Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru

I won't run through all of them, but I hold lots of positions in sport organisations.

I want to talk about the Welsh language—. Sorry, welcome, Minister. 

Diolch yn fawr. Thank you.

I'd like to talk about the Welsh language survey, and you talked a little bit with the first question about the fact that you're going to commission a consultation. There seems to be, in the report, a little bit of uncertainty around whether the figures in the survey are actually correct. With that in mind, you've kind of got to judge apples and apples. How will you know if the money you're spending is actually making a difference and pushing the Welsh language forward as you would like it to?

Thank you.

You're right, there's a lot of data pertaining to the Welsh language in the system at the moment, and we have, as did the previous Government, I think, the census figures as the baseline against which we measure our progress for the million by 2050. But there are also other data in the system, which offer a useful snapshot of some of the figures that we have at our disposal as well.

I think they all add to a clearer understanding, but it is interesting that people note their ability to speak Welsh more readily and happily in some surveys compared to others. We are doing some work looking at what may be behind those decisions and that we have security then in the numbers that we can use and share, and have as complete a picture as possible. What will be also useful, I think, is that when people are recording their level of Welsh ability—. The questions that we ask them now are not necessarily as targeted as would be helpful. You are asked, 'Are you fluent, are you a beginner, or do you not speak Welsh?' That's probably not enough levels of refinement to capture people's skills and confidence in using Welsh.

Our starting point always is use the Welsh you have; whatever the scenario you're in, use what you've got, everybody can have access to this journey. That's the point and purpose of the code that we will also introduce, which will give everybody a greater capacity to record against an international template of language ability. We then, by virtue of that process, will have, as a country, a much better understanding of where we actually sit, and that will feed into refining our strategy.

Just a quick follow-on from that. So, as I understand it, you're going to get all this information together and then you will publish a baseline, and then that is basically what you can judge from as we move forward, so that we can come back in two years' time and say, 'This is where we were at the start, this is where we are now'. 

We will still continue to use, I think, the census information as the baseline; that is what has fed the strategy so far. It's enriching that and allowing us to interrogate that data more thoughtfully—more intelligently, I suppose—that the code will offer us. I don't know if Jeremy would like to add something to that.

Yes. Diolch. It's on the same theme as Steven was saying about understanding the data. I think we're doing better than all the data says, to be honest. That's my feeling—

I hope you're right.

Particularly around the census. What influence do we have on what goes on the census, because it's not devolved? But we've got here, 'Can you understand, speak, read or write Welsh?' And you've just got, 'I can understand it, I can speak it, I can read it, I can write it or I can do none of the above.'

—but I would be ticking, probably, 'None of the above.' So, the question is, what influence do we have over the census to change—? There's not a lot of space on there. And then secondly, I think we're doing better, and my plea is to keep up with the carrot stuff and less of the stick. We're always nervous when we hear about legislating a language. We don't want to feel like it's forced on people, we want to feel like people come to it naturally. There are such good Welsh learning websites; they're brilliant. So, it's there, but I'd worry about legislating. I'd just use the carrot. But a question about the census, please.

Just a quick one on the commission piece. It mentions a little bit about legal protections, which makes me very nervous, because I'm all for the carrot side of it and encouraging people to speak Welsh and that side, but when we're talking legal protections for areas with a high concentration of Welsh speakers, do you see that there's—? I think you have to be careful, moving forward, there, because there's a potential that you might discriminate against non-Welsh speakers in those high-concentration areas when you're rolling this out, especially when you put a legal basis behind it.

Sorry, I just think, on that one, when we're talking about legal powers, we've got to be extremely careful, because I'm all for encouraging people to speak Welsh, to give them the opportunity to speak Welsh, but there will be an element behind it who could be discriminated against, because maybe they decide, 'I'm not going to do that,' or, because legal powers come in, they actually take against the language, which, I understand, is not what you're intending, but we've just got to be very careful when you use more of the stick and less of the carrot.

I think in this particular context of dynodi—I can't remember what dynodi is in—

Designation.

