Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru

Thank you, Chair. I am a member of Theatr Clwyd—just the supporters club.

Thanks, Carolyn. Sam.

Diolch, Cadeirydd. I am a director of Wales Young Farmers Club, who have been in receipt of Welsh Government support funds and Welsh language support funds previously as well.

My name is Vaughan Gething. I'm the Minister for Economy.

I'm Dawn Bowden, and I'm Deputy Minister for arts and sport.

Bore da, good morning. My name is Dean Medcraft, director of finance and operations, economy, skills and natural resources group.

Bore da. Good morning. I'm Jason Thomas. I'm director of culture, sport and tourism.

Thank you all so much, and you all managed to do that without speaking over one another. That was really impressive—

We know our pecking order, you see. [Laughter.]

We'll go straight into questions. We've got details now about the third round of cultural recovery funding. Evidently the Welsh Government won't have been able to draw on support from the UK Government this time. Could I ask you—and I don't mean this as criticism; I'm asking this quite genuinely—because of those constraints, is your assessment of that funding that it's sufficient to answer need, or is it the most that you can afford, just because of those constraints at present?

Could I deal with the overarching point and then perhaps Dawn and Jason between them can take you through some of how we then assess that? So, the honest truth is that if furlough and the self-employment income support scheme had been in place, then people in this sector would have had additional support, and that's undeniable, and it's the same in every part of the economy and activity. We've both had to understand an assessment of need within the sector, and then go back to what we could afford. If furlough had been in place, we may have ended up in a slightly different position on this, but this was, like I said, the balance of need and what we could afford to provide, but also the speed of the turnaround as well, because I know we get some criticism, but having to pivot pretty immediately as we did does require a huge amount of work for Jason and his team to pivot to design something that Ministers can then make questions and choices on, and the discussions we need to have before Dawn and I actually sign that off.

Yes, and if I can say, Chair, I think the budget that we set for cultural recovery fund 3 was based on an analysis of spend in the previous two rounds. So, we were analysing what a 50 per cent offer on the last award to those previously successful would be in terms of the total budget required. So, the £10 million that was allocated via the Welsh Government is based on expected need. So, within all the parameters that Vaughan has just set out, it was also designed and developed with expected and anticipated need. You will recall we announced the £5.4 million winter cultural stability fund, which we actually announced prior to the onset of omicron, because we had had discussions with the sector about the ongoing pressures amongst certain organisations, and we were very concerned that there were certain organisations that really would not have been able to survive the winter without further support, and that was before omicron. When omicron hit us, we then put the additional £15 million in. And actually, because we had these two funds running side by side, that was when we decided to pull it together and form it as one fund—sorry, it was £10 million additional—to bring it in within the winter stability fund, a total package of £15.5 million. As I say, that was done in consultation with the sector about what their needs were—the immediate need to get certain organisations through the winter, with or without omicron, and then, of course, the additional support that was needed for a range of other organisations because of the onset of omicron and as a result of the different protections that we brought in from 26 December. I don't know whether Jason's got anything that he wants to add to that, but that was basically how that was arrived at.

So, it might be helpful if Jason can tell you objectively how that support compares with the support on offer across the border and others, because we often get the comparability where other people do work over this period of time as well, and the border with England is the most porous and obvious one to compare ourselves with.

Thanks, Ministers. I think you've covered everything really well. I would just say two things, with one on stakeholder engagement. We've been incredibly fortunate throughout the whole pandemic to have had fantastic engagement with our stakeholders, so when we came to pulling together cultural recovery fund 3, most stakeholders worked just really, really closely with us across the board, really, on the cultural side, from events to culture, to trade unions who represent the workers on the front line in all of this. They worked with us. We came to a figure that we believed would get them through this, and the support that we've announced has been really well received. So, that's been a really good and positive thing.

In terms of how it compared with the rest of the UK, I can certainly directly compare it with England. They announced £30 million, as you said, Chair, right at the start, for their equivalent of CRF 3. That was ultimately, we believe, recirculated money from CRF 2 there that wasn't spent. We have put new money into CRF 3 from Welsh Government on this, so it's new money and Welsh Government has gone in to support the sector. And if you look broadly at the Barnettised formula on the £30 million there, 5 per cent of £30 million is £1.5 million. We've gone 10 times that with our £15 million fund, so I think we can say with assurance that our sectors have been very well supported in Wales versus across the border

Thank you, Jason. Thank you all for that. I know that Hefin David wanted to come in on some of these points. I'll hand over to Hefin. Could we unmute Hefin, please? Thanks.

Comparing England with Wales at this point in the cycle is probably less representative, given that the sector has been closed, or certainly constrained, in Wales to an extent that it hasn't been in England, with those restrictions still in place at least until the twenty-eighth. So, what flexibility is there to deal with some of the perhaps unexpected consequences that are likely to be a hangover from the current restrictions that might run into February? If there are further calls on the budget, is there flexibility to deliver that, or is this the limit now of what you can offer?

I think if I just deal with the point about comparability, if you reflect on the fact that we're going to put £5 million into the sector anyway, that does compare much more favourably with what was happening across the border, and actually there's been a lot of behaviour change right across the UK because of the position that we found ourselves in.

