Questions now from the party leaders. The leader of the Conservatives, Andrew R.T. Davies. 

Thank you, Presiding Officer. The question that started this session of Question Time from Julie Morgan indicated that a taxi firm obviously had broken the discrimination rules against disabled people. I believe the owner of that taxi firm contributed to your leadership campaign, First Minister. I am sure you inadvertently in referencing them would have declared an interest, but I'm sure you'll want to put that on the record so people can understand that you did receive a donation from them. And talking of donations, we have obviously seen continued speculation and comment on the substantial donation that you received for your leadership campaign. That company that donated to you, at the close of their accounts on 30 June 2023, in a footnote on their accounts, stated,

'Therefore, the external opportunities created for the Dauson Group to succeed continue to be mainly legislative driven'.

You are leader and First Minister of the Government that sets the legislative agenda. Can you not see why people are deeply, deeply concerned about the tensions between the substantial donation, the comments that the company asked people to see in their accounts about the legislative opportunities, and your accepting of that donation?

So, there are a couple of different points to make here. The first is that Veezu Holdings Limited did make a donation. That's been formally and properly declared. In answer to the first question about setting out the action that they took in removing that individual driver-operator from their platform and in reporting that matter to Cardiff Council as they should have done—. And I am pleased that they did so. 

When it comes to the legislation this Government is pursuing, it again goes back to the first question. We will pursue the improvements in biodiversity targets, we will improve not just the legislation, but also the fines for people who do not meet the standards that are going into legislation. This Senedd will have before it in this term that substantive environmental sustainability Bill. It will be introduced by the Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs. There is no question of any change in the commitment of this Government to introducing those measures. And, again, we go back to what's happened as a matter of fact, where donations have been properly declared or the rules have been followed to do so, and there is no link between any choice that this Government has made and what has taken place in the leadership contest, and all real conflicts are being managed. This is a business, that you referred to, that is based in my Constituency. I could not, have not and will not make any kind of ministerial choice around that company.

Well, we also heard in questions this afternoon from the Member for Newport East how valuable the Gwent levels are. But we know that the individual who made the donation to you has been the subject of court action and been convicted on two accounts of dumping and polluting the Gwent levels. But, equally, we've heard from other senior figures within your own ranks over the last week—Andrew Morgan, for example; a big fan of mine on Twitter, I might add—who has highlighted, obviously, his concerns, and he is leader of Rhondda Cynon Taf County Borough Council and chairman of the Welsh Local Government Association. We've also had Beth Winters, the Member of Parliament for the Cynon Valley, and even your de facto deputy, Ken Skates, when interviewed on this last Wednesday, was struggling, I think, to put it kindly, to defend the position. So, what do you say to those substantial individuals within the Labour movement who do have genuine concerns, and the wider public who have real concerns, when they look at the evidence that is before them?

Again, if you want to go back to the evidence, the evidence is that donations have been declared quite properly by both campaigns following the leadership contest. There is a formal review process taking place to look at the length of the campaign, campaign finance and a range of other matters. That's being dealt with openly and transparently. It's a matter for my party to decide the rules for future leadership contests.

Actually, what we are doing is focusing on the business of this Government and of this country, what really matters to people: the cost-of-living crisis; the reality that many families still go to bed worrying about paying their Bills at the end of the week or the end of the month; the reality that we know that we have more to do around our public services; the key importance of the funding settlement we have; and of course, last week, the news from Tata that they are looking to go ahead with their proposals to shed not just more than 2,500 direct jobs, but have an impact on the economy of more than 10,000 people. That's the business this Government is engaged with.

That's why, next week, I plan to go to Mumbai to meet Tata to press the case again not just for the alternative, but a clear case that we have continued to make and will continue to make for there to be no hard compulsory redundancies, and to look again at the opportunities for steel within Wales and Britain, and what it will mean not just for our renewable future, but the general future of our economy. That's a First Minister and a Government that are getting on with what matters to the people of Wales.

It's wonderful to hear you're having an internal review in the Labour Party to look into all this. It does remind me of the Communist Party era when they used to have the politburo slapping themselves on the back and saying, 'We've done a great job, we'll have a quick look at the next five-year plan, and we're still in the same position.' The fact of the matter is, the average punter in the street does have serious questions over this particular issue. It's coming up time and time again, over why £200,000, and what was expected in receipt of that £200,000. Because it wasn't given to the Labour Party, it was given to you specifically to solicit the role of First Minister.