—designation, diolch yn fawr—of designating areas where use of Welsh is very high, it is what comes from such a designation that protects the language in its communities and develops it there. That may affect things like planning, for example, but that's what we're looking at. These are communities with—. Some of the solutions to support and develop Welsh in those communities will be different from some areas of Wales, but, in so doing, we will do so, obviously, carefully, using the best data available. But we are determined to act appropriately in all communities in Wales to make sure that Welsh survives, thrives and develops in all of them, and that people have access to Welsh and are able to use it in their communities everywhere.

Thank you. Nick.

Economic development in these communities of a high density of Welsh speakers is obviously critical to keep those members of the communities there, and I think there were parts of the Arfor programme that were considered successful. So, talking about how we are working across Government, it's thinking about how or what the Welsh Government is going to do to embed Cymraeg in our economic policy, going forward, the positive elements of Arfor, perhaps, and how they might be included in the national development agency. Diolch.

Diolch yn fawr for that one. I think Jeremy said earlier on that Arfor is being looked at, but you're quite right to point out that one of the things that will make it possible for Welsh to thrive in some of these communities is that there are jobs, there are economic opportunities and the people who wish to stay in their communities can do so because they are economically vibrant places. To go back to the cross-Government element of the work around Cymraeg, I know that that is a factor in how we're looking more widely at economic development as well.

Diolch. Paul.

Yes. I believe languages are much easier to learn the younger you start learning them. And those of you who had the advantage, like my daughter, of starting off at Ti a Fi, going through Mudiad Meithrin before starting in school, it's hugely advantageous over people like me who's tried to learn a little bit in school, followed by trying to learn a little bit as an adult. It makes a huge difference. What support are you going to give to Ti a Fi, Mudiad Meithrin and the Urdd to get children at a young age to start using Welsh as their language of choice, so that they don't know enough words in English for it to become complicated? [Laughter.] Sometimes, when you know a lot of words in English, it becomes much more difficult to say what you want to say in Welsh. I did ask earlier in a private discussion, as I don't know what the Welsh word for 'ameliorate' is, for example. That's a word I use not infrequently in debates.

Oh, I haven't spotted 'ameliorate' in the debate so far. I'm going to look out for that now. It would probably be 'gwella'.

But I take the point that, obviously, the focus on early years is crucial. I think the work of Mudiad Meithrin, when you consider that 11,000 children across Wales go to a cylch meithrin—396 of the cylchoedd meithrin—and a majority of those from homes that are not Welsh-speaking homes and 89 per cent of those then go on to Welsh-medium education, it's obviously a very effective model.

And I think the assurance I can give him is that, obviously, in the cross-Government work and the childcare offer, for example, Mudiad Meithrin's part in that is something that I and the Deputy First Minister have discussed about how we make sure that that capacity, that that opportunity is there as part of that policy area, as well as in education more broadly. And that is certainly a priority for us. So, I hope that gives you some assurance that we are looking very carefully at making sure that those early opportunities are there, because they are very effective.

But also, where needed, when children come late, for example, to Welsh-medium education, there are opportunities for the trochi scheme—and now I don't know what that is in English—the trochi scheme where learners—. [Interruption.] Late immersion is an opportunity at that end of the scale as well. So, we are tackling it from both directions, but I take your point about the early years.

And you didn't say anything about Ti a Fi, which is pre-Mudiad Meithrin.

Yes.

And I think you were talking about people living in Welsh-speaking households, people living in English-speaking households. Some people live in households where one parent speaks Welsh fluently, went all the way through the education system in Welsh, and the other speaks Welsh very poorly. I include myself in that latter group and my wife in the former group. And I think that what Mudiad Meithrin and Ti a Fi do is give an opportunity for the less competent parent, in the medium of Welsh, to be able to go on the journey.

Yes. Thank you. I think you're being unkind to yourself there, but I too live in just such a household, and Ti a Fi was a key factor for us. I don't have any details with me on Ti a Fi specifically, but that early years focus, that pre-school focus, as I said, is part of what will be important in growing confident Welsh speakers. But it's also a key part of how we look at the childcare offer.

