Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru

Welcome to this hybrid meeting of the Petitions Committee. As a reminder, the meeting is being broadcast live on Senedd.tv and the Record of Proceedings will be published as usual. 

We have Joel James attending online and everybody else is here in the room. Committee members should note any declarations of interest now or at the relevant point during proceedings. 

That leads us now on to new petitions. Petition 2.1, P-06-1558, 'Simplify and standardise the process for booking an appointment with a GP in Wales', and it reads:

'It's currently very difficult to book appointments to see a GP in local surgeries. This is causing unnecessary stress for patients and it is also causing unnecessary strain on emergency departments in our hospitals.

'People should be able to phone their surgery at any time (within opening hours) to arrange an appointment with a GP. People are not always available at the times specified by surgeries and this prevents working people from securing appointments.'

This was submitted by Caroline Rundle, with 432 signatures obtained. Could I invite Lindsay to discuss the petition and the actions you wish us to take? 

Thank you, Chair. Clearly, I have sympathy—I'm sure all Members will—with Caroline Rundle and all the petitioners' concern about booking a GP appointment. Every GP surgery probably has different rules, and I accept that it would be wonderful if it could all be the same across Wales, but how to achieve that is very difficult. I see the Health and Social Care Committee's inquiry into the future of general practice in Wales has taken evidence on this issue from the patient voice organisation Llais. That committee is due to report by the end of the Senedd term. Could I ask a question? Do we know when that is? Will that be within—? Because we're only literally four or five weeks away. Or has it been? I genuinely do not know.

It hasn't been. It is due. 

It is due. So, I don't understand how we can monitor the new process from April 2026, which has been suggested in the preamble to the petition. And I'm not so sure that this committee will even be able to pursue it any further, because I know that we have two members of this committee not seeking re-election and the other members, we do not know, of course, whether we will return to the Senedd after May. Therefore, I regrettably would suggest that as much as possible has been done. I think this is very likely to be followed up in the seventh Senedd, and I think, perhaps in this case, we should thank the petitioners and close the petition.

Thank you, Lindsay. Does anybody else want to come in? Like you say, it says in the preamble that Eluned Morgan announced changes to the GP contract in 2021 to overcome the 8 a.m. bottleneck. I know when it's raised in the Chamber she refers back to that—that it should be addressed. I know that accessing GP appointments is a high priority, isn't it, it's raised very many times, and as you say, I'm sure it will be picked up in the seventh Senedd, going forward. And hopefully, we will get a chance to debate it when the Senedd's health committee bring it forward for debate before the end of the term. As you say, there's nothing else we can do at the moment regarding it, so we will close the petition and thank the petitioner.

Just to clarify, there probably won't be time to debate their report, but the report is due to be published before the end of term.

Okay, thank you. Sorry. To clarify that, then, there's not enough time to debate it, but it is likely to be published before the end of the Senedd term. Thank you. And I'm sure it'll be picked up by the seventh Senedd. Thank you, Lindsay.

Item 2.2 is P-06-1559, 'Uphold ALN Children’s Right to Needs-Based Support and Full-Time Education in Wales'. It reads:

'Children with ALN are being denied full-time education and support in Wales—unless they have a formal diagnosis. This goes against Welsh law, which says support must be based on need, not diagnosis.'

This was submitted by Danielle Jones, with 455 signatures. Could I invite Rhys to discuss the petition?

Thank you very much, Cadeirydd. The Cabinet Secretary is very supportive of the aims of the petitioner here and confirmed that assistance should not be based on diagnosis. You would know better than us, Cadeirydd, about the work that the Children, Young People and Education Committee has done on ALN, and I understand that that work is coming to an end now. It is also a matter that has been regularly raised at Plenary. Considering that the work you've done is coming to an end but hasn't been published yet, and obviously the issues are still there, are still of huge concern to many parents and children across Wales, I would suggest that this is a petition that we should keep open as something for our successor committee to consider in due course and to see how things develop in the next Senedd.

Thank you, Rhys. Would anybody else like to come on in on this? Vaughan.

I agree with lots up until the point of keeping the petition open, because the work that the CYPE committee, which I'm also a member of, is doing is going to conclude as part of its report, and I think it is unthinkable that a successor committee, the main subject committee in the next Senedd, will not pursue this issue. Apart from anything else, there is update work being done on the code of practice and then reviewing the implementation, and I think it will be staggering, regardless of the electoral result in May, if this issue is still not being pursued. Because most of us will have a postbag where we have people who are not in a dissimilar position to the petitioner, where there's a concern that, without a diagnosis, they won't receive the support that their child would need, even though the law and the guidance says that an actual diagnosis isn't required and it's the support needs that the child has that should matter.

I actually think this is an area that the current Cabinet Secretary has made a real effort to look at and to understand whether the law and the guidance are working together. She doesn't think they are, and that's why she's commissioned work from the president of the Education Tribunal for Wales. So, I don't think we should keep the petition open, because I think there will be developments in the very first few months of the next term that will lead to further policy debate and discussion. I think it would be more sensible to close the petition, but to note that we expect more to happen. And it's not just the petitioners in this instance, but I think there'll be an organised interest group, not just of parents but of policy makers and staff across education and healthcare who will be interested as well. Because, of course, this isn't just an issue for the school system, it's an issue for life for that person and their family and it's also an issue that is undeniably linked to our health and social care system as well.

Thank you, Vaughan. Danielle has asked the committee to consider the cumulative mental health impact on children when statutory support is not delivered in a timely and consistent manner. I just wanted to raise that here as well. I'm mindful of what's been said, Vaughan—you're on the CYPE committee as well. I'm aware it's a very hot topic as well at UK Government level at the moment. A lot of work is being done by the CYPE committee. I am minded to close the petition now, but I am also aware that it's very important that with the CYPE committee it's a priority with them and it will continue into the seventh Senedd under that committee.

