at a time of significantly rising inflation in the sector and labour shortages. This needs to be looked at if we are to achieve modest targets, let alone ambitious ones. 

With the current cost-of-living crisis with large increases in in mortgage interest rates, it's expected that some 220,000 households in Wales will face difficulties in paying their mortgages this year. Wales led the way in introducing a mortgage rescue package back in 2008, and we need to see the introduction of a similar scheme again. There's no budget line for this as yet, so I'd like to ask the Government to consider this, moving forward.

Finally, there is no budget reference to the second iteration of the Wales quality housing standards, which, while welcomed, will certainly mean significant extra costs for social housing providers, while the private sector will have no such bar set as high. So, can the Minister provide clarification on this? Thank you.

We have now exceeded the time allocated to this item on the agenda, but the business of the budget is very important. I have three further speakers. I will call all three, and then the Minister to reply. Huw Irranca-Davies.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd, and I'm speaking in my capacity as Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, although, if I have time at the end, I have just one other point to add, taking that hat off.

Our committee laid our report on the draft budget yesterday afternoon, and I thank committee members and our clerk team for their rapid and diligent scrutiny. Our scrutiny of the Welsh Government's draft budget proposals focused mainly on spending on justice. However, we also closely considered whether the Welsh Government has the capacity to legislate within the current constitutional context, and we're very grateful to the Counsel General for attending our meeting on 16 January to consider these areas in detail.

In relative terms, compared with the Welsh Government's other responsibilities, spending on justice within the draft budget is relatively limited, and it reflects the Welsh Government's relatively limited powers. However, its impact is wide ranging and so we keep a close eye on the Government's proposed spending in this area. We noted small decreases to the allocations within the draft budget that support the Welsh Government's justice transformation programme, and also to the Welsh tribunals. We were grateful to receive assurances from the Counsel General that these decreases did not signal that these areas were falling in priority. In particular, in the case of the Welsh tribunals, we heard that the Welsh Government would be monitoring the impact of any increases in cases or face-to-face hearings on the resources that the tribunals require, and so we recommended that the Counsel General should provide us with timely updates on its monitoring of that. We also heard about the important work that's under way to reform the Welsh tribunals, following recommendations made by the Law Commission. We would like to see more detail about the extent of this work, and so we recommended that the Counsel General should provide us with detail on the likely resources that will be needed to develop these proposals.

It is very important for us, as well as the Senedd, to be able to measure the outcomes of the Welsh Government's spending. We heard, during our session with the Counsel General, that the Welsh Government's first annual report on its delivering justice in Wales programme should contain detail on the Welsh Government's expenditure on justice and evaluations of the outcomes of that expenditure. As the content of the annual report will likely touch on both our remit and that of the Equality and Social Justice Committee, we will explore opportunities for joint scrutiny of the annual report.

Now, Members will be aware of the concerns we have as a committee on the increase in the number of UK parliamentary Bills subject to legislative consent memoranda. The Counsel General told us in quite clear terms that the Welsh Government has indeed sufficient resources to deliver its legislative programme. However, in the context of this increasing volume of LCMs, it's unclear to us as a committee if the Welsh Government does have sufficient resources to deliver all the legislation that it may decide at any time to be necessary. As a result, we are concerned that the Welsh Government may indeed be using the UK Government's legislative programme to implement some of its policy objectives because it may require less of its own resources to be deployed, which has the added effect of legislation in devolved areas being subject to less-detailed scrutiny by the Senedd. Now, I note that the Local Government and Housing Committee has also raised concerns after hearing evidence that the biggest challenge in delivering the Welsh Government's legislative programme is, in quotes, the 'skilled resource that is needed'.

We're also particularly concerned about the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill. The impact of this Bill on the Welsh Government's resources if it is enacted as currently drafted is likely to be considerable. The Counsel General told us that the Welsh Government is continuing to identify which areas will need attention under the Bill's requirements. We do believe that it is imperative that the full picture of that assessment is shared with us and with the Senedd. If the retained EU law Bill becomes law, the Welsh Government should do exactly that. We've recommended in our report that the Counsel General should report within a month of the Bill’s passage, and monthly thereafter.

Finally, we considered the Welsh Government’s future spending on its programme to improve the accessibility of Welsh law. We were told that the costs to deliver this programme are met from across a number of portfolios, and that indicative additional staffing costs of that work were set out in the explanatory memorandum to the Legislation (Wales) Bill. Since it is now over three years since the Bill became an Act, we have asked the Counsel General for an analysis of whether those costs are proving to be accurate.