When it comes to flexibility, it's about the work that Jason's outlined—the continuing conversation with the sector. We don't want organisations to go under. We've got to think about what we can actually afford and provide within this financial year as well as moving into the next one. So, this is about survival through the necessary public protection measures we've had in place, and when looked at in that regard, what we've done with our resource I think does compare well with other parts of the UK. The biggest challenge in terms of the broader support that's been available has been choices made by the UK Treasury on whether to make support available when we've undertaken public health measures. But if there is a need for organisations, then we can of course continue to have conversations, but we think that the sums that we have provided should mean that the sector survives and is able to look forward to a period where there aren't restrictions in place. There's then a different challenge, which is rebuilding people's confidence in wanting to go into this sector. Interestingly, I was looking at some of the figures on visitor numbers and some of the shift in visitor numbers around attractions, events and cultural sectors, and it's quite interesting about the choices people have made and how lots of people within this sector as customers have welcomed the fact that there are protections in place to give them the confidence to return. That isn't the point about measures, that's about—

Yes. I absolutely categorically support the measures that have been undertaken. There's no question about that.

I'm not saying you did. The point I'm really making is about rebuilding public confidence. To want to come back to use the sector is a different challenge and isn't really necessarily a budgetary one.

But I did want to come back to that comparator issue. I absolutely understand the fact that, prior to 26 December, the comparator was valid, but the comparator's not the same since 26 December, given that the English sectors have been open, whereas the Welsh sectors have been not fully closed, but relatively closed. Therefore, an understanding of what is needed is perhaps less a comparator and more a contrast with what's happening in England.

I think it's fair to point out that there have been different measures in place—that's a matter of fact. What we don't know yet, though, are visitor numbers and engagement numbers from customers, because, as we say, there's been lots of behaviour change across a range of sectors. People have made choices not to engage—we know that across the UK. The challenge will be have we done enough—and we think we have—with what we can afford, to try to make sure that the sector survives? That comes on the back of the engagement work that Jason's described and the choices that Dawn leads on as the Minister. I've got financial overview for the whole budget, but Dawn is the Minister who is making the policy choices, and this is our understanding of what we can do and what we need to do for the sector to survive.

Deputy Minister, did you want to say anything?

I think, to add to that, really, is to say that both—the economy Minister has been very coy about it—the economy Minister and the First Minister have always said that future support for all of our sectors, whether it's in the business sector generally or in the arts and culture sector, will be continually kept under review, because the last thing that we want to do is to see any of our organisations go under because of the coronavirus pandemic. So far, we have been able to offer support at a level that has enabled most organisations to continue and to survive through this.

We've got to keep an eye on what happens beyond this as well. We've talked a lot about the post-pandemic recovery. I've heard UK Government Ministers talking about, 'We're coming to the end of the pandemic now.' I see no evidence of that. We've still got infection rates of somewhere in the region of 500 per 100,000. We're still very much in the middle of this pandemic, although the nature of it is changing. I think the point you're making, Hefin, is a valid one—that we will, at some point, get through the worst of this pandemic. We've got to do what we can to get as many organisations through the pandemic, but then we have to have some kind of post-pandemic support in place for organisations where they need it. And I think, as I say, both the FM and the economy Minister have said that they will continue to keep that under review.

I take from that a positive answer to the question that there may be extra space in the budget to find funding where necessary, if necessary. I'll take that as a 'yes' to my question. But the other issue, then, of course, is the impact of COVID passes, which weren't in place in England for much of the time. I know they were part of plan B, but for a much smaller part of the time, and I think that's going to go now. So, what impact have COVID passes had on the financial stability of the culture and sporting sectors?

I think part of the challenge is we may be looking at trying to prove a negative. We introduced COVID passes to try to help manage the risks when we knew that circulation rates were pretty high with delta previously. It's worth reminding ourselves that delta was more infectious than alpha and, actually, more likely to cause harm as well. The difference is, of course, that we've had a largely successful vaccination programme in the run-up to delta, and that protection has protected all of us, but we could see that there was a case for it, and the Senedd agreed that it would be proportionate to introduce passes within those sectors.

When it comes to the financial consequences of that for all the sectors where the passes were in operation, we haven't really seen that there's been a need to budget for an increase in any material way in the support we provide the sectors. We had these conversations. The stakeholders were worried about whether there would be extra costs, but, actually, I think it's of real credit to people in all the sectors where the pass has been introduced that, actually, they've managed to keep running and keep going. If you think about spectator sports, very successfully introduced, and real credit to both Cardiff and Swansea football clubs for the way they co-operated. And I, myself, have been to the rugby at the Arms Park and the passes were there, really easy, and I thought that the staff on the gate made it very easy for customers as well, and that was part of the point—

But is there clear evidence that you've got that the COVID pass hasn't had a negative financial consequence on either the demand or supply side? You're describing it—. You're giving anecdotal evidence, is there evidence you've gathered?

Well, no. The challenge is that the pass meant that some people were more likely to go out than before, so actually, trying to balance up those people who attended because they had a pass, because they could have confidence about their status and others they'd be near to—. I mean, it's very difficult to disprove the impact of that versus people who said, 'I'm not going because I've got to show a pass.' Actually, football fans in particular were the ones we were particularly concerned about and yet, it really didn't make a dent in attendances. And I think that that is largely because the two largest football clubs made a real effort with their fan base and people wanted to see their teams. Now, if you were a Cardiff City fan—before Alun Davies says anything—you might feel differently about what actually happens on the pitch, but for people to attend, it didn't appear to make a difference to people's willingness to attend or the financial viability, and it was a real protective measure, given the balance of where we were, which is why we haven't had any particular blowback from those same sectors about the pass being reintroduced with reopening.