The last question I've got is, again, how are we going to get the staff able to speak Welsh competently. And I've been in places—I won't name them—where it's nominally a Welsh-medium institution but, certainly, a lot of staff there use English for most of their communication.

I'm Tanni Grey-Thompson. I'm chair of Sport Wales.

Thank you very much. If I can go first, we very much welcome sport and culture being put at the heart of everything. Obviously, we think sport and physical activity in Wales are incredibly important, not just sport for sport's sake, but the impact of physical activity and everything that it brings. If I could just quickly go through, I'm just starting my second term as chair. As ever, it's been a very busy year for Sport Wales and the work that we do. So, for me, putting sport at the heart of community, it's about what else sport and physical activity can deliver. 

We very much welcome the Government talking about prevention. It's something that we believe in, and we've talked a lot at Sport Wales and beyond about how we keep people out of the health service, how we are able to encourage everyone to lead fit and healthy lives. Sport is an integral part of that. We can't do it on our own. It is actually linked to education, it's linked to healthy food, to employment, to housing. All those things have an impact on people's lives. But I think it's a really exciting time in terms of the collaborations. We already have a very strong link with Public Health Wales, a memorandum of understanding and the work we're doing together. But we see this, and I very much see it, as an opportunity where we can link with other arm's-length bodies, other organisations, to actually get individuals thinking about what they do differently. So, we've got our governing bodies, we've got partners. There are lots of people, if you talk about sport in Wales, with whom we work together. But if you're an individual who doesn't do any physical activity—what I was saying earlier, people know they have to be physically active but they don't necessarily know what to do—actually, I think this is an amazing opportunity for us to try and get to those individuals, to get them to think about what their personal responsibility is and about what they could do.

And it's about putting Wales on the world map. We've come off the back of the Commonwealth Games. I know that doesn't fit within our annual report, which we laid before the Senedd last week. But, as a very small nation on a world stage, we're doing incredibly well, which is brilliant. But I think we can use sport and physical activity to help raise the nation in other ways.

Diolch, Gadeirydd. Thank you, Chair. If I could add to that, I think that's a really critical question, certainly for the committee as well. I have to say, as an organisation, we're really encouraged by the language used in the call for evidence from the new Welsh Government in their documentation. Committing to Wales being a powerhouse is quite a significant statement. Sport and physical activity to be an essential part of Welsh life is another huge statement.

If I could, whilst we're still preparing our organisational response to that call for evidence, I think, together with the sector, I'd volunteer that a high-level initial narrative in response to that is that sport is a national asset, but it has untapped potential. It hasn't been given the opportunity to show everything that it can do as a sector for the nation. And to be able to do that, a mindset change is necessary not just within Government, but within the public consciousness as well. It's not just sport, it's sport and physical activity, and it's so much more than just a competition on a Saturday or a Wednesday night, or whenever. And I think if we can get that right together, across the nation, across sectors, across Government departments, across party lines, I think we can achieve that powerhouse status. There are examples globally where work has gone on in that vein. So, we do welcome the call for evidence.

Just building on some of the wider stuff that Tanni mentioned, we've got some good engagement with Welsh Government officials on that process as well. We will take an organisational response, obviously, but we also want to coalesce the sector in the response they can make. But they need to make that on their behalf. We shouldn't do it for them; they should do their own. And we'll encourage that and we'll bring groups together to make sure that happens. But, yes, we do welcome it and there's an opportunity here, I think, for us to grasp.

Good. Thank you. Diolch yn fawr. We're going to move on to funding—cyllid.

Sure. Thank you for coming today. There are lots of warm words going around about how important sport is and embedded in life in Wales and within Government strategy, but, obviously, in the programme for government, we didn't see that come through in terms of actual cash. So, at the moment—. Obviously, we've had a decade of cuts, and this committee had a report on that, didn't they, which said that, considering CPI and inflation, we're probably about £11 million short. So, what have you asked the Welsh Government for right now in terms of raw, hard cash? That's my first question—or the percentage that you've asked for.

