Legislation on Dangerous Dogs

Debate between Christina Rees and Wayne David

Monday 27th November 2023 Westminster Hall

[Christina Rees]

I thank the hon. Member for his intervention. I really respect his view, which he put in a measured way.

On behalf of Hope Rescue, I urge the UK Government to consider letting rescue centres rehome XL bully types that, through no fault of their own, find themselves in a rescue centre.

[Wayne David]

The hon. Member and I visited the Hope Rescue centre in Llanharan a few months ago, where we saw and heard many moving things. I was particularly moved by the number of deformed dogs that the centre had taken from illegal dog breeders, many of which would otherwise have had to be put down. That brought home to me how illegal breeding is such a menace and really needs to be clamped down on. Does the hon. Member agree?

[Christina Rees]

I thank the hon. Member for his intervention. Not many people know this, but we were in school together many years ago at Cynffig Comprehensive School, so I always listen to his views, and I do agree with him on this.

On behalf of Hope Rescue, I urge the UK Government to consider letting rescue centres rehome XL bully types—that, through no fault of their own, find themselves in a rescue centre—subject to the exemption process and being assessed for suitable rehoming.

A friend of mine, Professor John Cooper KC, will be taking the legal challenge to the Government if the ban is not halted. Between 2016 and 2017, John and I served on the Bach commission, which was chaired by Lord Willy Bach and which provided detailed proposals on establishing the right to access justice as a fundamental and enforceable public entitlement. John has always been a staunch advocate of animal welfare both in and out of court, as well as being relentless in his representation of people who find themselves in the most vulnerable of situations. His work with dogs includes advising on the reform of the Dangerous Dogs Act—particularly the flawed breed-specific legislation regime—and advising on and drafting proposals for a more effective sentencing regime for pet theft. A former columnist for Dogs Today, John has a rescue lurcher called Lawrence.

Professor Cooper KC has stated:

“This is knee jerk legislation, which has neither maturely reflected on the wealth of evidence which is available or taken the time to reasonably consider the best ways to protect the public and act rationally in relation to the dog. It simply will not work.

Any proposed ban is no more than putting a sticking plaster over the issue as unscrupulous breeders simply move on to the next dog.

The answer according to the government’s own previous reports is an effective licensing regime, responsible ownership and stricter penalties and sentencing powers in the courts.

The law, maturely and carefully considered, can protect the public. This, tragically, goes nowhere near that.”

I cannot agree more with Professor Cooper’s words. Nor can I disagree with the heartfelt plea of Vanessa Waddon and her wonderful staff at Hope Rescue. For those reasons I call on the Government to halt the ban’s implementation, support responsible rescue centres, review the effectiveness of breed-specific legislation and carefully consider how to properly protect the public from serious and fatal dog attacks.

Spring Budget: Wales

Debate between Christina Rees and Wayne David

Wednesday 29th March 2023 Westminster Hall

[Christina Rees (Neath) (Ind)]

It is an honour to serve with you in the Chair, Mr Hollobone, and I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Newport West (Ruth Jones) on securing this important debate.

To help people survive the cost of living crisis in Wales, the UK Government must reform local housing allowance and universal credit. Local housing allowance was introduced in 2008, and it is the amount of housing benefit or the housing element of universal credit available to those who are renting from private landlords. The amount of support provided is based on the area in which the individual lives and the number of bedrooms they require. There are a number of determining factors, including allowing a tenant to rent in the cheapest third—the 30th percentile—of properties within a market area, which depends on the location of the property. Wales is divided into 23 broad rental market areas.

Despite the good intentions behind the local housing allowance when it was introduced in 2008, the scheme has been the subject of criticism and controversy in the last decade. In many areas, it does not cover the full cost of renting a property, leaving individuals and families in a precarious financial situation. The issue has been exacerbated by the UK Government freezing local housing allowance rates since 2020 at 2018-19 private rental rates.

Research by the Bevan Foundation found that in my Neath constituency, 51 properties were advertised for rent in February 2023, but not one property was fully covered by the local housing allowance rate. Furthermore, the gap between market rents and the rate in my constituency is £95 for a one-bedroom property, over £110 for a two-bedroom property, nearly £150 for a three-bedroom property and over £250 for a four-bedroom property. That means many people in Neath face the prospect of homelessness, and some are being forced to choose between paying their rent and putting food on the table. This is an unacceptable situation that the UK Government need to address urgently.