Forgive me for interrupting you, Minister, but I think Alun Davies wanted to come in on this point specifically, but not—

I hope it's not about his misery of being a Cardiff City fan. [Laughter.]

No, it's not. It's not.

He knows where Cardiff City are going on Saturday.

Yes, I know that as well. I won't be there.

I agree with you that I saw no—. I've used the pass many times and I've seen no issues at any point in using it—none at all. I saw it as an entirely neutral fact. My feeling is that your point, where it's positive, is probably correct, but you were far more bullish than I would be about that, and you said—well, you just said to Hefin—that it has been a positive. And I'm just wondering on what basis you can say that. I've seen no evidence, no impact assessment, that a COVID pass has had a positive impact on attendance numbers. We've heard anecdotal stuff around it, but there's been no impact assessment and the Government hasn't published any research on this, has it?

With respect, I wasn't trying to say that there's been an assessed impact that shows that the COVID pass was positive. I was trying to make the point that my impression has been positive; there's anecdotal evidence about that. But equally, you can't disprove the negative—how many people you've put off compared to how many people you've maintained. But equally, we might have been forced into making different choices about activity to continue, and it's definitely a positive for the confidence we have, and the public health advice we have now, about reopening as well. So, these are important additional measures to manage the risk, and it's all about risk management, isn't it? So, the things that we do individually with lateral flow tests, we then do with using passes and when the third jab is available in the online pass as well, I think that'll be extra protection too. So, it's about risk management rather than trying to say that there are hard and fast absolute answers that we can provide. I'd like to have been able to do that at different points in time, but we can't.

Without—

Hefin, I think that the Deputy Minister—

I was just going to say, without labouring the point, I think there is a comparator; the comparator would be the Cardiff City attendance when COVID passes were in place compared to, say, Bristol City, where they weren't. You know, there is a comparison that you can make, and some of the costs on the club from the supply side as well. But if there's a minimal impact and that's coming  through clearly from the sector, then, fine, that's not going to have a huge impact on the budget.

Hefin, I think the Deputy Minister wanted to come in here, but I'm not sure on which point.

It was on the overall point. But I think, generally, what we've seen in terms of attendances—and I honestly don't think this is down to the COVID pass, I think this is, as the Minister was saying,  down to behaviours and concerns—is the difference between people attending indoor and outdoor events. That's been the big difference. I mean, I went to the autumn internationals when we were using COVID passes and there were capacity crowds. But theatres and cinemas have reported significant downturns in ticket sales, with and without the COVID pass, because people are more nervous about going to events indoors. So, the COVID pass has brought a level of assurance to people who do want to go to events and feel more confident about doing that, knowing that they will be sat in an indoor venue near to somebody who is doubly jabbed and/or has had a lateral flow test, whereas, if you're in an outdoor stadium, that is not such a major concern. And I think that's more to do with the attendance than the COVID passes, i.e. whether it's an indoor or an outdoor event.

Yes, and I think it's very difficult to objectively unpick all of that and I think the attitude is absolutely understandable. I'd like to come to the spectator sports fund and the £3 million allocation and ask a very similar question to the one that Delyth asked about the cultural recovery fund: is it what's needed or is it what you could afford?

Well—

Ministers—. Forgive me interrupting, Deputy Minister. We have half an hour left of our allocated time, because we will need to finish 09:55, just for witnesses and Members to be aware. If I could ask for as brief a response to that as possible.

I'll stop and I'll turn my mike off now, Chair. [Laughter.]

No, I'm conscious of how quickly the time goes, Delyth, so I will try and keep it brief. But, yes, the £3 million that we allocated in the spectator sports fund, that was an initial estimate of what was required. Now, obviously, what we knew is, in making that announcement, we knew the number of clubs that were likely to be caught in that measure. So, we did an initial assessment of—. So, if our professional and elite clubs were going to have to play behind closed doors, and those other clubs, say in the Cymru Premier, that wouldn't necessarily have had 500 people or more attending events, and so on—. We were able to make that initial assessment. So, that was almost like a mathematical exercise: how many organisations and clubs are likely to be impacted, what would be the likely effect on their income, and that's how we came up with the figure of around £3 million. And, to date, with the applications that we've had in—and again, Jason will correct me if I'm wrong on this—that looks to be about right in terms of the applications and the support that we've been able to offer to those organisations that have had to play behind closed doors.

Absolutely spot on. Yes, absolutely spot on, Minister. I think it's just worth noting that we always envisaged this as two phases: the first phase was going up until the point of the last 21-day review and, as the Minister says, we're very much coming in on budget with that. And, again, it was the point that we made earlier: because we've got such good relationships with our stakeholders, we were able to to work with them through all the finer points of all of this before we announced the figure.

So, the more difficult bit to assess was, obviously, the second phase, which would take us beyond the current review period. But, as the First Minister set out last week, we are now moving forward, obviously, on the expectation that we will move back to alert level 0 on 28 January, so the need for the spectator sports fund will reduce, obviously, at that point then. So, I think we can say with a high degree of confidence that our funding will enable these organisations to get through again.

Thank you for that. Before we move on to Sam Kurtz, Heledd, I think you had a query about correspondence that we've received as well.