Humza Yousaf yesterday lost his job as First Minister because he failed to read the room. First Minister, are you failing to read the Welsh public's mind on this particular issue by not coming forward and commissioning that independent inquiry into the important issues that people have identified as being of deep concern to them, so that we can have clarity on this, rather than you being judge, jury and executioner, if that's what's required at the end of this process? I hope it's not, but ultimately we need the clarity and that's why we need the independent inquiry. What have you got to fear?

I think there are a number of points to make. The first is that there was of course an election—not soliciting the post, having an election for the post. Members made a choice in a one member, one vote ballot. The second is, the Member made reference to Humza Yousaf, and it's a reminder of how difficult and brutal the business of politics can be. But, I have to say, in all of my interactions with Humza Yousaf, I found him to be a decent individual. We, of course, have different views on constitutional futures, but I do wish him and his family well. Every now and again we should acknowledge that there are decent people on all sides of our political divide, trying to do the right thing for their country.

When it comes to how the public feel, I don't think the public will rally to the Tories' banner when it comes to how politics should be funded. Indeed, when you look at how the public feel about a whole range of issues, the most recent polling evidence simply doesn't support the Member's contention. The public are most concerned and most obsessed with the cost-of-living crisis, they're concerned with the future of the UK and Wales, they're concerned with how well-funded their public services are, and they're concerned with the sort of economy we could have. If you went to Port Talbot or to Llanwern or to Shotton or to Trostre, you wouldn't find people obsessing about the issue the Member wants to raise. They're concerned about this issue. They're concerned about the issue of the future of their jobs. They're concerned about the future of their communities. They're concerned about whether the UK Government is prepared to support a decent future for steel. That's what people are concerned about. That's what this Government will be focused on. I look forward to doing just that.

Leader of Plaid Cymru, Rhun ap Iorwerth.

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Llywydd. People want to know that they have a Government and a First Minister that they can trust, and that's why there's so much public attention on the poor judgment that you showed in receiving that money as part of your leadership campaign. I'll look forward to continuing with the scrutiny when we look at this again in the Senedd tomorrow afternoon, because these questions won't go away.

I also noted that perhaps the First Minister should reflect on whether a declaration of interest is needed when he mentioned not once but twice, in positive terms, a taxi firm, Veezu, that he was given £25,000 by as a donation to his campaign. It is a matter of a declaration of interest. But, this afternoon, I'm going to turn to the South Wales Fire and Rescue Service. 

In February, it was announced that the Welsh Government would take over the South Wales Fire and Rescue Service after a finding that there was a culture of misogyny and sexual harassment. The commissioners who were sent in by the Government appointed Stuart Millington as interim chief fire officer. But it became clear that Mr Millington himself was facing an employment tribunal following an accusation of harassment and discrimination in his role with the North Wales Fire and Rescue Service. Now, although the Fire Brigades Union, the FBU, asked for the withdrawal of the appointment, the appointment was defended by the commissioners. But is the First Minister entirely confident that commissioners and Ministers have all relevant information in order to come to a conclusion on the appropriateness of his appointment, be that information in the public domain or not?

I'll first just go back to the point about Veezu, the fact that a declaration has been made and referenced today, and I was pointing out factually what they had done in response to the very, very difficult and wholly unacceptable treatment of Julie Morgan's constituent. And that is a simple matter of fact that that report has been made.

On the reality of the commissioners' appointment of Stuart Millington as the acting chief fire officer for south Wales fire and rescue, I recognise that in a previous internal investigation, whilst no disciplinary action was taken, there were points of learning for Mr Millington about his managerial style. I understand the sort of comments that that can lead to. Of course, I've been a former trade union shop steward and an employment lawyer myself. I understand a lot about the realities of the world of work and how difficult it can be for people to raise complaints in the first place, but also in contested matters how there is often a need for the leader or the manager in question to undertake and take on board changes to their own management style. 

There is, of course, an employment tribunal that is due to take place on 7 May, where the North Wales Fire and Rescue Authority are the named respondent. The Welsh Government will, of course, take an interest in the evidence provided at that tribunal and, indeed, the outcome. If further action needs to be taken after that, we will do so, but there is a process in place to have a permanent leader in place for the South Wales Fire and Rescue Service and the improvement that is plainly required within that organisation.