Well, thank you for raising that. It is such an important part of our role. We do invest public funds in over 70 organisations across Wales. On top of that, we also invest in local community clubs separately. So, funding is clearly a really important part of our work. We haven't made a direct ask of Government, as such, but we have presented reports and policies and ideas that would need funding. But we haven't made a direct ask of Government, to date at least. But you're right, the previous committee did publish a report that showed the differences between public funding in Wales and in counterparts in Great Britain, let alone across the board. Sport Scotland have had a huge increase in their funding in the last 12 months, half of which is ongoing, is recurring. So, we haven't made a direct ask, but we currently invest around about £12.5 million in national governing bodies of sport in Wales, around about £3.5 million in other national partners, and then, significantly, about £11.2 million in sport partnerships, which covers the local authority base. So, on those figures, our policy asks were for an increase in the figures that we could then present.

Anything will do, any increase. You've not given a percentage, just, 'Any more cash, please'.

Well, there was a figure already of about £11 million down on inflationary pressures, et cetera. That doesn't include the cost-of-living increases that clubs and other organisations are facing as well. You heard a lot from the Minister, I think, last week about swimming pool closures. A lot of that is down to the energy crisis. It's not all down to that, but that affects all sports. So, our lottery funding we use to help the energy savings aspect for clubs with solar panels, et cetera. So, yes, an increase would be welcome, and if only because there is some pressure on the lottery at the moment in terms of the returns. We're not encouraged currently by the number being presented by DCMS in terms of the figure we're going to get next year, certainly not the increases that were promised. So, finances are pressured.

It's a double whammy, really, if you get reduced spending from there. 

It could be.

We're keeping a really close eye on the lottery, and I think we've taken a very conservative stance because there were big promises made. We've been very sensible with that, and we continue to keep looking at that. It's always easy to say that more money will fix everything, and if the Welsh Government were to offer us more money, I wouldn't turn it down, but it's how you spend the money that's in the system. So, I think, where we are at the moment, it's looking at money that's currently going into health, about how you can use that preventatively. There is so much data out there about prevention, keeping people out of the health service, keeping people fit and healthy longer, keeping older people in their own homes. By sport and physical activity, it's how money is used in a slightly different way. And, I think, with our funding model, it's not about 'new' anymore, but asking the governing bodies and partners to think differently about what they do. We're exploring, we're talking about systems thinking, using that with our partners to get them to think differently, to move away from quite a traditional way of looking at physical activity.

And then just some of the other things that we're able to support through Be Active or Crowdfunder—money going down to a much more local level, in terms of people who are working at the grass roots. Sport in this country survives and thrives with volunteers, and it's how you keep them engaged as well. So, I think, sometimes when we talk about sport, you're thinking about people playing sport. Actually, it's coaching, volunteers. There are lots of ways people can be active in quite a broad sense, rather than just, I think, the participants that we usually think about. 

I think, more positively, the capital increases that we've had over the last few years have been really welcomed by the sector. Tanni just mentioned the Crowdfunder scheme, where we didn't used to be able to invest in off-field activity, like changing rooms or things that weren't directly involved in participation, so to speak. But, with additional capital funding, we have been able to partner with Crowdfunder. So, we can work with organisations to develop that kind of facility. I think that's an untapped talent area as well. I think we can grow that. Capital is one thing, but revenue is where the pressures have definitely been felt.

Okay. Thank you.

Diolch. Mair. 

Steven. 

It's actually quite linked into what you were just saying. So, mine is all about priorities, because you are in a difficult funding environment. And, again, there are quite a lot of priorities for you on here. We've got daily activity, prevention, we've got grass roots, we've got community, we've got clubs, we've got facilities—the big ticket item—and you've got elite sport and legacy, and what's in the pipeline in order to get there. Each of those are massive funding items. You've mentioned Be Active, the daily activity, but how would you prioritise each of those items? And after that, for you, if you look back, what would success look like?

That's a good question with a long answer, I think. I'll try and keep it brief and then, Tanni, maybe you can add to it. Not all of those are mutually exclusive. I think some of those can happen at the same time. They're so interlinked, a lot of them, which shows the power of sport and physical activity generally.