Yes, thank you, Chair. Deputy Minister, can I just ask for clarification on the letter you sent to the Chair of our committee yesterday regarding freelancers? There's just some ambiguity in the text where you reference that details will follow in due course, in terms of the creative freelance community, but then there is some detail. Therefore, is support for cultural freelancers who've been impacted by the pandemic this winter being provided solely by the emergency business fund grant, or is further support planned from the Welsh Government?

So, we've introduced and increased the emergency grant, as you already know, from £500 to £1,000. That was done as part of the business support that was announced by the economy Minister. Over and above that, part of the future development of support for freelancers in the wider sense—so, not part of the COVID response—is all wrapped up with the Arts Council of Wales funding review and how we can develop ongoing support for the freelance community across the cultural sectors. We've also got the freelancers pledge, and we want to meet the requirements of the freelancers pledge, but it is all wrapped in the future strategy around funding for the arts. Obviously, all of that is carried out by the Arts Council of Wales, but it will be part of that future funding strategy. So, I'm sorry if the letter appeared confusing, because there are two elements to that. And, again, Jason, I don't know if you want to clarify that at all, but that's where we are: we've got the emergency funding and then the longer term strategy.

Jason, unless the there's something that you wanted to contribute, that has clarified things, but Jason, if you wanted to add something—

No, the Minister is spot on again.

Okay, fantastic. Full marks from Jason there. [Laughter.] We'll turn next to Sam Kurtz. Diolch, Sam.

Diolch, Cadeirydd. Bore da, Minister, Deputy Minister. Can I, first, start off with regard to the evidence that the Welsh Government has supplied for the session? In it, it states,

'We will be tackling major inequalities in terms of access and participation, not least racial inequalities'.

Can I ask how this statement is reflected in the draft budget, please? I'll start with the Deputy Minister.

Thank you, Sam, for that. I think what you see is the budget doesn't actually have specific amounts of money allocated for race equality, so there are amounts of money that form the budget so that we have an amount allocated that will enable our organisations to deliver their requirements under the programme for government and under the race equality action plan. If you were to say to me, 'What, specifically, will each organisation then do to meet the requirements of the race equality action plan or the programme for government in increasing access and representation and so on?', I would have to say to you that that's all set out in our remit letters, and each of our sponsored bodies now have three months to respond to me with their operational plans, setting out exactly how they intend to achieve those objectives. So, inbuilt into their budget allocation is an expectation that they will do that within the budget allocation, but there isn't, say, £200,000 set aside for them to do x, y and z, because we expect that everything that our sponsored bodies do will be leading towards the inclusion and access outcomes that we're looking for. So, you can't point to a specific thing, but the operational plan that follows on from the remit letter will give us a greater insight to what our sponsored bodies are going to be doing to deliver the programme for government in this area.

And, of course, my officials meet with our sponsored bodies on a regular basis. I meet with them on either a half yearly or quarterly basis, where I discuss with them how they're operating and how they're working to achieve those objectives. So, that's basically how it's done. It's not something that you can pin down as a definitive; it's something that will go through everything that they do, and their allocation will enable them to do that.

Could we please have a copy of those sponsored body remit letters?

Yes, indeed. Sorry, Delyth, I thought you'd had them, but there's absolutely no problem with you having those. Jason, if we can organise that.

Yes.

Thank you—

So, what I'm saying, Delyth, is that in those remit letters you will see that they set out very clearly what our expectations are, and we will then expect the bodies to come back to us with their plans to meet those expectations.

Thank you. I think Jason wants to come in on this point, and then I'll bring Dean in. Jason.

Thank you, only very briefly to say that one change, obviously, now is that the remit letters for each arms-length body are whole-term-of-Government remit letters, so it's very clear within them the expectations around equality, inclusion and access. This will be measured over a whole Government term now, which is a change from before, where we used to look at things on an annual basis, so I just wanted to mention that.

Thanks, Jason. I'll bring Dean in and then Heledd. Dean.

Thank you, Chair. I was just going to say the same thing about the whole-of-Government remit, basically, but also, we do impact assessments on every budget decision as well, so we cover all impacts, basically, so not just race equality as well.

Perhaps Dean can explain how we're getting there.

Dean.

Thanks, Minister. There's no explicit line within the budget, basically, for public sector pay increases. We will work with our public sector bodies, basically, have those negotiations, and it's fair to say that we have linked those public sector bodies, as you've said, with the civil service pay rises, basically, and there are ongoing discussions with them. But we've got a finite amount of money and there will be opportunity costs to doing that. But that's something we will work through with Ministers, basically, and in discussions with those bodies. 

I think Heledd just wanted to briefly come back on that.

Yes. So, there is a possibility of additional funding, otherwise what we're seeing in the budget is a real-terms cut, then, if pay is included within the budget.

Yes, like I said, there are no specific allocations at this stage, but, as we go through the next three years—because this is a three-year provisional budget, basically—there will be opportunities for us to go to finance central reserves and actually put a bid in for those things. So, this is not a one-stop, 'This is it for the next three years.' There is potential for additional allocations, and we will be making that case to Treasury, basically—our Welsh Treasury.

Okay. And just for Members and witnesses to be aware, we have fewer than 20 minutes left of our time, if people can be as brief as possible. There will inevitably be areas where we'll need to write to you for further points, if that's all right. 

Diolch, Cadeirydd. Sticking on the topic of long-term and multi-year budget allocations, both Sport Wales and the arts council have called for multi-year budget allocations, noting planning difficulties caused by yearly budget decisions. But what consideration has Welsh Government given to multi-year budgets for these two organisations? 