The Welsh Government have already taken steps to address this issue, with the introduction of the Welsh housing quality standard and the Housing (Wales) Act 2014. Low-income tenants may face more barriers when looking for properties in the private rental sector, and many may find them difficult or impossible to overcome—for example, deposits of more than one month’s rent, guarantors, credit checks, minimum income checks and professional-only tenants.

The Bevan Foundation found that only 32 properties in Wales were at or below the local housing allowance rate. Twenty-three properties had one or more of the barriers that I just mentioned, so only nine properties fully covered by the local housing allowance did not ask for one or more of the additional qualifications. Seven were in Cardiff, one was in Ceredigion, and one was in Rhondda Cynon Taf, but there was none in Neath. The Chancellor could have used his spring Budget to uplift local housing allowance rates to the contemporary 30th percentile and keep it at that rate, providing housing security, which would improve mental and physical health among those struggling to pay their rent in Wales and the UK, but he did not.

The Joseph Rowntree Foundation recently launched its research on an essentials guarantee, which would reform universal credit to ensure that people can afford the essentials during hard times. It tested public opinion and worked out the cost of basic non-housing essentials in Britain today—food and non-alcoholic drink, electricity and gas, water, clothes and shoes, communications, travel and sundries such as cleaning materials—to be £120 a week for a single person aged over 25, which is £35 a week more than universal credit, and £200 for a couple aged over 25, which is £66 more than universal credit. Those figures are for April 2023, and the gaps for under-25s are bigger. It is clear why so many people have to go to food banks.

The Joseph Rowntree Foundation, with Trussell Trust support, proposes that the UK Government should introduce an essentials guarantee, which would embed in our social security system the widely supported principle that, at a minimum, universal credit should protect people from going without essentials. Its research shows that 90% of households on universal credit are going without essentials, and that universal credit is now at its lowest level as a proportion of average earnings. Over 66% of the public believe it is too low, and almost 50% of households have their universal credit reduced by benefit deductions and caps.

Inadequate social security is the main driver of food bank need, with the Trussell Trust giving out 1.3 million parcels between April and September 2022. The essentials guarantee, which would be developed in line with public attitude insights and focus groups, would enshrine in legislation an independent process to regularly determine the essentials guarantee level based on the cost of essentials—such as food, utilities and vital household goods, but excluding rent and council tax—for the adult in a household. Universal credit’s standard allowance must at least meet that level, and deductions such as debt payments to the UK Government, or as a result of the benefit cap, should never pull support below it.

The cost of implementing the essentials guarantee would be an additional £22 billion a year in 2023-24, assuming there is a full roll-out of universal credit. The devastating effect of people going without essentials has a profound effect on our society and economy, and there would be savings to public services as a result of improved incomes.

The Chair of the Work and Pensions Committee, the right hon. Member for East Ham (Sir Stephen Timms), has stated that social security benefits are reviewed every year but are not updated. In real terms, the current level is the lowest in 40 years. Furthermore, low benefits are a problem for the economy because people take the first job they are offered, irrespective of whether it matches their skills, so economic productivity is a problem. The benefits levels are not linked to anything logical; they are arbitrary figures, which are actually set at the deep poverty level, not at the poverty level. Universal credit needs reforming because it is not preventing widespread poverty, but the Chancellor did not use his spring Budget to do so.

[Wayne David]

Not only is poverty bad in itself, but it also creates enormous pressure on the health service, because there is a direct correlation between low income and poor health.

[Christina Rees]

I completely agree with the hon. Gentleman, who has made his point succinctly. I was about to say that the Chancellor could have at least restored the £20-a-week uplift that recipients of universal credit received during the covid pandemic. That would have been a good start.

The Minister will know how important rail investment is in Wales. On several occasions, I have raised the issue of Barnett consequentials coming to Wales as a result of HS2, as is happening in Scotland and Northern Ireland. The same has happened with Northern Powerhouse Rail being classified as an England and Wales project, so Wales does not get a consequential. The cross-party Welsh Affairs Committee, which has already been mentioned, has recommended that HS2 be reclassified as an England-only project so that Wales can receive the £5 billion it is entitled to. There is precedent for this: when Crossrail was classified as an England-only project, Wales received a consequential.

Wales has around 10% of the UK rail network, which includes some sections going into England, such as the Marches line and the Severn tunnel, but it has historically received 1% to 2% of rail enhancement investment. Right hon. and hon. Members can see why the people of Wales feel unfairly treated when it comes to investment in their rail network.