I have to say that I commend partners. Earlier on, I talked about how much we invest in partners. That is one of our main roles. I have to commend the work they already do with that investment. They have changed their narrative and their focus over the years. It is no longer sport for sport's sake. They do understand the power of the product that they have. So, some of the difficulties have been overcome—the changing of attitude by partners who invest. I think to choose one amongst those is difficult.

I did mention the whole-school approach, because we are tasked with using the lens of the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015. If you're talking about young people, school is the environment where you've got a captive audience, and if you can make children who go to school regard activity as part of the norm, lots of the other things that you mentioned there just flow—they will join clubs, they will take part in sport, that it is fun, that the environment they're going into is beneficial for their mental health as well as physical health. It is difficult, because some other things do also need to happen.

For example, Daily Active requires the school to be able to make its facilities available pre and post school, not just during the school hours, if it's going to be a proper whole-school approach. There are a few things that need to happen concurrently. There's work going on already with education in terms of that piece. I know it's a priority for the Minister as well in terms of school facilities, the stock that we've currently got, and making that available. So, they're not all mutually exclusive, but there are some that are fundamental. 

I think a lot of them do feed off each other. If we can get a generation of young people not thinking about this is the hour, two hours a week that they play sport, but actually just thinking about how differently they live their lives, it will have a massive impact. We know there's data to show that if we keep girls engaged in physical activity beyond 13, they're less likely to be teenage mums and less likely to be in abusive relationships. There are costs to that. They're more likely to stay in school. They're more likely to have career goals. Some of the evidence we've got—there's so much of it—shows that if you teach a child at two and three years old to catch a ball, then literacy and numeracy becomes easier. But it's actually finding a way to help them do that. So, I think that Daily Active is important.

I was at Active Travel England's conference last week. There were 1,000 people in the room—planners, housing developers, all sorts of different provision—talking about just thinking about everything differently, about lighting, about being safe. So, facilities matter, but if women and girls or anybody doesn't feel safe going there, it's a waste of facility. But one of the things they found is, by changing lighting, they're saving councils millions of pounds a year. People are feeling safer. They're being more active. If we can get the joined-up approach working, that is really exciting for what we're going to be able to do. And if you've got more people being active, then that feeds the elite side as well. Because how do you know if you're good at riding a bike unless you do? You need to find ways to try lots of different things, and being active through the day is one way to do that.

Just going back slightly, the second part of my question was what does success look like to you. If we were to measure you at the end, is it, 'This many people now are active in schools', or are we measuring you on every single different priority? Where would you see success?

It's an important point, and it's important for a couple of reasons. One is that we've identified, since we launched our strategy in response to the vision for sport in 2017-18, that we're in a complex system. Just because we've done something, you can't attribute any movement in figures to that action by us. Likewise, with some of our partners, it's very difficult. So, there's an acknowledgement that we're part of a complex system, and that interacts with other systems as well. But it is important that we know that we're doing the right work and doing the right things. We've started a project within our systems-thinking process in the leadership at Sport Wales where we're looking at how we measure impact. But it's not the old-fashioned KPI targets, it's about are we doing the right things. We need to listen to what's happening out there. It's literally a complex situation, but there are methods of doing this now, and there are other bodies in Wales, and certainly in the UK, that are taking this approach.

But fundamentally, we use data and insight to make some decisions, so we need to see shifts in some of that data and insight. There's the school sports survey, the national survey, the active adults part of the national survey. In these kinds of long-term surveys, there needs to be a shift, otherwise questions need to be asked around are we doing the right things. And we need to adjust accordingly if there aren't any shifts. But they're long-term measures. I do understand that politicians do like some short-term measures occasionally as well, and I'm sure we can strike a balance on this. But measuring singular things is not necessarily the right thing to do; it needs to take cognition of the fact that we're in a complex world. But we're willing to work with other agencies on that and come up with the right solution. So, it's a really valid question.