So, our budget allocations this term have been for three years. So, the UK Government has now moved towards multi-year settlements for devolved nations. So, we had a three-year budget settlement from the UK Government and we were able to pass that on to our sponsored bodies. So, if you look at the figures that we produced for our budget you will see that there are indicative budget allocations for the next three years. Now, they are indicative, because they can change, depending on circumstances, and of course there are opportunities throughout those three years for us to have discussions on, say, additional capital allocations if there were specific projects that were brought forward and so on. But each of our sponsored bodies have now had a three-year indicative budget.

Okay. Dean, you wanted to come in. 

Thanks. The Deputy Minister is totally correct in what she's saying. The problem we've got is the operating model we work within within the UK, and we have an annual cycle, so, basically, even though we give three-year indicative, which probably says 90 per cent of the money that you're going to receive over the next three years is a given, there are always margins, and we work in accountancy on a 12-month cycle. So, basically, as much as I would love to say to all our organisations, 'Here's the money for three years. Just get on with it. Don't come back to us', it just doesn't work with this, because of the operating model we work within in the UK. So, I've got the same constraints as those organisations, and I would love to have three years and just get on with it with the Ministers, but we don't work like that, unfortunately, because of the operating model within the UK.

Okay. Thanks for that, Dean. I'll bring Jason in, but I think we'll probably need to move on after this because there are quite a few other areas we're hoping to squeeze in. But Jason.

Thank you, Chair. Just to say the positive feedback we've had so far with our arm's-length bodies around the multi-year budget settlement—. Ultimately, what this enables organisations to do is plan, obviously, over the longer term. I can speak, obviously, from being the accounting officer for Cadw as well. We can now, on the back of an indicative allocation like this, let multi-year contracts, because there's a level of assurance there that the funding will be there, and I know that that's the same position in all of the other arm's-length bodies, so it's already making a positive impact in terms of operations. 

Okay. Thanks. Thanks, Jason.

Thank you very much, Chair. Deputy Minister, why are you cutting the budget of the national library?

I don't think we're cutting the budget of the national library, are we, Alun? What we've done—

If you look at the revenue budget, it's decreasing from £12.9 million in this year's budget, final budget, to £12.3 million in the 2022-23 draft budget, which is a decrease of 5 per cent, and is a decrease of 32 per cent in cash terms to the capital budget.

Okay. So, what we've actually got is we've got a budget allocation that, basically, is sufficient for the library to continue to deliver their programme of work. Now, I met with the national library last week, with the chief executive and the chair of the national library, well, the interim president and the chief executive officer—they're not called 'the chair', he's called 'the president'—the CEO and chief librarian. They were very positive about the funding settlement and how it will contribute to enabling the library to become financially stable going forward. So, I know that there had been some concerns in the lead up to that, but those concerns were not played out in the discussions that I had with the two most senior members of that organisation.

So, we've seen an additional funding of £1 million that was allocated in the final budget to support the operational pressures, and that's been maintained in the baseline, and there has been a modest incremental uplift of about £750,000 provided on a kind of equitable basis with the other sponsored bodies to further address the operational requirements. I think it's probably worth noting that that's offset by the non-recurrent funding of £750,000 that was put in to budget for the tailored review. That's not actually published in the budget, so it only looks like a £7,000 increase, because that was just a one-off allocation. The—

Can I stop you there, Minister? I can well understand why people would be very pleasant to a Minister over a cup of tea, but that's not the reality, is it, because the tailored review, if I'm reading it correctly, in its absolute conclusion, said that the current situation is not sustainable, and those are, I think, their words, not mine. The report called for urgent attention to the library's financial needs. So, if you commission a review, the review tells you that there's an urgent financial issue in the library, that the current situation is not sustainable, and then you do not provide consistent funding—. I recognise the one-off funding to implement that, but what any organisation needs is consistent revenue funding in order to sustain its services and to address the issues that were identified in that review. And then what really worries me, as somebody who lived in Aberystwyth and remembers the fire in the national library, is any cuts to its capital, because I remember the impact of that event some years ago. This is an absolute treasure house of our nation's history, and if we're not taking care of it then I wonder what else Government is doing.

Well, I absolutely agree with you, but I think there are two separate things going on here. So, we had the tailored review, and the tailored review—. There was additional funding that was allocated to the libraries for the tailored review. It was outside of the current budget allocation in this term of Government. There has been additional funding allocated in this term for the outstanding work that's still required from the tailored review. Many of the recommendations from the tailored review have actually now been drawn up, they have been implemented, we've seen the restructuring going on. That's about to be signed off. So, we've seen an awful lot of the work around the tailored review already happening and it was funded by us, and there is additional funding—albeit one-off, because that is specifically for an additional piece of work. There have been reductions over some of the capital funding, but the discussion that I've had with the library was that they felt that that was manageable, that they were—. At any point, as I said previously to a previous question, if any of our sponsored bodies want to come back to me and talk about specific projects that they need capital funding for, then we can look at that at any given point in time. But the budget allocation, as it stands at the moment, over the next three years, is a budget allocation—. It was better than was initially anticipated by the library and it's one that they have welcomed, and they are saying is more than happy to deliver their strategic priorities—

But it doesn't—. Sorry, because we're short of time, I'd prefer the officials to write to the committee.

Yes, that's fine. We can certainly do that, because I take your point, Alun—you've got a genuine concern that you want responded to and we can do that, but probably not in the detail you want within the time that we've got available this morning. But I'm happy to give that to you through the committee.

