Senedd members criticised a “half-hearted, illogical and disappointing” response to calls to ensure vulnerable adults without bank cards can continue to pay in cash.

Carolyn Thomas, who chairs the Senedd’s petitions committee, led a debate following a Senedd inquiry prompted by a 2,500-name petition submitted by Mencap Cymru.

Ms Thomas raised the example of a young person who could not buy a rugby shirt with his birthday money because the shop was cashless.

The Labour politician said committee members also met Steven McGee, who was unable to go into a cafe and buy a coffee with cash.

She told the Senedd: “Just two examples of people being denied their basic rights to be financially independent and to socialise.

“This is very distressing for vulnerable adults striving to live independently.”

Ms Thomas, who represents North Wales, added: “We cannot allow the rush to embrace new technology to create new barriers that exclude people.”

Pointing to stats showing almost 40% of people still use cash once a week, she cautioned that the response to the committee’s report shows the issue is far from resolved.

She raised Mencap Cymru’s suggestion that the Welsh Government could use the public sector equality duty to require organisations in receipt of public funds to accept cash.

Ms Thomas urged businesses to display signs at their entrances clearly showing whether they accept cash to save people from humiliation, anxiety and distress.

The Conservatives’ Peter Fox raised the risk of members of society being “shut out” with an increasing number of businesses becoming card only.

He said: “One young man with learning disabilities became so distressed when he was told he was unable to purchase a magazine that the police had to be called.”

Mr Fox pointed out that older people can also struggle to access digital payments.

Sioned Williams, who chairs the cross-party group on learning disability, criticised ministers’ “half-hearted, illogical and disappointing” responses to the committee’s recommendations.

She said: “It’s yet another example, unfortunately, of how changes and processes are put in place without consideration of the impact on disabled people.

“Because, in plain language, this is about discrimination.”