As long as we're moving in the right direction, and we set those foundation levels, and you go, 'Every year we're building on something', that's good for me. Everyone talks about the short term, but often when you're talking in sports and how you build foundational success, it starts from somewhere low, but you know which direction you're going in, and you can measure that progress.

Yes, thank you. It's a live ecosystem, that's the point.

If you're thinking about elite pathways, there might very well be a young person who has watched the Commonwealth Games this year, they've watched Emma Finucane, who thinks, 'I might want to ride a bike', but it could be 20 years before that happens. I think the school sport survey was 122,000—

There were 122,000 individual responses.

I think that's a really important part of measuring what young people want to do, how that shifts, how that changes. That's really exciting. I don't think there's anywhere else that asks young people what they want to do. I'm of an age where, at primary school, we did musical movement, and the world has changed. When I was going through school, there was a very narrow range of sports and physical activity on offer. Now, it's huge, and we've got to listen to young people.

Nick.

Thank you, both. Can I start by saying how impressed I was with your annual report and your accounts, which I had a look at this week? It shows you're doing some really good work. I was particularly impressed with your systems thinking and your user-centred design. I'm really interested as well to talk about the preventative health side of things, and I think we might come on to that later. But the first thing I wanted to ask you about was your new investment model. I think at the last committee meeting you talked about some organisations liking your new model and others not quite so much, but that you were going to do a bit of work on that over the course of the year to review how that's gone. I think the previous committee also got some representations from other organisations. I just wondered how that review has gone along.

Thank you, Nick. We have reviewed elements of the investment approach. I think there might have been some views that we would review the whole thing and start from scratch. It wouldn't take us any further forward, because some people would still like it, but it would be a different group. The people who didn't like it would be another group altogether again. But we did commit to continually reviewing it in elements, and this time we reviewed the school sport survey aspect of it. We've made some changes to that aspect. As Tanni said, we've had an amazing response, thanks to the schools, the teachers, the local authorities and the sport partnerships that did some work for us in trying to get that out there.

In terms of the changes we made, we've made it more accessible in several ways. There's audio narration now, for pupils who are blind or who have low vision. There's a British Sign Language and Makaton translation for pupils who are deaf or hard of hearing. So, we've made some accessibility changes. We've made a design change, so that it was more engaging for young people as well, given the age range. There are interactive games and features to focus and motivate pupils to continue filling in the answers. And finally, there's better access to the data that comes out of this with interactive online dashboards. Those have been launched to the schools. Every school that had pupils that completed the survey gets an individual report on what the pupils in their school have been saying. Local authorities, sport partnerships and national governing bodies will get further information through this interactive dashboard as we analyse the data. Because it's ONS-qualified data, we have to go through certain steps. That's a long-winded answer to say that that's the review we undertook. Because it's such a significant part of the investment approach, that was done for this iteration.

I think it's fair to say that some of the most noise came from—. Everybody agreed with the funding model, then when people got their indicative figures, the bodies got it, there were some that were slightly less keen. As I said earlier, just more money to a particular governing body or partner is not necessarily—. It's actually being fair across the whole system. And part of this transition—. I think previous funding models have been quite transactional. I've seen it, 20 years ago, when you could talk about experience. But you can measure engagement in lots of different ways. A club could say it had 20,000 experiences, but it could have been 15 children, and we're trying to get to everybody. I think it's about the governing bodies and partners thinking differently about how they engage with everybody to keep everyone involved in some way, whether they stay in that sport or go to a different one. It's about being less transactional.

I have to say I have a lot of sympathy with the governing bodies, especially those who saw reductions in funding, because with the pressures everybody's under, clearly, that isn't great. But with a finite sum of money and competing demands, we're always going to be in this world where there's never enough for everybody. So, I do understand the disappointment. And the reaction of some has been very positive, to get on and generate some commercial money or whatever they've done, make some changes or cuts, or, as Tanni said, be innovative.

I do understand that and I have some sympathy with it, but the whole purpose of the investment approach was to reflect our strategic priorities, which was a response to the vision for sport. It does reflect Government priorities as well in terms of the weightings we give. Should the Government change significant priorities, we can then review the investment approach to change those priorities and, therefore, the outcomes. However, those priorities seemingly are not dissimilar at the moment, so we will continue the way we are, but we can change it.