Yes, I'm grateful to you for that. Because if a report tells you that a current situation is not sustainable and you accept that report—which the Government did, of course, and, as you say, you've started to implement some of that—then cutting the funding leads to greater instability and a greater lack of sustainability, not more. And I'm concerned that the cuts that you're making, the real-terms cuts that you're making, to the national library are going to mean that the Government's objectives, which the economy Minister outlined at the beginning of this session, are not just not going to be met, but you're actually creating a potential crisis for your successor.

Okay. Well, as I say, I'm happy to—. I take the points you're making. I think Dean and Jason might be able to give some quick technical answers, but, on the more long-term strategic issues that you've raised, Alun, I'm happy to write to the committee and set that out in more detail. 

Okay. Let's do that. If we could move on, then, Delyth, because I think if we're short of time—. 

Okay. Was there—? Right. Jason, if it would be all right, please, if you could—. Because we're now into our final nine minutes. But if there was something very brief you wanted to say in a couple of seconds—. Forgive me for constraining you. 

Just to say that there is no cut to the ongoing revenue budget of the library. There was a one-off allocation last year for the tailored review, but there is an increase for the library completely commensurate with all the arm's-length bodies. They've all had exactly the same increase, and the library have welcomed their budget settlement immensely. 

Thank you. Dean, forgive me, I'm afraid we're going to have to move on. I appreciate that this will be something where we'll need to pick this up with you in writing. I have eight minutes left, and one Member who hasn't asked any questions at all yet. I know that we needed to ask you about one thing, certainly, in terms of mental health and physical health recovery being a hugely important thing that's been pushed in narrative form by the Government as we, as we all hope, are coming out of the pandemic. One might have expected to see a large increase in spending in sport as a preventative measure response to that. That doesn't seem to have happened. What was the reasoning for this having happened, or not happened?

Okay. So, again, we have regular discussions with our sponsored bodies, Sport Wales being one of them, and we talk to them extensively about what the requirements are, both in terms of revenue and capital. What I can say is that we've had a significant amount of capital allocation this year that has already been spent on meeting our programme for government objectives, particularly on grass-roots sports facilities and so on. We've—. It isn't public yet, but we are in the process of just announcing a further capital allocation for Sport Wales, because they have been absolutely inundated with applications for projects for grass-roots sports and improved local facilities. So we're looking to put another £4 million into Sport Wales for that in this financial year. There are significant capital allocations then over the next three years to meet that particular requirement. But, again, what I would say is that, with some of our sport work, it works cross-portfolio as well. So, the mental health and well-being that you talked about is not something that just applies in sport; this is something that we work across portfolios on, and Sport Wales has been helping to deliver that with other departments, with the department for health, the department for education and so on. 

So, it's—. Again, I can ask Jason to give a little bit more detail about where we are with sport, and the conversations that he had with Sport Wales that led us to the budget allocation that we have, but, certainly, again, we are satisfied that the budget allocation that we have for Sport Wales over the next three years is sufficient to deliver the objectives set out in our programme for government. 

Thank you, Minister. Jason, I'll come to you very briefly, and then we'll move on to Carolyn. But if you could write to the committee as soon as is possible with any information on—

Will do, Chair. Yes.

Thank you very much. Jason, was there anything brief that you wanted to add to that?

I'll just focus on capital funding, Chair, thank you. Just to say that the capital allocation that we've made this year and going forward, again, has been really well received by sport. This has been a new line of funding that has been put in over the last three years, and it has increased year on year. We've put a figure in there that we believe Sport Wales can actually deliver over the next financial year. Again, as we mentioned earlier in the committee, if there were proposals to go beyond that allocation, we would obviously look at that in-year. But we had our quarterly monitoring meeting with Sport Wales yesterday, and it's fair to say, I think, that they are very receptive and grateful for the allocations that we've made and they can make a big difference in the years to come with that provision. 

Thank you, Jason. We're into our final five minutes and, without further ado, we'll move on to Carolyn. 

The Welsh Government's evidence paper said that the local culture and sport budget will support the cultural strategy. What is the timeline for developing this strategy, and how do Ministers envisage the money will be spent?

Okay, so, on the cultural strategy, we said that we would start the work in earnest on that this year. It is part of the co-operation agreement with Plaid Cymru, so there was additional funding allocated to delivering the cultural strategy. We're not starting from a zero base, of course, because the last Government had already started work on a cultural strategy. That was held up because of the COVID pandemic, and we had always intended to start that work again in the new year, in this year. I think I've mentioned that several times on the floor of the Senedd and in conversations that I've had with the cultural spokespersons of both the main opposition parties. So, that's always been there, but there has been some added impetus now with the co-operation agreement with Plaid. So, I'm expecting that we will have an initial paper from officials fairly soon that we can start to develop. But what I have always been clear about is that this is not something that me and my officials are going to sit in the office and develop, even with Plaid Cymru on board. This is not something that we're going to sit and develop, this is something that we're going to develop after the full consultation with the sector, because this cultural strategy needs to be developed by the sector. So, I will say that in terms of where we are at and where we're going, and so the timescale will be dictated by that. 

The delivery of a cultural strategy, of course, is a programme for government commitment. So, we have a five-year term in which we would be looking to deliver that. But I would be very clear and say that, with or without the cultural strategy, this is not a Government that doesn't have any cultural direction. We absolutely have our own priorities that were set out in our manifesto that are in the programme for government and form part of the co-operation agreement. So, even without a written strategy, we have a strategic direction in which we're going to deliver our programme for government commitments. 