The interim appointment is an important one. I know this is something that is being pursued by journalists at ITV Wales. When Stuart Millington was appointed, the north Wales chief fire officer, Dawn Docx issued a statement saying, and I quote, 

'While it would be improper for us to comment on any particular grievance, we do provide Welsh Government with details of cases of inappropriate behaviour, including bullying and harassment, on a regular basis.'

Now, we were told that the complaints Mr Millington was facing represented only learning opportunities, or minor learning opportunities—a phrase repeated by the First Minister today. None were deemed serious enough to meet the threshold for a disciplinary panel to meet, but I have here a copy of the report presented to Dawn Docx on 12 October last year, an independent report commissioned by the north Wales fire service into allegations against Mr Millington. It concluded that there is evidence to support a prima facie case that may amount to bullying, harassment and discrimination, or harassment on the grounds of trade union activity. Is the First Minister content that Dawn Docx's response gave an accurate reflection of this report's conclusions? And does he know whether the commissioners appointed by the Welsh Government were aware of this independent report when they promoted Mr Millington to his current post?

I haven't had the advantage of reading the report that the Member refers to from October last year. The point about a prima facie case is that you then need to investigate that fully to understand what comes from that. And I've represented in my life before coming into this Chamber people on all sides of the employment relationship, so I wouldn't want to try to reach a judgment on a report that I haven't read, haven't had access to, and, indeed, not understanding the investigation that did or didn't take place.

What is important, I believe, is that when information is provided to decision makers to make a choice on it, you can understand why that's happened. When actually, as in this case, there's a suggestion that there may be more information available, well I'd want us to consider that. And, as I said, this is an issue where there is an employment tribunal taking place about the North Wales Fire and Rescue Authority, where Mr Millington may or may not be a part of that. I'll need to understand that, and I know the Cabinet Secretary for Housing, Local Government and Planning will want to understand that too, to see if there's anything for us to do, but the first point is for the commissioners to understand what that looks like.

This is important to get right the leadership and the culture, not just in south Wales, but across our fire and rescue authorities. None of this takes away from the bravery and the service of all of the firefighters across the country, but the culture has to be right for everyone to have the opportunity to join and to be able to progress as they should do within the fire and rescue authority, and where that is not the case, we want to see action taken.

The First Minister is right: it's key what happened after this independent investigation. The Cabinet Secretary for Housing, Local Government and Planning was questioned about Mr Millington's appointment in the Equality and Social Justice Committee only last week. In her evidence, she said that, yes, prior to appointing Mr Millington, a complaint had been made about him in 2023, that he had been the subject of an investigation, and that

'that had concluded that there was no disciplinary case to answer.'

But we know that the independent external investigation did say that there was a case to pursue. The Government's most senior fire and rescue adviser, Dan Stephens, also downplayed the allegations against Mr Millington. In the same committee, he said that the disciplinary investigation found that no aspects of the allegations made against Mr Millington met the threshold for disciplinary action. But we have already established that the external report found evidence to support a prima facie case that may amount to bullying and harassment, and that if upheld, the report concluded that this may amount to misconduct or gross misconduct. Now, bearing in mind that Dan Stephens is aware

'of all complaints made against principal officers and the outcomes'— his words to the committee—does the First Minister, again, have confidence that Government has been given an accurate account of investigations, all investigations, including this independent external one?

I think there are two important aspects to what the Member has said. It's both his earlier comment about a prima facie case; that isn't a conclusion at the end of a disciplinary process, but is the point about disciplinary action if those prima facie allegations were upheld, and that's what I'm interested in. The disciplinary action to date has not found a cause of action that has been upheld. The employment tribunal and the evidence in it may change the picture. I know what I'm not prepared to do is to comment in advance of that, before I understand what has happened. It will be the same thing for the Cabinet Secretary for Housing, Local Government and Planning. We need to understand what evidence is provided at that employment tribunal, and if that changes the position for the commissioners.

The bigger picture, though, is actually the cultural change that is still required within South Wales Fire and Rescue Authority to make sure that the culture at work is a welcoming one, where there's appropriate challenge and support within the workplace, and we don't tolerate behaviours that we're determined to drive out of wider society. That's the path that I want us to take, and not to be drawn away from. If that means that there's a challenge with any senior manager within the fire and rescue service in any part of Wales, then I will want to see that addressed and for Ministers to be properly informed about not just the investigations, but the action that does need to be taken.