Just to say that we have previously flagged ALN as one of the core issues that we've received a number of petitions on, and it is covered in the legacy report as a thing to look out for in the next Senedd as well.

That's a really important point. Thank you, Gareth. So, we'll close the petition. It's going to be in the legacy report because it's a high priority for us as well. I'd like to thank Danielle for all the work she's done and raising awareness. That priority will not decrease just because we've closed this petition. It will continue through the CYPE committee and in the legacy report. Thank you very much.

Item 2.3, P-06-1572, 'Lead and fund a long-term flood mitigation solution for the B4318 and Tenby catchment'. It reads:

'The B4318 floods repeatedly, cutting off a key access route to Tenby. Although the road is maintained by Pembrokeshire County Council, flooding is caused by surface water runoff, high River Ritec levels, and tidal locking at the South Beach outfall during high tides. These combined factors mean local highway measures alone cannot resolve the problem.'

It was submitted by Rhys Jordan with 3,454 signatures. Local Member Sam Kurtz did offer a visit, but I was unable to attend at short notice before this petition came forward—I don't know if anybody else was able to. Joyce Watson has also spoken to me about this as a concern. Could I invite Joel to discuss the petition, please?

Thank you, Chair. I'm awfully sorry I can't be there in person this afternoon. I'd just like to start, as you say, by highlighting the work that local Member Sam Kurtz has been doing on this issue. As you mentioned, he did offer to host us at the B4318, and it's just a shame that we don't have the time left to take him up on his offer.

One of the things that this petition has highlighted, actually, I think, is the gap that exists in both funding and policy in terms of highway infrastructure and flooding. There's a lot of policy on flooding and its impact in terms of residential and commercial property, but not necessarily on transport infrastructure. I definitely think this has been a very good opportunity to highlight that with the relevant Government Minister.

I'm conscious, Chair, that the petitioner has come back with several other questions following the work that we've done with the Welsh Government. I was wondering, if the committee is minded, if we can forward these on to the Cabinet Secretary and ask for a response. I would then probably urge that that response be forwarded on to the petitioner, unfortunately, given how little time left we have.

I'm also conscious that Natural Resources Wales are looking into the matter quite vigorously, if I remember rightly. It might be the case that we have to close this petition. I also know that the lead responsibility here is with Pembrokeshire council, I think, Chair, and we need to do what we can to urge them to take this bull by the horns, as they say, and to really push for this, if that's okay, Chair.

Does anybody else want to come in on this? We have, at the Climate Change, Environment and Infrastructure Committee, discussed the impact of flooding on highways and ensuring that the local drainage network is kept cleared, whether it's culverts, ditches, drains, and the impact that they have on highways, very often. Because NRW has responsibility for rivers, and this is impacted by that river and it flows into the sea, and then the local road network comes under the council, so I understand where they're coming from, about people taking responsibility.

We could forward the extra questions now from the petitioner to the Cabinet Secretary as you suggest. This comes across two Cabinet Secretaries in a way, so one in charge of flooding and one in charge of highways, so if we send those over to the Cabinet Secretary to further highlight, and then moving forward, I think we need to close the petition and then move on, and hopefully it will continue to be raised locally and a solution will be found, but it is something that I do raise and will continue to raise at that committee with the few weeks we've got left. Thank you.

Moving on now to item 2.4, P-06-1571, 'The Welsh Government and Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board should put in a fully funded minor injury unit at Llangollen Health Centre'. It reads:

'The Wrexham Maelor A&E is overwhelmed, with wait times of over 12 hours. Outlying Minor Injuries Units would help to alleviate pressures and wait times for treatment for minor injuries.'

This was submitted by Stuart Davies with 557 signatures. Could I invite Vaughan to discuss the petition and any actions you think the committee could take?

There's the challenge of wait times for accident or emergency treatments, and accident treatment would include minor injury units. Those who have the joy of being parents have probably visited a minor injury unit at some point, if not an A&E. It's a normal part of what happens. And yet at the same time, going to a genuine emergency, where there are still long waits and there's a challenge about how to quickly put people into the right place for the right care. I know there's real pressure on our health service, not just at the front door, but getting people through the whole hospital system and back out of a hospital as well. You see front-door pressures because of the challenge about getting people through the whole system to the right place.

I understand why the petitioner is concerned. The challenge, though, comes about whether we should take more time in pursuing the specific proposal for the Welsh Government and the health board to fully fund a minor injury unit in a specific location. If we were to want to require that, then the health board would need to think about how it uses other resources, how it plans to deliver against the population as a whole, whilst at the same time delivering the improvements in unscheduled care that it understands it plainly has to.

My own view is that raising the issue helps to reiterate to policy makers and people who have responsibility for delivering that this is a real issue that needs to be resolved. I'm confident there will be significant comment and conversation in the run-up to May and beyond about this particular issue. My view is that we should thank the petitioner, but close the petition, because this is an operational position for the health board, as indeed are the points on the budget. I'd be reticent about a group of politicians wanting to spend time talking about one particular location within a health board area for an individual unit to be placed and funded, because we don't understand, with the best will in the world, how it would affect the flow of patients around it.

I think this is a matter where the health board need to consider what they're doing and they need to engage properly with their local public. That's both elected representatives and the wider public that the health board serves. I'm sure that whoever has the joy of being the health Minister in the next Government will have every opportunity to answer many questions on the current state of the health service and prospects for the future.

Thank you, Vaughan. Would anybody else like to comment? No. As you said, it's an operational issue for the health board, and they have to manage the flow across the area, and I'm sure it'll be something that could be taken up when we get whoever is standing in those areas. I probably have to declare an interest, because I will be one of those that will cover not just Llangollen, but the wider area. And as you say, it's how it impacts across all the other places within that area as well. Okay. So, just going forward, we'll thank the petitioner and close the petition. Okay. Thank you.