The Minister will be aware of the global centre of rail excellence being developed in my Neath constituency, which will become the UK’s first net zero rail-testing facility. It will be a shared campus for rail innovation, research and development, testing and verification for main-line passenger and freight railways, developing next-generation solutions for the rail sector. The UK Government have pledged £30 million for the global centre of rail excellence, of which £20 million has been received for the construction phase. Will the Minister confirm when the remaining £10 million will be paid, so that the centre can be completed?

In summary, the Budget delivered nothing beyond the bare minimum for Wales, and was specifically lacking in support for local housing allowance and universal credit reform, and the investment in rail that we are entitled to.

Breed-specific Legislation

Debate between Christina Rees and Wayne David

Monday 6th June 2022 Westminster Hall

[Christina Rees (Neath) (Lab/Co-op)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered e-petition 603988, relating to breed specific legislation.

It is always a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir George. The prayer of the petition states:

“We are not satisfied with the response to previous petitions making requests relating to breed specific legislation, and the recent report by Middlesex University, commissioned by the Government at a cost of £71,621, has now cast doubt on one of the core assumptions of the Dangerous Dogs Act: that certain breeds of dogs are inherently more dangerous. The Government should therefore immediately repeal breed specific legislation.”

Four breeds are banned under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991. They are the pit bull terrier, the Japanese Tosa, the Dogo Argentino and the Fila Brasileiro. Dogs suspected of being of a prohibited type are assessed against a standard, which describes what a particular type should look like. For example, pit bull terrier types are compared with a 1977 American Dog Breeders Association standard, and the dog is expected to approximately amount to, be near to or have a substantial number of characteristics described by the 1977 standard. However, the number of characteristics is not defined, and neither is the way in which the assessment should be conducted, which results in many legal breeds and cross-breeds fitting the standard regardless of the dog’s behaviour.

The petition that we are debating this afternoon was created by Anita Mehdi and, when I last checked, had attracted 114,557 signatures, including 113 from my Neath constituency. The closing date is 21 June, so those figures may increase. The House considered e-petition 300561, which called for reform of breed-specific legislation, on 5 July 2021. I am sure that hon. Members are familiar with that debate, so I intend to focus on the specific issues raised by Anita, whom I was fortunate to meet before this debate.

Anita told me that her dog, Lola, had been seized by the police in August 2019 because it had been brought to their attention that Lola could be of a banned breed. The dog legislation officer identified Lola as a pit bull type, based on her appearance, and a destruction order was made. Lola had never shown any aggression towards anyone and had never been involved in any incidents. Anita sought a court order so that she would be allowed to keep Lola. The court considered evidence put forward that Lola was not a risk to the public, and it agreed that Lola could stay with Anita, subject to the conditions that Lola was neutered, microchipped and always kept on a lead and muzzled in public.

Anita told me that before Lola was seized, she did not know anything about breed-specific legislation, and she was horrified to discover that dogs were being destroyed because of their appearance and not because they had harmed anyone. Anita believes that there should be legislation to take action in respect of dangerous dogs, but that it should not be breed specific. Many dog owners have contacted her about the adverse effect on their mental health when their dogs have been seized, and about the practical difficulties of owning a dog that has been exempted by court order. Anita wants to see breed-specific provisions repealed and the Dangerous Dogs Act amended to focus on dogs that are dangerous and on owners who mistreat their dogs, with increased penalties for offenders and possibly the reintroduction of dog licences.

[Wayne David (Caerphilly) (Lab)]

It is clear that breed-specific legislation does not achieve its intended purpose, which is to reduce the number of serious attacks on humans by dangerous dogs. Does my hon. Friend agree that a fundamentally different approach is required to tackle all kinds of dangerous dogs, to look at the issues of licensing, which she has mentioned, and training, and to make sure that the illicit sale of dogs is prevented and that proper controls are introduced? That requires a totally different approach to legislation.

[Christina Rees]

As usual, my hon. Friend has covered all the points that I am coming to in my speech. There is no collusion here, but I completely agree with him.

Before the debate, I met representatives of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and the dog control coalition. The coalition was formed in 2019 with five members: the RSPCA, Battersea Dogs and Cats Home, Blue Cross, the British Veterinary Association and the Dogs Trust, whose operations of rehoming and promoting animal welfare had been detrimentally affected by section 1 of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991. The Scottish Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and the Kennel Club subsequently joined the coalition. After 30 years of breed-specific legislation in the UK, those organisations joined forces to raise awareness of the ineffectiveness of the legislation in protecting public safety, and of its negative impact on dog welfare. They told me that breed-specific provisions in the Dangerous Dogs Act must be repealed because evidence shows that its approach to public safety is fundamentally flawed.