In the final 20 seconds I have, if I can take my hat off, I began with justice, and I want to end with social justice and echo the words that have come from a few colleagues, our concern about the support for bus transport in Wales. This is a matter of social justice. I am worried that the squeeze on this budget—and there is an undoubted squeeze on this budget—is going to mean that, when Liz Truss blew up the economy, she may have blown up parts of our policy agenda, including radical reforms on the buses—[Interruption.] No, I'm not speaking as Chair. I made that clear, quite clear, quite crystal clear. As a backbencher.

It's a pleasure to take part in this debate this afternoon, although I do feel a bit like a radio DJ on early breakfast now, as we're in the graveyard shift. This time of year, I usually get a little bit disappointed as well, because I always have this picture in my mind that we're going to be sat here like Charles Babbage with calculators, sort of going line by line through the figures, but I understand it's not like that and we have to be a bit more woolly and subjective about some of the things that we're talking about in a roundabout way. 

As this budget has shown, the Welsh Government is continuing to undervalue social care, and not have its priorities in order. The over-reliance on agency workers and worsening skills shortage is leaving the sector incapable of functioning properly. Instead of taking responsibility, the Welsh Government puts the blame on local authorities, forcing them to consider cuts that affect the most vulnerable. A recent case of that was my own council in Denbighshire. It was widely reported that they were discussing reducing the care home fee for our most vulnerable residents in the constituency behind closed doors, without public scrutiny. So, I don't agree with the leadership decision to do that, and I think it should be debated in a public setting, where all stakeholders can be involved. Even when the Government has taken some responsibility, it has been a shockingly poor response to the needs of social care, and only £400,000 has been allocated to apprenticeships, with no answer on how to plug the gaps. 

That brings me on to the training opportunities. I think, in social care, it's not always just about pay, although that is very important. It's also about the training and people feeling like they're valued in their roles, like they've got a career path and something to aspire to. I think that's a big thing in terms of the retention and recruitment of social care staff within various different settings. In my own constituency, I've done a programme of care home visits, and a lot of them are not operating to capacity. They might have, for example, an allocation of 50 beds, but they can only operate at maybe 25 to 30 because they just don't have the staff available, and then that's then backlogging onto the NHS system and contributing to some of the waiting times we're seeing and bedblocking, although I'm not too keen on that sort of wording, although I can't think of a better one at the moment.

Equally, even though the Welsh Government has recognised the role of unpaid carers, I'm deeply concerned that the Welsh Government does not see this, providing financial support to them, as a priority. This budget continues to undervalue, under-reward and underfund our carers, and all of this shows, whilst the UK Conservative Government levels up, the Welsh Labour Government is messing up.

Minister, managing public finances after Liz Truss crashed the economy is desperately difficult, and I'm sure you have the sympathy of many Members in the Senedd in this very difficult task.

Members have already raised a number of points that I intended to, so I just have two points that I'd like you to consider in your response today. First of all, is it the case that all funding that would have been spent on the north-south air link and which was promised for improvements in public transport in north Wales, will indeed be spent on public transport improvements in north Wales, including the Wrexham Gateway? And secondly, do you agree that, amongst the many priorities that Welsh Government rightly has, improving the mental health of young people must be a key concern of all Ministers when they set their budgets? Diolch.

I call on the Minister for Finance and Local Government to reply to the debate.

Diolch, and thank you to all colleagues for what I think has been a really helpful debate. We've heard so many different priorities coming forward: dentistry, building safety, the health Minister’s six priorities for health, the EMA, social care workforce, highways, renewable energy, support for care leavers, the Welsh language, bus services, homelessness provision, farm funding, mental health and swimming pools. And I know that many of these particular issues are subject to some specific recommendations from committees. So, perhaps I'll leave my colleagues to respond to those through their responses to the committees, which I know that we'll be aiming to get to committee Chairs at least in time for the debate on the final budget. And I thought I maybe would concentrate my remarks more along the process, the reprioritisation exercise that we undertook and, of course, some comments on tax as well.

So, I thought I'd begin in reference to the comments by the Chair of the Finance Committee that suggested the committee was surprised and worried at the lack of candour in the draft budget. I take that suggestion very seriously, because we've always adopted an open, transparent and collaborative approach to the preparation of both our draft and our final budgets. I'm really proud that, as a Government, we publish a huge and extensive suite of documentation alongside the budget, and that includes details of our spending plans across all of Government, the impacts of our decisions, the economic context within which we're making those decisions, as well as new tax products, such as the ready reckoner.