Moving on, item 2.5, P-06-1575, 'Protect GP services at Meddygfa’r Sarn, Pontyates'. That reads:

'Meddygfa’r Sarn GP Surgery provides essential General Medical Services to patients in Pontyates and the surrounding rural area. Hywel Dda University Health Board will consider proposals on 29 January to review current arrangements and potentially disperse patients to neighbouring GP practices from 30 June 2026. No final decision has been made. Residents are concerned about increased travel distances and reduced continuity of care. Petitioners seek Senedd scrutiny before any decision is taken.'

That was submitted by Clare Treharne, with 3,089 signatures. We've had a few more since these papers were published. Could I invite Lindsay to discuss the petition and any actions you wish the committee to take?

Thank you, Chair. Can I say that I have some sympathy with Clare Treharne and the 3,000 plus people who've signed the petition, because my own surgery closed in a similar fashion and the 4,000 patients there were also dispersed to other surgeries? My new GP informed me that he had 1,000 new patients overnight, and that's quite an onerous task for any GP to take on. 

I notice that the health board are still holding their consultation, which ends in April, which is at least a month away now, and we're expecting a final decision on 28 May. This is a rural location and, for the reasons that I've outlined, that there is going to be extreme difficulty in travelling for many patients—some, of course, may not travel so far, but my guess is that the bulk of the patients will—I personally, Chair, would ask the committee to favour option 1 and that we seek assurances from the Cabinet Secretary and the board about the process, about the assessments and the approach to the public engagement and to seek answers to their very real concerns and questions. I think we have a duty to carry on listening to the people of that area so that their voice, they feel, will be heard loud and clear in this Senedd. I don't favour option 2 at all, otherwise it's just simply a rubber-stamping exercise in my opinion. So, I would ask that we favour, as a possible action, option 1, please. Thank you very much.

Okay. Anybody else like to come in on this? Yes, Vaughan. 

Yes. I disagree with Lindsay, not just having been a Cabinet Minister for health with responsibility across difficult organisational challenges, but also I too have been a patient where my GP practice has closed down and been dispersed. You have the same challenges in a more urban environment, where people talk about the challenge of being dislocated if their surgery were to close or to merge, as you do in rural Wales. People are genuinely concerned about going somewhere different. I should also point out that I've lived in a rural community, and I understand the difference in travelling miles to go to local primary care services. So, this isn't about a lack of sympathy; it is about what do you do with the practical position and what's the role of this committee. 

If a surgery is closing because there aren't the full-time staff to keep it going, then it's very hard to insist that you do so, because, if you do that, you will spend more money on a locum process and it still won't guarantee that you can sustain a service of the quality that all of us would expect for our own friends and family as well. There is always going to be a challenge about how you manage any merger or relocation process, and sometimes that is a challenge for new practices taking on board new patients. And that's partly because these things are very rarely managed on a longer term basis. If people are retiring, the practice is closing, you almost always have issues when you're right at the end of the road and you have to make a choice. 

I'm interested in what Llais say about the ongoing consultation, and Lindsay has pointed out that it doesn't conclude with a final decision until the end of May, which will be into the new Senedd term. I don't think there's any doubt that people's voices will be heard, because it's not just the petition we have here, but I'm aware that there is a significant local conversation about the petition as well, and it will go through a full health board process, including public meetings and considerations. I think that, in raising the issue, the petitioners have managed to ensure that there is wider attention on it. They also indicate that they themselves are preparing a response to the consultation, and I think it is one of those things that, in having highlighted it to the main committee here, to the Cabinet Secretary and the health board, who will be corresponding with and will receive their consultation response, I don't think it is a rubber stamp. It's not this committee rubber-stamping it; it's whether this committee has a role in that process.

Just as in the previous issue, about whether a specific health service should be sited in a specific location, this is another one of those where this committee isn't informed properly about what the circumstances are, about the balance in full-time and locum staff, about what it would mean to keep this practice going as it is, in terms of the quality of care and the cost of care and what the alternatives are. That, I think, it's properly a matter for local people and their representatives, and I don't think that's a matter for this committee. There are councillors, there are MPs, and there will be newly minted MSs near the start of May, who no doubt will be receiving this during the election campaign and immediately afterwards. And I think this is a matter for local decision making, for elected representatives and the health board. So, my view is we should thank the petitioners, recognise the significant increased attention the petition has brought and close the petition.

Well, we've got two different views here. Anybody else like to come in? No. I think, myself, that there's no harm in writing—. The petitioners would like the committee to seek clarification regarding timing, examine whether consultation meets required standards of fairness, assess whether estate and workforce alternatives have been properly explored, consider whether independent review is warranted. I think, by writing to the health board with these questions, it keeps that pressure up and the awareness of those concerns locally. But then I also agree that we should close this petition now and then it could be continued further after they've had the response following. So, there we are; we've got a compromise going forward.

The art of the compromise—that's how life works.

So, is that agreed? We'll write to the health board with those further questions and then close the petition.

Item 2.6, P-06-1560, 'Reinstate single sex toilet provision in educational settings'. And it reads:

'By law all schools are legally required to provide separate toilet facilities for boys and girls. However this hasn’t been followed with many schools changing facilities to communal mixed sex spaces. After the recent Supreme Court clarification that sex is biological these single sex spaces need to be reinstated & the law upheld.'

This was submitted by Hayley Rowley with 459 signatures. Could I invite Rhys to discuss the petition and any actions you wish the committee to take?