The progressive global trend is to repeal breed-specific legislation. The Netherlands introduced breed-specific legislation in 1992 and abolished it in 2008, after a study found that commonly owned dogs were responsible for more bites than breed-specific dogs. Italy introduced breed-specific legislation, which banned 92 breeds, in 2003 and abolished it in 2009 for similar reasons.

Using breed as a predictor of aggressive behaviour is not reliable. Human behaviour, including poor management and the inability to provide for a dog’s needs, are more likely to cause dog to be dangerously out of control. The method by which banned dogs are identified is inconsistent and can be subjective, because the degree to which a dog needs to match the characteristics of a banned type is not clearly defined. The RSPCA has looked at the science around incidents involving dogs that are dangerously out of control, and found that dogs of a banned type are not more likely than other dog types to be a risk to the public. It wants the UK Government to improve data collection regarding the UK dog population and incidents involving dogs that are dangerously out of control, in order to make evidence-based decisions.

Welsh Affairs

Debate between Christina Rees and Wayne David

Thursday 3rd March 2022 Commons Chamber

[Christina Rees (Neath) (Lab/Co-op)]

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Caerphilly (Wayne David) for securing this St David’s day debate on Welsh affairs. It is a pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Montgomeryshire (Craig Williams). My hon. Friend the Member for Caerphilly and I went to the same school: Cynffig Comprehensive School in my home town of Kenfig Hill. I was the sporty one, and he was the musician. When I made my maiden speech in May 2015, my hon. Friend sat by my side in the Chamber for many hours waiting for me to be called, and he has been at my side throughout my time in Parliament. I thank him for all he has done for the people of Caerphilly and Wales.

In my maiden speech I spoke about the historical and political aspects of my Neath constituency, and my dear friend Hywel Francis, the former MP for Aberavon, helped me write that speech. My speech was about other people, not Hywel, but today I will speak about Hywel and how he was, in so many ways, involved in creating and recording the contemporary history of my Neath constituency.

Hywel tragically died on 14 February 2021, aged 74. Even though Hywel was the MP for Aberavon, we in Neath only loaned him to Aberavon, because so many people in Neath regard him as one of Neath’s finest, and I do, too. I have spoken with my hon. Friend the Member for Aberavon (Stephen Kinnock), and he wants me to mention just how much Hywel meant to him, too.

Hywel was born in the village of Onllwyn in the Dulais valley, Neath, and he had a rare childhood. Born into one of the leading communist families in south Wales, he was the son of Dai Francis, general secretary of the South Wales Miners’ Federation. When Hywel was a child, he met Aneurin Bevan, Arthur Horner and Will Paynter, and he lived a lifetime in awe of men like Dai Dan Evans, who Hywel mentioned often. Hywel was a child of the revolution. With that background, Hywel was destined to study history at Swansea University, and he went on to complete a PhD, which was two volumes of intricate, beautifully written historical analysis.

In 1984, Hywel’s PhD was published as “Miners Against Fascism”, one of the finest studies of the international brigades ever written. It pioneered the use of oral history and broke with the long-established tradition within the Communist party regarding what the Spanish civil war was all about. Welsh miners from south Wales made up one of the largest contingents within the British battalion of the international brigades in the Spanish civil war, and they brought with them trade union militancy, extra-parliamentary activity and internationalism. Hywel wrote about the compulsion imposed on some of the volunteers and the effects on the wives and children of those volunteers who joined up. Much of the history of south Wales was dependent on Hywel’s PhD and his subsequent publications. Hywel would probably have had much to say about Putin invading Ukraine.

In 1969, Hywel joined with Welsh academic, cultural historian and author David Burton Smith, known as Dai, and they made a plan to recover the fast-disappearing archives and intellectual material of the south Wales coalfield. This led to the founding of Llafur, which Hywel made sure that I joined, in a Swansea pub in 1970. Llafur brings together people from all walks of life who have a common interest in Welsh people’s history, because history does not just inform us about our past, but can help us understand the present and shape our future. That is what Hywel did—he brought people together, and he was always full of ideas. In fact, Llafur has had such an effect on promoting Welsh history that people are now undertaking historical studies of Llafur.