And this year's documentation, of course, builds on that which we provided for the 2022 multi-year spending review, and that also included a distributional analysis of our spend, and that was a really significant piece of work, which helps us not just as a Government, and helps the Senedd too, but also our partners in the public and the third sectors. We also, of course, provide a budget leaflet, and that provides a really easy and accessible way into our high-level allocations, and we've provided a children's budget leaflet and also a fantastic animation, which sets out where our money comes from and what it is spent on. And some of these products have been developed in collaboration with our partners and stakeholders, including children, and of course we've sought to take back feedback from colleagues within the Senedd over the years, including the Finance Committee.

So, throughout the production of this year's budget, I've welcomed the constructive engagement and collaboration that we've had with the Finance Committee and with the Chair in particular, and we've worked really closely with the committee to provide details of what our priorities are, to the keep the committee up to date in terms of the challenging circumstances that we face, and also to actively pursue some collaborative working practices, which is why I was concerned by the comments mentioning candour. I think that could be interpreted by the public as an attempt to obscure the scrutiny process, and I think that couldn't be further from the truth. I always have recognised the importance of the scrutiny process, especially at times when funding is so restricted, and I'm keen to continue that open and collaborative work, and of course I'm open to understanding what further information committees need to complete their scrutiny, and look forward to continuing that productive relationship.

One area I think the committee identified as one that we could provide some further information in future would be alongside the calculations relating to the block grant adjustment. So, certainly, we'll look at seeing what more we can provide. Even though the draft budget narrative contains some substantial detail on the block grant adjustment, I do recognise that it has become more complicated over time and there would be benefit, I think, to a more detailed presentation of that information. So, I look forward to working with the Finance Committee on that particular aspect as well.

So, thinking of the reprioritisation exercise, it's just worth re-emphasising, I think, that this budget, of course, builds on our already published plans as part of our three-year spending review. So, this budget only allocates £1.2 billion over two financial years. Of course, we scrutinised a three-year spending review last year. And, as part of that, of course, we allocated an additional £1.3 billion over that spending review period to health, and nearly £0.75 billion additional to local government, and I think that we need to remember that in the context of what we're scrutinising here as well.

Of course, our capital budget falls by 8 per cent in real terms in the next financial year, so hearing about additional ideas from the Conservative benches as to how we could be spending capital is difficult to swallow when there wasn't a single extra penny of capital coming in the autumn statement. Of course, the Chancellor has the opportunity to rectify that in the spring statement, and we look forward to continuing to press the Chancellor for additional funding in that respect.

Thinking, now, of the reprioritisation exercise, to help us protect our front-line public services and support people through the cost-of-living crisis, we did undertake that reprioritisation exercise to release £87.4 million from within those existing budgets, which I've referred to as being agreed as part of our spending review. I did give certain areas a degree of protection, so front-line health services, local government through the RSG, and part of the education budget were excused from that exercise to try and reprioritise across Government, but, I mean, I have to say it was such a difficult exercise. We've been asked why we couldn't reprioritise a greater amount, but actually once we got past that we really did get into the realms of talking about cutting some of the programmes that help the most vulnerable people, and you end up going completely against the kind of preventative agenda that we all want to embrace by cutting some of those proposals.

In deciding which areas to reprioritise, Ministers across Government were searching out areas that were perhaps demand led, where they could, at risk, put a small amount into those budgets to release some funding. Other options included looking at whether contracts could be terminated or redeveloped or reduced in scope. For example, I did that in my own MEG through the reprocurement of our e-procurement contract, and also some work took place in that space in relation to public appointments.

I know that portfolio Ministers did have some really good and thorough scrutiny in their own committees about the choices that they made, but I'll just give a few examples to put them on the record. So, in the rural affairs MEG, the budget repriorisation was limited to farm funding outside of the basic payment scheme. So, the Minister provided protection to the BPS, and we did see then, of course, though, a reduction to the rural economic and sustainability budget line. This MEG, though, did have an increase of £63 million through the multi-year settlement last year. That's now been reduced by just under £9 million to £54 million, and I know that the Minister is working through the difficult choices now that that makes for her in terms of some of the farming and land management activities. That's just one example of the difficult choices that we talk about.

In health, there were a number of areas where funding was refocused to ensure that resources could be focused on our front-line services as far as possible. Those, for example, include changes to the plans for the establishment of an NHS executive, so there will be a reduction now in scope and capacity over the short term, in order to refocus some of the funding towards the front-line services.

In other areas, we've had to revise the timeline of delivery, due to the inflationary pressures, but not the scale of ambition, and an example there would be that whilst obviously excellent progress has been made in terms of maintaining the sustainable communities for learning programme, our programme to improve and develop schools and colleges in Wales, the availability of construction materials and labour has seen costs rise by around 15 per cent, so inevitably we'll be delivering less with that programme even though the amount that we intend to spend will be the same.