Thank you very much, Cadeirydd. The Cabinet Secretary confirmed that she is aware of the report by Merched Cymru. She clarified the legal position that schools are legally required to provide separate single-sex toilets for children aged eight years and over. She also clarified that this was a matter for local authorities and governors to ensure that the law is complied with. Now, the Supreme Court's judgment has been raised on a number of occasions in the Senedd. I think it's been raised quite often with the business statement. The Trefnydd has confirmed that the Welsh Government has been working closely with the Equality and Human Rights Commission with regard to their code of practice, which has yet to be published. But the Trefnydd has confirmed that the Welsh Government will follow the code of practice when published. National trans guidance is also expected soon. 

Now, we've had some further comments from Merched Cymru. I think we can forward those on to the Cabinet Secretary for her information, but I don't think there is anything further that this committee can do other than to thank them for raising this issue, pass on the further comments to the Cabinet Secretary, and to close the petition.

Okay. Thank you, Rhys, that was very thorough and well covered. I agree. Anybody else like to speak on this matter? Okay, we can forward the comments to the Cabinet Secretary and then close the petition. Thank you.

Item 2.7 is petition P-06-1570, ‘Introduce Martha’s Law in Wales to guarantee patients’ and families’ right to a second opinion’, and it reads:

‘We call on the Welsh Government to introduce Martha’s Law in Wales, giving patients and families a clear legal right to request a second medical opinion when concerns about safety are ignored. Preventable deaths, like that of Martha Mills, show the urgent need for consistent escalation processes. Families in Wales deserve the same protections as in England, so no parent or relative is dismissed when a life is at risk.’

This was submitted by Dylan Mark Owen, with 292 signatures. Could I invite Joel to discuss the petition and any actions you wish the committee to take?

Thank you, Chair. I'd just like to start by thanking the petitioner, if I can, for raising such an important petition. Unfortunately, I well remember Martha Mills's passing. It was about 2021. She was only 13 at the time. I know her family campaigned quite hard to try and make sure that the situation doesn't happen again, for all families, for people, really. And I know in England they've adopted Martha's law, but if I understand correctly, Chair, I know that in Wales we're looking to bring something in later this year that, although it’s not called Martha's law, is similar—‘Call4Concern’, I think it's called, which addresses many of the issues that Martha's law addresses as well in terms of a right to escalation if there’s a deterioration, and routes then to bypass the hierarchy of hospitals as well. And I was just wondering, maybe—. I think, given that, I don't know that there's much more we could do as a committee, I'm afraid. I know we have been in contact with the petitioner to raise that, and I don't think we've received any further correspondence from them. So, it might be the case that we look to thank the petitioner again for raising such an important petition, and also raising what's going on in Wales as well, I think, and then we look to close the petition, Chair.

Okay. Thank you, Joel. Anybody else like to come in? Yes, Vaughan. 

I'm going to say something, because Members may or may not have noticed the death of a young woman, Bethan James, who was a constituent of mine. I've met her parents, Jane and Steve James. They had to fight for a coroner's inquest, and there was criticism of both the transfer between the Welsh ambulance service and Cardiff and Vale health board, and they've been asking for something, and they were asking if we would call it ‘Bethan's rule’ in Wales, after their daughter, and it's about the implementation of the full ‘Call4Concern’ process. Because Bethan died of sepsis, and there wasn't an understanding. She had a national early warning score of eight, which should have led to immediate intervention, but it didn't happen during the journey with the Welsh Ambulance Services University NHS Trust, and it didn't happen on arrival.

So, there is something about the current protocols that exist and how they're properly dealt with. And there are two issues here. One is about sepsis, improvement for treatment, and the other is more generally the point around escalation and how consistently it's done. So, I agree that the petition should be closed, but I think it's one of those things that, whether this committee wanted to mention it, or to write to the health committee to ask if they want to look at this again in the new term, once the roll-out has taken place, to understand how consistently it's being done, and not just from health boards, but also from Llais and others as well. Because otherwise families fight very hard and often feel that the system is against them, even when there are well-meaning people on the health board or the Welsh ambulance service side, and in particular when somebody loses their life as well. So, I think, it is one of those things where having the complaints and having the escalation process should be about trying to understand what might otherwise go wrong and can't be put back right. And I think it's one of those where we close the petition, but in the legacy report we indicate that it might be something, in the future—. And we could write to the health committee. I think it is something that the health committee, in whatever form that is, would be best placed to look at it, once this has been rolled out, and to make sure that there is a check on what has been the experience, and does that then mean there is a better and more consistent experience across our service, and what that means for patients and their families.

Okay. Thank you, Vaughan. I would like to thank the petitioner for raising this important issue. In Wales, we are rolling out Call 4 Concern, so it's not Martha's rule, but Call 4 Concern. Vaughan highlighted it's about making sure there's an escalation process in place, and asked that we write to the health committee and highlight the petition to them. And so, would you like it to be—? Vaughan, are you asking that it's in the legacy report of the health committee, rather than ours?

Yes. I think we should write to them to ask them to consider whether they want to have this as an issue in their legacy report for a future committee.

In their legacy report.

I think, again, it would be pretty unusual if a future health committee did not want to look at the roll-out of a new policy like this and what had happened. But I think it is worth us making sure that we directly put that point to them.

Okay. So, they need to monitor the Call 4 Concern, to just monitor how it's being rolled out, and that it's being rolled out correctly. You say it's about ensuring that complaints and escalation are followed up. Okay. Thank you. 

Can I just ask, Vaughan, is the sort of thing you've got in mind like a 12-month review kind of process?

Yes. Once it's supposed to have been rolled out, after 12 months, what has been the experience? What does improvement actually look like? And the voice of Llais and their own engagement in supporting families as well. I think that would be important and genuinely useful about what are we getting right and what do we still need to look at in that sort of early stage of implementation. If you review it in three years' time, you might miss some of the early learning. I think it would be genuinely useful to make sure people understand that the process is there, because many people won't know it's there, even after it's introduced.

Good idea. So, we need to promote it as well. Thank you. We will try and capture all that in a letter to the health committee. Thank you.