In that Swansea pub in 1969, the south Wales coalfield history project was also created, and that led to the establishment of the South Wales Miners’ Library in the autumn of 1973. My friend Sian Williams is the secretary and vice-president of Llafur and has been the librarian of the South Wales Miners’ Library since 1985. Before I became an MP, I was national coach for Squash Wales, and I coached Sian’s three sons in squash. Wales is one big family. We shall be celebrating the South Wales Miners’ Library’s 50th anniversary next year. Sian and I cannot contemplate doing that without Hywel.

As a young boy, Hywel was mesmerised by hearing Paul Robeson at the Ebbw Vale Eisteddfod in 1958 and hearing his voice down the transatlantic link to the Porthcawl Miners’ Eisteddfod. Every year between 1952 and 1957, Robeson was invited to attend, but his passport had been withdrawn by the US Government because of his outspoken left-wing and anti-racist views. Hywel was so proud when Paul Robeson Jr. visited the South Wales Miners’ Library in 1989 and again in 2007.

Hywel played a prominent role during the 1984-85 miners’ strike, and in 2009 Hywel collected his earlier writings and memories together to publish a book on the 25th anniversary of the miners’ strike in Wales entitled “History on Our Side”. The title comes from the words and actions of the 1984-85 strike, what was happening across the world in 2008, and the words of Tower colliery striking miner Robert True in June 1984, who said to Hywel:

“Surely we can’t lose, history is on our side”.

Hywel started to keep a diary during the strike, but became aware of police surveillance, so went through a gradual process of self-censorship. Phil Thomas and Penny Smith from the Welsh Council for Civil and Political Liberties recorded their experiences for their book “Striking Back”, but they hid their tapes under the floorboards in their house. I became friends with Phil and Penny when I did my law degree at Cardiff University during the nineties. Phil was head of the law department, and I am still in touch with him now.

Hywel believed that his miners’ support group in the Dulais valley was the best, because of the talented and committed people who rose to the challenge of developing what was to become an alternative welfare state. Kay Bowen from Dyffryn Cellwen was the food co-ordinator who organised food for more than a thousand families for 12 months. Dai Donovan from Ynyswen was one of the fundraisers. Dai built strong links with trade unions in London, a range of political organisations and the gay and lesbian community, who donated a minibus. The most successful fundraiser was Alun “Ali” Thomas, the secretary of Onllwyn miners’ welfare club, which Hywel called “the palace of culture”. Ali was away collecting funds in Ireland, north Wales and other parts, and he became known as our roving ambassador or our foreign secretary. Many years later, Ali became the councillor for Onllwyn and leader of Neath Port Talbot Council. He is a great friend and has helped me so much, but when he tugs at his braces and says, “Now look here, lovely girl,” I know that I am in trouble. He is one of the best storytellers, especially after he has had a few sherbets.

The fundraisers organised many concerts which featured the South Wales Striking Miners Choir, Elvis Costello, Billy Bragg, Jimmy Somerville, the Communards and the Flying Pickets to mention a few. The Welsh Striking Miners rugby team went on a fundraising tour of Italy. The funds, some £350,000, were looked after by the support group’s treasurer Christine Powell, whose fearsome dog Butch slept on top of the money until it was deposited in a bank.

The support group also produced its own weekly newspaper The Valleys’ Star, whose editors were Frank Rees from Ystradgynlais and Margaret Donovan from Ynyswen. It was distributed all over the world and was included in striking miners’ food parcels. The wise picket organisers believed in talking rather than fighting and they were so good at it that some people were talked into submission.

Hywel’s support group was different in that it was led by women: the secretary of the group, the formidable Hefina Headon from Seven Sisters, who was courageous on the picket line and a great public speaker and fundraiser; Siân James, who went on to become the MP for Swansea East; and Margaret Donovan, who developed a women’s support group and who travelled to fundraisers to speak and to picket. Since retiring as an MP, Siân has returned to live in Neath.

All of that and more, with a bit of poetic licence, was made into the film “Pride”, which was filmed in the palace of culture and the village of Banwen at the top of the Dulais valley. I have watched the film many times and I always cry when my friend and singer-songwriter Bronwen Lewis from Seven Sisters sings “Bread and Roses”.

[Wayne David]

I agree with my hon. Friend that it was a remarkable film. If anything, however, it did not give the thanks that were due to Hywel Francis for his role in all those activities.