Thank you, Minister. I think Heledd Fychan has a very brief supplementary and then I'm afraid that we're going to have to bring the session to a close. Heledd.

Yes, just on that, throughout the paper, there are references in terms of the budget to deliver a cultural strategy, which we don't have yet. So, there seem to be a number of assumptions about the cultural strategy. I would just like to see if there is money set aside to develop this strategy and look at the funding required post COVID, because there's also a line about seeing if the work previously done is fit for purpose.

And similarly, in terms of the cultural strategy, if we are serious about this, is there a way—? Because there are a number of pockets of different funding that seem to be additional to a lot of the sponsored bodies, is it possible for us to have clarification as a committee about the actual allocations and delivering different programmes of government, not just in terms of the revenue and capital budgets, so that we have a true and accurate picture on the situation of these organisations?

Sure. I would probably need to discuss that with finance officials, Heledd, but in principle, I don't have a problem with doing that if we can. But, again, I think it's probably much like the race equality question that I had earlier on—you can't pin it down to particular activities, you say that this is something that's running through everything we do. But I will have a further conversation with officials about that and whether we can give you any more specific detail, but it was an amount of money that was allocated to enable us to do a dedicated piece of work across our portfolios to deliver the cultural strategy.

Okay, thank you very much, Ministers. I'm afraid that we've run out of time. There are lots of other areas that I know that Carolyn had wanted to raise with you there. We'll be writing to you with the transcript so that you can check it. 

Bore da. Good morning. Andrew Gwatkin, director of international relations and trade.

Bore da. Good morning. Paula Walsh, deputy director, international relations.

Thank you ever so much. I'm sure—. We're very grateful for your time this morning. We only have half an hour, so if I could ask Members and witnesses to be as succinct as possible, please, so we can get through as many issues as possible.

If I can ask firstly, First Minister, you've allocated over £8.9 million for international relations in the draft budget, but there's not anything in the draft budget narrative that tells us what that money will be spent on specifically. Could you give us an outline of that, please?

I can do. So, the budget is broken down into two main areas: £3.22 million will be allocated to international engagement, and I can break that down further for you if that's helpful; the remainder part of the budget, the £5.434 million, will support the work of the international offices. 

Okay. If you could provide us with any further breakdown, that would be fantastic for the framing of the session.

So, within the first part of the budget, the £3.22 million for international relations, that is essentially allocated for internal management purposes to the four headings of the four action plans that underpin our international strategy. So, I want to be clear that these are fluid boundaries here, these are the working assumptions we make. So, for priority regional relationships and networks, which is the first of the four action plans, then notionally we've put £150,000 against that. We've put £150,000 against diaspora engagement. We allocate £350,000 against the aspects of the Wales for Africa programme that fall to my responsibilities. There is further money and responsibilities that lie with Jane Hutt. And then £1.4 million is allocated to support the fourth action plan, and that is the public diplomacy and soft power aspect, and that's the cross-cutting part of the budget particularly, and that covers a whole range of different activities in culture, sport, education, sustainability, equality, diversity, and so on.

With regard to this £8.9 million, what measurable impacts are the Welsh Government expecting from this? What key performance indicators are there to see what has been delivered from this £8.9 million?

Well, of course, every part of the budget has its own objectives and KPIs, so I would take up the whole of the half hour if I was to go through the whole budget. Can I just give a couple of examples to help the committee to understand?

In diaspora engagement, where we developed a contract with Global Wales to deliver part of that diaspora work for us, there were three specific things that they had to deliver as part of that contract. They had to connect the Welsh Government to 10 new job-creating projects for each year of the contract, they had to introduce Welsh companies to potential collaborators on a minimum of five trade missions in a year, and they had to identify and secure the services of five mentors from the Global Wales network to support Welsh companies who were looking to grow internationally. Those were specific and measurable, they were in the contract, and, in fact, all of them were delivered by Global Wales as part of the contract that we had with them. 

In a completely different example, as part of the £350,000 that I hold for the Wales and Africa programme, that covers the work we do in Mbale in Uganda, which is the tree-planting project that we have. Amongst the measurable outputs of that is that a tree is planted in Mbale for every child who is born in Wales in a year. We plant a tree in Wales and we plant a tree in Mbale, and the parents of the child get information from the Welsh Government telling them about that. So far, 15 million trees have been planted by Wales, working with 100 different local people who are employed in that part of Africa as part of our target to have reached 25 million trees by 2025. Again, we measure that annually, and are able to report on it, and we are on track to plant that 25 million trees. It's not the trees themselves that are important; it's the work that it provides to people in that area, it's the improvement that it brings about in soil conditions, and it's the long-term livelihoods that are secured because the crops that are yielded from the trees that are planted have developed an industry in that part of Uganda that will go on providing employment and economic opportunities for people well, well after the planting of trees is over. 

First Minister, I appreciate that, as you said, if you were to outline all of the KPIs for all of these areas, it would indeed take all of the session, but if it would be possible to write to the committee with any further KPIs that you have for this budget area, we'd be grateful. 

Thank you. This is in a similar vein, really. Your letter to the committee in November includes £1.178 million for cross-cutting activities and international engagement. Is this being maintained in 2022-23 and can you set out what this money will be used for?