Okay, moving on to 2.8, petition P-06-1582, 'Restore a fair funding route so Welsh students aren’t shut out from MT/dance degrees in England'. And the petition reads,

'Welsh students applying for specialist musical theatre and dance degrees in England now face new barriers because the way funding and course designation works in practice has changed. Many courses no longer meet Student Finance Wales conditions, disadvantaging Welsh applicants compared with students elsewhere in the UK. This shift has created uncertainty and made planning applications far more difficult.'

And this was submitted by Jenny Capitao. Can I congratulate her on the amount of signatures she's been able to collect in a short amount of time? Since the report was published, the signatures have increased to 10,582, which has taken it over the threshold for a debate normally in the Chamber. I know time is very restricted now—we haven't got long left. Could I invite Vaughan to just discuss the petition and any actions you wish the committee to take? 

Yes, thank you. It's a petition that has garnered significant attention in a short period of time. So, if we were three months earlier, we'd be recommending it for a debate, but that time is unlikely to be available to us in the last sitting month that we have ahead of us. I think it's about how to make sure the issue is still alive and available for the Senedd and wider public engagement and scrutiny. I think that is in the next term. In the four weeks or so we have left, I don't think this would otherwise gain the attention that it would merit. Because of the shortened time, there hasn't been time to get a response from the Minister for Further and Higher Education either. Of course, it's open to Members to highlight it in the remaining proceedings that we have in both questions and/or committee proceedings.

My own view about the best way to take this matter forward is that I think this should be something that we mention in our own legacy report, and we should point out that there wasn't time to put this into a debate before the Senedd ended and we could recommend to a future petitions committee, assuming the Senedd decides to have one, that this should be a matter that it considers and is debated. That would also mean that a new intake, in a new Senedd term, would have this at the start of their term, when it's still recent and germane. And because the culture committee have already considered it, I would expect that the culture committee will mention this in their own legacy report. But I think this committee could write to the culture committee to note that it's gone through the 10,000 threshold, and again ask them if, in their own legacy report, they would consider returning to this issue early in the new Senedd term. Because I think there are a number of points to do the petition justice. You'd need to look at the current rules, how they're dealt with and what changing them would look like, and what it means for the current cohort of students looking to start this autumn, but also whether you can have a sustainable answer for future years as well. And I think that is better left to a future Senedd.

So, I think we could close the petition, but make clear that it will be mentioned in our legacy report and write to the culture committee as well, so that they understand why we said that and ask them if they will consider having this matter raised as well. And I would expect that a future petitions committee would want to return to this, and the fact that, were it not for timing, there would have been a Senedd debate on the matter.

Yes, okay. Would anybody else like to come in on this?

Could I just add, Chair, that I was at a conference, as you may know, on the weekend, at the Celtic Manor and the conference centre associated, and on the Saturday morning, there was a dance festival? Speaking as a tad-cu of three young granddaughters who partake in these sorts of activities, there were literally hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of young people dancing and keeping fit, of course, but also enjoying themselves, which is very important for young people. And the whole atmosphere was just electric. Of course, all of these young people need people to train them, and my guess is that these dance teachers and these musical theatre producers and all of those, we need to be pushing these through universities. I would ideally like to see these courses available here in Wales, of course.

I was waiting for that, Lindsay.

You have to. I can't say that I'm a dancer myself—I'm definitely not a dancer myself—but this is the future. And if you had witnessed what I saw on Saturday, it was absolutely wonderful. And children of very young ages as well, and the enjoyment and the pleasure that they had, it's certainly a profession that Wales has to nurture. It is definitely one for the future.

Musical theatre, singing, Wales, you know—

Why not?

—that's what we're famous for. So, it's being proposed that it should really be looked at in the next Senedd term—

Yes, please.

—and that we include it in our legacy—. Yes, Gareth, would you like to come in?

I was just going to say that in order for us to be able to consider it in the next Senedd, it would be easier to keep it open rather than closing it, because then we would retain—. We could request a debate early in the next term, whereas if we close it, we forfeit the right to request a debate.

Yes.

Fine. I'm—[Inaudible.]

Yes. Especially with coming so close to the end of term and so many signatures gathered so quickly. Okay. Are we happy with that? We'll keep it open. We'll include it in our legacy report, saying it's open, and hope that the fresh new Senedd will debate it early on, and then also write to the culture committee and, hopefully, they will include it in their report as well, and we could ask them if they could. And we thank the petitioner, and well done for gathering all those signatures, and good luck to her daughter as well. Thank you.

Moving on now to agenda item 3, which is updates to previous petitions, that brings us to 3.1, petition P-06-1232, 'Stop the proliferation of intensive poultry units (IPUs) by legislating and introduce a moratorium until this can be achieved'. This was submitted by Gill Marshall, with 5,920 signatures. Again, a lot of signatures. Could I invite Lindsay to discuss the petition, please?

Thank you, Chair. This is certainly quite contentious. It's been back-and-forth a number of times at the Senedd now, and it's quite clear that Powys County Council have a duty to act, as well as Governments. I don't quite know what the answer is. What I do know is that the demand for chicken at the moment certainly outstrips supply here in Wales. I understand that we have chicken on plates in Wales from places as far away as Vietnam and Brazil, and that can't be right. In some of the countries where some of these chickens are being exported from, the food hygiene standards, I would suggest, are probably not as high as they are here in Wales and the rest of Britain, and that alarms me. So, I think we do need as a country to, I'm afraid, breed more chickens for those people who eat a lot of chicken, and I happen to be one of them, I'm afraid.

Nevertheless, looking at the problem we have here, I would suggest that option 1 might be the better option and that we request an update from the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs on whether there will be this updated technical advice note and perhaps keep the petition open pending a response on that, because this is something that is not going to go away. It's definitely going to be with the next Senedd as well, and so for that reason, I would suggest we adopt option 1. That's the one I favour, please. 

