Infrastructure (Wales) Bill - Clause 9 and amendments to the bill

Proposed new clause requiring the Bank to publish annual reports on geographical spread and ownership details, as well as a 'Good Jobs' plan for all investments. Additionally, suggested amendments that would include reducing economic inequalities within regions, support supply chain resilience, improve water quality, and ensure water companies have costed time-limited plans before receiving investment.

Argued against the Liberal Democrats' new clause 1 and amendments, stating that the sale of the green bank under coalition government was beneficial as it attracted £3 billion in private investment. He also questioned how adding more objectives to the Bank would affect its clarity and ability to meet its core objective of helping achieve net zero emissions. Suggested that existing objectives cover a wide range of sectors with clear intentions.

Mr. Hosie supports new clauses and amendments to ensure equitable disbursements, align with devolved Governments’ objectives, and prevent the UK Infrastructure Bank from undermining its goals by working against Scottish interests.

Mr. Edwards supports amendments for spreading geographical investment across the UK, ensuring formal roles for devolved Governments within post-Brexit frameworks like the UK Infrastructure Bank. He welcomes a concession but criticises lack of Senedd committee scrutiny and calls on Labour to form the next Government with a radical realignment of the British state.

Supports the establishment of the UK Infrastructure Bank but calls for stronger objectives and reporting. Emphasises the need to create good jobs across the country, support the supply chain’s resilience, and contribute to regional economic growth by reducing inequalities.

Complements Abena Oppong-Asare for holding the Government accountable on review period. Supports a five-year subsequent assessment period but questions the initial seven-year period.

Questions the Minister about Northern Powerhouse Rail, suggesting that assurances are needed to ensure that the UK Infrastructure Bank distributes its benefits across every part of the country.

Concerned that additional objectives could give an Executive more discretion, potentially weakening parliamentary control and accountability over statutory objectives.

Asked if the Minister's previous rejection of an amendment about reviews was a U-turn, implying scepticism over changes in stance.

Emphasised that the institutional culture is crucial in the early years and questioned how responsibility would be balanced in the seven-year review period. Also highlighted that focusing on additive capital was essential for attracting third-party private investment.

Asked for leave to withdraw the motion.