Thanks to Carolyn for that. Yes, we do expect broadly the same level of investment in the cross-cutting aspects of international engagement, and they do cover a very wide range of things. I referred earlier to the Ireland-Wales forum that we agreed on St David's Day last year. That includes an annual exchange, a ministerial exchange, and in the first year it was Ministers from the Republic of Ireland who came here to Wales, and that was a genuinely cross-cutting event. It was led by their foreign affairs Minister, Simon Coveney, but he had a range of other Ministers with him. We met for lunch in the museum here in Cardiff, because there was a renewal of a very long-standing memorandum of work between the National Museum Wales and the National Museum of Ireland. We were joined by their Minister for climate change, and I know that there are plans for him—he's the leader of the Green Party in their coalition—to come to Wales, and particularly to focus on the joint interest we have in using energy from the Irish sea in a sustainable way. And I joined the Taoiseach a couple of weeks later, when he was in Cardiff for the British-Irish Council, to foreground some of the economic development parts of that forum agreement. So, you can see that that's at least four or five different Ministers in that one initiative, and it covers many other parts of the Welsh Government as well. Education: we play our part in the £65 million investment we are making in international exchange for our young people, and bringing young people from other parts of the world here to Wales. That part of the budget helped to fund the Hillary Clinton global summit at Swansea University, held not that many weeks ago, which reached literally millions of people, because it was an online event with that global reach, and that came out of that cross-cutting part of the budget as well.

With the real-terms cut in the revenue allocation for international relations, can you account for that simply through moves to such things as remote working and digital working, or are there likely to be longer term consequences for current provision?

Well, the budget goes up, Chair, in cash terms, modestly, by £0.25 million. Of course, Hefin David is right that even when you add that in, in real terms, that is less than we would have had in the last financial year. But the way that we will deal with it is exactly the way that the Member said; by reducing some of the more costly things we do and doing them in a different way, then we will be able to sustain the same level of activity with the money that we have. So, when you're dealing with a relatively small budget like this, then it doesn't need, for example, more than a couple of ministerial visits, trade missions, to move online from being in person, and we're able to make up the gap between the cash uplift and the erosion of that by inflation.

So, the First Minister is confident, therefore, that that covers it, basically.

Yes. There is nothing that we are planning to do next year that we are not going to be able to do because of the budget position.

Okay. And with regard to budget allocations for international offices—those need to be funded through revenue allocation and have to be in situ—what what will be the consequences there and the allocations there?

Well, we will sustain them at their current level and there are ways in which we can accommodate that. You have to look at the whole range of costs—staff costs, accommodation costs, running costs and so on—but within the global sum, the £5.5 million that we spend on our offices overseas, we expect to keep all of them open, all of them staffed, all of them doing the things that we've asked them to do, this year into next year as well.

And will the allocation of funds be the same across all the international offices? Will there be a change in the Brussels office, for example?

Yes. This is not a guarantee that the current disposition of things is frozen. It's always a bit dynamic: people come, people get other jobs, you're dealing with them that way, and priorities change. So, next year, we will move on from our Wales in Germany year to Wales in Canada, and for 2023, when the Rugby World Cup will be with us again and in France that year, we're planning Wales in France for that year, so you can imagine that we might want to strengthen a bit of our ability to deliver things on the ground in Canada next year, and that may mean we have to do little bit less elsewhere. But these are marginal changes; the basic disposition will remain the same.

And a last question: how are you going to measure the contribution that the allocation makes to us back here in Wales? How is performance measured, please?

Well, performance linked to international offices is measured monthly. Those are internal management measures, so there is a report every month from every office, in which they set out the activities that they've undertaken against the major objectives that we set for them. Those objectives were recalibrated to deal with the coronavirus onset, because lots of our officers spent their time working alongside some UK Government colleagues sourcing PPE, for example, for us, when supplies of those things were very difficult. And we are confident that we ended up with supplies coming into Wales and into the UK because we had people on the ground in some important places who were able to make contacts and put things in place that allowed that to happen.

More generally, the work of offices is essentially economically driven; there are other aspects—and culture is an important one—but the essential mission at those offices is to make sure that where there are inward investment possibilities, we hear about them early and we work to bring them to Wales, and where there are Welsh companies wanting to expand in overseas markets, they can use our presence on the ground in those offices to find those opportunities. Those things get reported on in that monthly way and, from now on, in agreement with the committee, there will be an annual account of that which the committee will receive from us.

And if you don't mind me switching to English just to say that the numbers have fallen short of the target of 2,800 secondary school teachers. So, I'd like to understand how that bridge can be built to ensure that that happens. 

And, finally, could the Minister just expand on the £2.7 million that's been allocated to regional consortia and local authorities for support for practitioners? How are the outcomes of that going to be measured to ensure they've been effective?

These questions are in relation to the Welsh Language Commissioner. So, to what extent do you, Minister, accept that the flat budget for the commissioner will impact on the efficacy of the commissioner's office? He's raised in the past that 75 per cent of the budget is staffing costs, and they have pressures regarding annual increases, and also regarding the co-operation agreement, because there are expectations with that going forward. And if there are issues with budget, in-year or next year, especially regarding enforcement of anything, would you make funding available for that office to be able to do that? 

It was just really to cover the last section. So, the commissioner's asked if in-year funding is required regarding any anticipated higher legal costs for any legal cases.

Forgive me. Forgive me. There is a general position that applies to all commissioners in relation to access to reserves, which I think is the mechanism that, in the past, has been used to address the point that you are raising.