Would anybody else like to come in on this one? Yes, Vaughan. 

I do agree that we should write again, because it's been such a long-running issue without reaching an end point, and the water summits that are taking place are about understanding the impact on water quality and that isn't just about issues about agricultural activity, as there's a whole range of other issues that affect water quality as well. But I'm sure all of us are concerned about the quality and the health of our river networks in Wales, and understanding the variety of things that contribute to that.

So, I think it is worth asking about that and pointing out that this is part of a wider consideration, and then I think future committees plural in the next Senedd term will need to consider what they're doing. Because there was a Green Paper on future water quality and whatever happens with the 11 planning decisions, there's a broader point about the balance between the impact of agriculture, the fact that we all want food that is produced locally to high animal welfare standards, and what we are then prepared to do to make sure that we also maintain and protect the health of our environment around us, including water courses as well. So, this isn't an easy area, because, as we've seen, we found it quite difficult to reach agreement in the Senedd in this term, but I do think the next Senedd is going to need to come up with this. But I think we should ask, as Lindsay suggested, for the current Government to set out its approach, whether there is going to be a technical advice note before the end of this term, and then I'm sure it will run on into the next term, regardless of whether we choose to keep the petition open or close it. 

Okay, thank you, both. I agree with you. So, if we can write to the DFM on whether there will be an updated technical advice note on agricultural development—. We'll request an update, actually, from the DFM, because there should be one, basically. There should be an update from the DFM and an updated technical advice note. There's such an issue, isn't there, with our water quality. As chair of the cross-party group on animal welfare, actually, welfare in these establishments in this country even is a concern, never mind importing from other countries. But— 

I do think as well, Chair, that Natural Resources Wales must be given—. Well, they do have the power to just simply get on with their job, but they have an onerous task, because, of course, all of this waste has to go somewhere and any applicant who is applying for these very large—I'm not quite sure if they're called chicken farms, if I'm being honest. But whatever they're called, 10.8 million chickens is a lot of chickens and will produce a lot of waste. They have a duty as well to ensure that that waste is disposed of correctly. I understand that money can, indeed, be made from that.

We had a huge barn in a rural area that I represented as a councillor, and when we had heavy snow one year, the roof collapsed on all the chicks. It was horrendous, and I didn't realise how many thousands of chicks were in there. It had to be rebuilt. It was rebuilt under better conditions, but the impact on the local water and the streams and the rivers was very poor. So, it's a huge issue, and I'm sure it will continue into the next Senedd to be raised. So, if we can write to the Deputy First Minister seeking clarification on when the technical advice note will be delivered, and an update on it, that would be useful. And you want to keep the petition open, did you say?

I think that's essential. I cannot imagine the sight. I have stood in a barn of 20,000 chickens myself when the local farmer near where I live was seeking permission to extend his farm. But at least those chickens were free-range; they were going in and out of the barn quite at will. But that was a big enough building. So, the structure of these buildings would be of extreme concern to me in a rural location, as well, of course, as the welfare. I know we're breeding the chickens to eat, but I'm totally opposed to some of the things that I have seen on television as well. It's a huge problem, and I don't know what the answer is, but I'm sure the powers that be will do their best to resolve this.

Okay. Thank you. We'll keep it open for now.

Item 3.2, petition P-06-1479, 'Stop the detention of learning disabled and autistic children, young people and adults in hospitals'. This was submitted by Stolen Lives, with 1,754 signatures. Could I invite Rhys to discuss the petition and any actions you wish to take today?

Thank you very much, Cadeirydd. This is another petition that has been open for quite some time, and it's obviously a real concern still. Just earlier on today, somebody came into my office—it was off the street—on this very topic, which is incredible, thinking I was going to talk about it later on today. This is the third time we've considered it, and our friend, Hefin David, led a Member's debate on this very issue. Now, a lot has happened, but the Minister's response outlines that there's still much to be done, and the petitioner, quite rightly, is concerned about the lack of detail and the lack of urgency, or the perception of a lack of urgency. I think, because of so many ongoing concerns, I would favour that we keep this petition open so that a successor committee can keep on top of this in the next Senedd.

Okay. Any other comments? So, going forward, we will keep the petition open. Thank you.

Item 3.3, petition P-06-1521, 'Give park home residents in Wales the right to a water meter'. I need to declare an interest here because Sam Swash, the petitioner, is an employee of mine. He works part-time for me. It has 447 signatures. Could I bring Joel in to discuss the petition, please?

Thank you, Chair. I've been thinking a bit about this. I well remember when I last came to committee, and the issues being raised are quite worrying, really, for park home residents, I think, especially in terms of the leakages not being fixed in time and then still being charged quite astronomical rates, really. I was just wondering, if the committee is minded, if this is something that could be kept open as well for the next committee, and maybe with a bit of a proviso to say that we instruct the committee either to write to the Minister responsible for water reform, or maybe scrutinise the Minister for water reform, or write to the Minister directly to ask what immediate regulatory action or measures can be taken.

I'm also conscious, Chair, that there's a Green Paper currently, a consultation, about water regulation, and maybe this is something also to highlight to the petitioner as well, though I suspect that they probably already know that, if I'm honest, and they might have already taken advantage of that opportunity. 

So, Joel suggested that we write to the Minister responsible for this area to highlight the petition and request that, going forward, as part of the Green Paper consultation as well, individuals should have their own water meters on sites such as this, cabin sites. I believe that there is still a further water leak as well. It wasn't addressed last time, the initial water leak, until, I believe, the council threatened to withhold the licence from the operator and then work took place. So, is the committee minded for that to happen? Is that okay? Okay. There we go. We'll keep it open. 