[Christina Rees]

My hon. Friend makes a good point. Hywel worked behind the scenes; he did not like to be in the limelight, but I totally agree that there should have been a place for him in the film.

Hywel and the support group organised the annual commemoration of the start of the strike in the palace of culture, which became known as the “Glorious 12th”. He brought together all the people involved in the support group who were still alive, the cast of “Pride” and many of his friends. At the 2019 commemoration, I had the honour of unveiling a memorial plaque for Hefina.

Hywel saw history as a means for social change and his boundless energy and relentless activism had a profound effect on everyone who had the privilege to meet him. I was in awe of him, but he had the gift of making people think that they were the important ones. His networking was the stuff of legend. He had many friends throughout Neath, Wales and beyond who he kept in touch with by text and email, which he signed off as “H”, and by telephone calls that turned from minutes into hours. He would start by asking, “What do you think of this, Chris?”, but by the end of the call, he would have given me far more guidance and advice than I could ever have given him, all delivered with his quick-witted humour and lots of anecdotes along the way.

Hywel could never be accused of rewriting history to portray himself in a better light, because he was our guiding light. He used his charm to find consensus by working behind the scenes, cajoling and persuading—never demanding. He was a man who always had a long-term plan and who drew in many of his friends to achieve a common good. We could never say no to H. We are lost without him and we miss him more every day. After standing down as MP for Aberavon, Hywel and Mair returned to live in the village of Crynant in the Dulais valley, and I spent many hours in their house putting the world to rights.

Many hon. Members may not know that Hywel was an accomplished rugby player. He was president of the Seven Sisters rugby club from 2005 to his death and he was the author of “The Magnificent Seven” about its history. He played rugby from 1972 to 1980 and was awarded the Seven Sisters RFC club badge in the 1972-3 season. He played 78 times for the first 15, and scored 22 tries, with a total points score of 88.

After I had been selected as the candidate for Neath in 2014, Hywel took me to Seven Sisters RFC to watch the first team play against my home town of Kenfig Hill. He introduced me to the chairman Jeff “Jako” Davies, who has become one of my dearest friends. The club’s compère Emyr Lewis, who is well into his eighties, took great delight in reminding the crowd that “Chris is from Kenfig Hill” every time that Seven Sisters scored against them. I must be one of the few MPs who has voluntarily joined a rugby club committee—and I still do not know how that happened.

Hywel was instrumental in me becoming the patron of the Seven Sisters ladies team. My friendship with the club captain, former Ospreys captain and former Welsh international Bethan Howell, has grown over the last seven years. Hywel used to call Beth the gay icon of the Dulais valley just to wind her up, but she never bit. She is a formidable person on and off the field. When she puts her arms around me, I feel loved and safe—and a little bit crushed. I am a squash player and I am proud to have played more than 100 times for Wales, but even though she has tried to persuade me to play rugby—on the left wing obviously—one tackle and I would be done for!

Hywel was a one-off who influenced the lives of many people. His friends will ensure that that is never forgotten and that his ideas are taken forward to influence the lives of future generations. Salud comrade!

Welsh Affairs

Debate between Christina Rees and Wayne David

Monday 19th March 2018 Commons Chamber

[Christina Rees]

And we do, and I will see the hon. Gentleman in the gym in the morning.

The law derived from the full Welsh Government Bill was introduced in the Welsh Assembly on 7 March 2018, but the Welsh Government are clear this is not their preferred option. What the Bill categorically does not do is to block or frustrate Brexit. The Welsh Labour Government respect and accept the outcome of the EU referendum. However, the vote to leave the EU was not a vote to reverse devolution. The current devolution settlement in Wales has been backed by two referendums, in 1997 and in 2011. Brexit is not an excuse to ignore those votes.

I repeat that serious matters confront us. I doubt there has been a St David’s day since the second world war when there was so much at stake for Wales. The future of whole sectors of industry, as well as the ability of families simply to get by, hangs in the balance. The people of Wales have a right to see a UK Government acting in their best interests: protecting their jobs and investing in the public services they rely on and the infrastructure we desperately need to secure Wales’s future.

[Wayne David]

Does my hon. Friend agree that one of the most unfair things we regularly see in our surgeries is the manifestation of the assessment system for benefits, particularly with regard to employment and support allowance and personal independence payments? That is greatly unfair and is entirely due to what the Government are doing here in London.

[Christina Rees]

I totally agree. My surgery is full of people who are desperately trying to make ends meet and who have been subject to the terrible PIP measures.