And, of course, you'll have heard my colleague, the Minister for Climate Change, talking about the commitment in relation to 20,000 social homes. That now will include an element of homes beyond new builds compliant with development quality requirements, but it's clear that given the multiple sector challenges and the cost increases in the supply chain, and the inflation rates that we face, we may now see, out of necessity, some more homes being brought into the social sector though non-new-build routes. But I do think that gives us good opportunity to take further action in respect of empty homes.

As well as reprioritising, having more flexibility would of course assist us. A number of people have mentioned the fuel support payment. Well, that was something that we were able to do because we were carrying over money that had arrived very late in the financial year in 2021-22. We were able to carry that over outside of the Wales reserve. That was a pragmatic decision on the part of the UK Government, but if that kind of carry-over of very late consequential funding could just become part of our normal way of working, that would help us a great deal.

I don't have too much time left, but I do want to say a few words on tax, although I know we'll have much more opportunity to talk about this in a lot more detail tomorrow afternoon. But there is a recommendation from the Finance Committee that we talk more about the work that we've been doing to understand the potential use of various tax-raising powers. Of course, we did publish our income tax ready-reckoner alongside the draft budget, and that takes account of behavioural impacts of tax changes. It does use His Majesty's Revenue and Customs estimates for certain elements, but it also does include some additional estimates for the potential migration effect of varying income tax rates within the UK. Those were based on a Swiss academic study, because it's the most appropriate proxy for the situation in Wales, although it's not perfect, but we do build that into our ready-reckoner to understand what the impact would be if we were to raise those higher and additional rates of Welsh rates of income tax. We know that the recent changes to income tax rates and thresholds in Scotland provide us now with that first example of income tax varying policies within the UK, and as the relevant detail does now become available as to the impacts of that, hopefully that will provide us with some further information to help inform our policy in this area in future.

And then, just on the rates and bands, the devolution of powers to vary income tax thresholds would prove an additional policy tool, but I think that it would be very difficult to do so without the full devolution of all income tax on non-savings, non-dividend income, and that would be a step that the Welsh Government's devolved tax responsibilities would take, but it would lead to a very, very big change and much greater exposure to the relative tax-base growth risk within Wales and the rest of the UK. So, I think that this is something that we'll discuss in a lot more detail tomorrow, but again, whenever we're talking about the further devolution of tax powers, we have to do so in the context of balancing the risk and the reward, but I look forward to tomorrow's debate on that.

Finally, just thank you to everybody for their contributions this afternoon. I know all of my colleagues will be responding to those committee reports, but also giving some thought and reflection to the important points raised this afternoon.

Before I move on to the further business, I did indicate to the Member for Carmarthen East and Dinefwr that I would accept his point of order at the end of the debate. I understand that the point of order will now be raised by the Member for South Wales Central, Heledd Fychan.

Yes. Diolch yn fawr iawn, Dirprwy Lywydd. I just wanted to check, really, that I'd heard correctly earlier, and I'd like to ask for a ruling, Dirprwy Lywydd, as to whether the language used and one phrase in particular used by Hefin David in the course of the debate were acceptable. I won't repeat the words, but they were crass, insensitive, and in a workplace setting, arguably discriminatory. In fact, an employment tribunal judge in 2021 ruled the exact same comment as being inappropriate and unprofessional. It lowered the tone of the debate, in my view, that was otherwise characterised by respectful disagreement and is an affront to the dignity of the Senedd and the people we represent.

I have had a chance to review the transcript and I consider that the language used is wholly inappropriate by the Member, and no Member of this Parliament should be using such language, and I would therefore call on the Member to both retract his statement and apologise for making such a reference in his contribution today.

I sincerely withdraw and apologise for using that term. It was intended, in the heat of the debate, to make a political point. It was flippant and it was indeed inappropriate. In fact, given the fact that one of Plaid Cymru's councillors in Caerphilly had been pictured holding a gun, threatening to shoot English people, the word I should have used was 'appalling'.

I'm disappointed that the Member included the last reference. I accept his retraction of the statement, and I would encourage all Members not to use such language, but in doing so, please do not bring other issues such as that in. I think this was purely based upon the language used in this debate, and I do not believe such language is appropriate in any debate in this Chamber, and I would encourage all Members to make sure that their contributions do not include such language in future.

The proposal is to agree amendment 1. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. I will defer voting under this item until voting time.

Voting deferred until voting time.

We'll move on now. In accordance with Standing Order 12.24, unless a Member objects, the two motions under items 5 and 6 will be grouped for debate, but with separate votes. I see that there are no objections.