Item 3.4, P-06-1538, 'Protect full stroke services at Bronglais Hospital; prevent downgrade to Treat and Transfer'. This was submitted by Bryony Davies, with 17,881 signatures in total. Could I invite Vaughan to discuss the petition?

Yes. Thank you. We've considered this petition a number of times and it, of course, had a Senedd debate in October last year. At our last meeting, the committee, by majority, agreed to write to the health board and we've received a response back from the health board. The board met just under two weeks ago and agreed to move to consolidate four stroke units into one at Glangwili in Carmarthen, with a treat and transfer service at Bronglais. That doesn't mean that there's no stroke provision at Bronglais, but it means that people could be stabilised there and then transferred for further treatment in Glangwili. 

Now, I think that we are, in honesty, at a real point of impasse. The board has undertaken a consultation, and there are people who are opposed to the change in services. We've considered that on several occasions and had a debate in the Chamber, but the board has made the decision now as well. Actually, if that decision is going to be overturned, then there may be legal processes that people will want to undertake. I tend to find that, often, those processes are expensive—someone has to fund them—and don't always deliver the outcome that petitioners and campaigners want. And I think there's just a basic disagreement, in honesty, about both the model and whether there is a need to make a decision or whether there's a belief that, actually, there will be a better service in this way. My own experience is that any kind of reorganisation is difficult. People will have different views on this in the run-up to May and beyond, but I don't think that there is an extra role for this committee to play. 

We could highlight the further comments. I'm robustly confident that the petitioners have written to the health board already. If we want to make sure that people are specifically aware of that, we could do so, and still close the petition, because I am also robustly confident that this will continue to be a local issue as well as part of wider conversations around health service reorganisation. Everyone is in favour of a better service and everyone says that they will travel to get better care, but when it comes to local decisions about that, I think that people are genuinely fearful about whether the change to their services will really mean that they'll be travelling further for better care, and that is going to be the nub of health service reform, not just on this one issue but on a whole range of issues that, again, whoever has the privilege of serving in the Government next term will have to make choices about.

Okay. Thank you, Vaughan. Does anybody else want to come in? Lindsay.

If I could, Chair. I will be in Aberystwyth on 13 March, and I'm actually going to pop along to the meeting about the issues at Bronglais in particular. Can I say that we all are aware that stroke victims need to be treated very quickly? I cite the case of my own sister, as I have done in the Senedd Chamber. When they put her in the ambulance, the ambulance driver told me, 'I should take her to the Grange hospital, but I will be driving her to the Heath hospital; please do not follow us as fast as I am driving, because I will have to drive very quickly to save your sister's life. If I take her to the Grange, she probably won't survive.' He took her to the Heath hospital, where I believe you shouldn't, and she survived. Her survival has been difficult—I'll just leave it at that—and is still very difficult. But what I do know is that unless my sister had received that treatment very quickly indeed, she wouldn't be with us, and for that reason—. I know this will be running and running, and will be going to the next Senedd. I just think, perhaps, as a glimmer of hope, we offer option 1 to the petitioners, because I feel that's what I would want, having experienced such a traumatic moment and episode in our family's lives.

Can I just say, Chair—?

Yes.

I think Lindsay's example highlights exactly the difficulty of the issue. If you go to a local hospital that doesn't have the provision you need—. You can take longer to get to somewhere, but it could actually be the right care. If you go to the wrong place, but it's nearer to where you are, it doesn't mean you'll get better outcomes. You need not just the right equipment; you need the right staff and you need the right service for that to happen. And I understand why people want that service to be available as locally as possible, but there is a reality of how many of those services you can maintain across the country and where they will be, and wherever they are, some people travel further to get them. But, actually, you're almost always better off going to the right place for your care, even if it takes a bit longer to get there, rather than having something done locally that doesn't actually provide the right care.

I think the example about the Grange and the Heath is exactly that. Where is the right place, not the nearest place? Where is the right place to go for the treatment to make sure someone has the best chance of recovery? And if you don't go to the right place, then you are likely to have more avoidable mortality and more avoidable disability, and that's at the heart of every difficult service change decision that has to be made.

I actually think, as a country, we need to make more choices, not fewer. We are building up a problem in the way our services are run, where we'll make it harder to deliver the right care for people, including when that hospital is no longer the right place for them and they need to move somewhere else. I think this is a good example of how all the emotion—understandable as it is—in the choice, could actually lead to holding up making the right choice. I do think that we're getting into something that is absolutely something that, if it's going to take place in a committee here, should be in the health committee.

And this is a choice where—. We appoint people to health boards to make these choices. And when we had the parliamentary review, and it was agreed on a cross-party basis at the start of the 2016 term, it was on the basis that we all understood we needed to find a way to make changes and that some services would need to go into more specialist care, but we needed to move more of that non-specialist care into a wider range of services. Everyone, in theory, agreed to that, and it's when it comes to practical challenges that it gets much more difficult.

So, again, whoever the next Cabinet Secretary or Cabinet Minister for health is, regardless of what the First Minister chooses the title to be, they will have choices to make, and they've got to be able to choose, and they've got to be able to then make sure those services are implemented. This committee, I think, has reached the end of where it can usefully add to the debate on this issue, but it won't stop, even if we want it to, and that is because people desperately care about the service they receive, where it is and the quality of it. But I don't think keeping the petition open will add more quality to that debate, because whether you live near Bronglais or Glangwili, or in Pembrokeshire or anywhere in north Wales, mid Wales or south Wales, this debate will carry on going, because we still haven't reached a point where we can make choices to deliver a better service in the time frame that all of you want it to be delivered in. And we're part of the answer and part of the problem, frankly. I can say that as I'm not standing again, but it's absolutely true.

I hear what's being said. Time is of the essence for stroke victims. I remember being asked to help a neighbour, and the paramedic that came, that's what he tested for, first of all, because he knew if it was a potential stroke, he had to get that person to hospital as soon as possible.

We have debated this; it was a really good debate. So, I am minded to close the petition, but I think it's important to highlight the petitioner's further comments with the board, and the Cabinet Secretary, and the health committee, for information, and I'd like to recognise the petitioner's persistent campaigning on this issue. I don't think this is going to be the end of it either. Okay? Thank you, everyone.

Item 3.5, 'P-06-1546 Welsh Government should fund the Llanbedr relief road!' This was submitted by Karl Ciz, with 1,271 signatures. Could I invite Lindsay to discuss the petition and any actions you wish the committee to take?

Thank you, Chair. Certainly, if I was living in Llanbedr, I'd want, obviously, this petition to run and run. And I notice that the proposal has been scrapped in the past, and possibly replaced with a bypass that would perhaps only travel at 40 mph. I'm sure that people travelling through Llanbedr would love to travel at 40 mph, as opposed to bumper to bumper when they're going through the towns, in particular. So, for that reason, I think that, again, I would urge the committee, perhaps, to keep this petition open, because, again, I think by simply closing petitions and saying, 'Oh, it's up to the next Senedd', I think people lose heart. They say, 'Well, we've bothered to go out and knock doors and collect signatures, or staff a stall in the town centres or village centres', but I think they lose heart when they perhaps feel that the Senedd, their Senedd, is not actually listening to them. And for that reason, I would urge, so that the good people—the 1,271 people, although 852 were from Wales only I notice—. But, again, maybe visitors to the town have signed the petition because they've suffered in the traffic nightmare. I think some of our towns in the rural locations definitely need these bypasses, in order to give people better air quality and a better way of life, without putting up with all of the traffic. So, I would urge that we keep this petition open, please.

Would anybody else like to speak?

Yes, I don't agree with you. I think we've had this debate several times before about when does a petition reach the end of its life in this committee. And I think it doesn't mean that people stop caring, and it doesn't even mean that the Senedd has stopped listening. And I don't think people are losing heart, because there is a local government involvement in this, there's also a Welsh Government involvement, and there is a regular policy committee as well. 

And this one issue is tied up in a broader issue—as you'll remember, a former junior Minister for transport and his choice on roads policy. I think the issue here was that the way that it was done provoked a challenge and a reaction. And, actually, when it comes to the potential for a bypass in this particular location, some of that is also tied up with what might happen at the airfield and whether that's part of the growing space industry in Wales, because there is real potential around the Cardigan bay coastline. All those things matter when the case is made for a new road, and how it's done, and whether people believe they're being spoken with or spoken to. 

I don't think the petition takes that on, and otherwise I think we'll get into the point where we'll never close petitions. I think this is the third time we've had this petition. I don't think it stops the issue being relevant if you live in or near Llanbedr—far from it. And it doesn't really matter whether the Member for Llanelli is a different person in the future, but, actually, what I do think matters is the choices that are made, and the fact that elected representatives are interested and engaged in this. I don't think this issue will go away, because, as I said, I think Llanbedr airfield is an important factor in what happens with any choice around the bypass. But I think we've done all we could and should do in the Petitions Committee, and it's time to thank the petitioner, to close the petition and to look to a new Senedd to make other choices.

Thank you, Vaughan. Rhys. 

Thank you, Cadeirydd. I have every sympathy with this petition, as someone who's driven down that road on a number of occasions. I realise there is no hard-and-fast rule, firm rule, about when we should keep a petition open, but some of you will remember that earlier on this afternoon I said that we should keep the ALN petition open, and there was disagreement with me on that one. So, I think it would be very illogical that we've closed that petition, and others since then, and kept this one open. I think, with that ALN petition, we started some sort of precedent here today, and I couldn't give a real, strong reason why we've kept this one open and then closed previous ones, such as the Bronglais one and the ALN petition. So, I would agree with Vaughan on this one.

Okay. I agree with you as well. It's about choices of funding as well, isn't it? So, now that funding that might have gone into certain grants, such as active travel, which was increased threefold, is now being given to the corporate joint committees for choices on their regional transport plan and high-priority schemes, it's up to them to decide. It's a local network road. That significant funding now will provide some flexibility for some important road schemes to possibly go ahead now.

A choice for regions to make, not for Ministers and for people here.

A choice for regions to make, yes, I agree. We can't keep them all open. It's our duty now, as we come to the end of the sixth Senedd, to close petitions as well. So, I agree we should close this going forward. I thank the local campaigners. I'm sure they will continue to campaign. I think that's what they need to do, and make sure that the north Wales corporate joint committee have it high on their agenda going forward.

Moving on to 3.6, P-06-1549, 'Urgent Support for Hirwaun, Wales, Homeowners Affected by Reinforced Autoclaved Aerated Concrete (RAAC)'. That's that RAAC concrete that gets talked about so often. It's in some school buildings in England as well. This was submitted by Wilson Chowdhry with 273 signatures. Could I invite Rhys to discuss the petition and any actions you wish to take?

Thank you very much, Cadeirydd. I anticipate this is one we can all agree to close because it was kept open for the Cabinet Secretary to confirm that Hirwaun was the only area, as far as the Welsh Government are aware, to be affected by RAAC. That has been confirmed, and there's been some positive correspondence between Mr Chowdhry, the petitioner, and the Cabinet Secretary. The Cabinet Secretary has raised this issue with the housing Minister at Westminster. We haven't received any further responses from the petitioner. I think this is one where we can thank the petitioner and close. Diolch.

Okay. Thank you. Are we all in agreement? Very good. We'll close the petition. Thank you.

That leads us, then, on to agenda item 4, which are papers to note. Are committee happy to note the papers? I don't see any dissension. Thank you very much.

That brings us on to agenda item 5, which concludes the public business now. I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17.42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting. Are Members content? Okay. Thank you.