Historically, if someone asked me why we were giving tiddlywinks £50,000, I couldn't really tell them, other than, 'We've always given them £50,000 and it broadly fluctuates somewhat unless there's a major disaster.' Now I can tell you exactly why we give each governing body or partner this or that, with the data-driven aspect of the investment approach. That's really open and transparent. It's not historic trend, it's open and can be argued against, but at least it's there to be able to be argued against.

I won't name the governing body, but we used to give very little to a governing body that became No. 1 in the school sport survey in terms of children and young people telling us what they wanted to do. We were giving it £30,000 a year. That's a disconnect between the needs of the people and the public funding. The investment approach addressed that, but that meant we had to find some money from somewhere else because the finite sum didn't go up.

Thank you.

Going back a couple of steps, something just popped into my mind about what you spoke about with the lottery funding side of things. I was just wondering if you could provide a bit more detail on the financial situation that you could potentially be facing. Have you had conversations with the Department for Culture, Media and Sport and others as well? What is that figure looking like for you guys now? It would be handy, just so that we have an overview of what could potentially be coming down the line.

Thank you for that, because it is important. It almost doubles our budget. We're broadly £23 million in revenue, and £16 million-ish in lottery, depending on ticket sales. There's a new licence, so there's a new operator of the lottery in the UK, a company called Allwyn; it's no longer Camelot. Allwyn have promised to double the amount of returns to good causes in the term of the licence, which is a 10-year licence. But they laid out some prospective likely funding scenarios each financial year, and it's behind. To be fair, they had to upgrade 30-year-old technology with the lottery, which they've done successfully, and it did take some cost and some time. So, there is, hopefully, the opportunity that they will manage to deliver what was promised.

But there's a double whammy, if you like: whilst ticket sales might not be what they were hoping for at this point in time, they're facing pressure from the societal lotteries as well, people thinking they'd rather spend their money in that sphere. Well, actually there's a triple—so, that's the double—the triple being that the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport have launched a call for evidence on the National Lottery itself and where the priorities should be. Now, I have to be careful what I say here, but I think that's more of an English issue. I think, when you talk to Scotland and Northern Ireland and Wales, we're content with the distribution of lottery, I'd argue, because it does do what they're trying to address in England, which is local delivery of projects. We give grants of £500 to local schemes, and so do the Arts Council of Wales, et cetera, et cetera. So, the distributors in Wales would argue we don't really need to do it for the reasons DCMS are doing it, but we do worry further down the line that might impact our percentage return, which is that, currently, 0.9 per cent of lottery returns comes to Sport Wales.

It took quite a long time to sort out the new licence. Brian's absolutely right: some of the hardware they were replacing was out of date. They didn't have databases for people. They talked about new games, new ways of engaging young people, but, actually, I think there's generational change as well. So, when there are big rollovers, more people buy tickets. There's a lot of debate about who's buying tickets, where they're from, the socioeconomic background. Young people are thinking differently about this. Potentially, as the housing market's quite difficult, they're looking at different lotteries to maybe win a house or do something very different. Brian's absolutely right about the consultation: it does feel much more English focused. This is part of a much wider discussion on English devolution—you know, the metro mayors. It feels like maybe being able to share the lottery in a different way, and I think that's one of the differences between how we're able to allocate money, and England. We have spoken to DCMS, and we have ongoing discussions with them, not least about the consultation. When it went out, it was quite challenging, in some ways, to ensure that it went out with Welsh translation.

So, one of the conversations I have very frequently is about devolution, and pretty much at every meeting I have to go, 'Sport's devolved'. I think those conversations with Westminster and DCMS are really important, actually, so that we're not seen as something that's just sort of sat on the side of England, which—. I was hoping we wouldn't be having to have that conversation, but sometimes we still do. So, with my role in Sport Wales, I sit on UK Sport. Because the four home countries have very different amounts of money, spend it very differently, we're spending some time educating. We're going up to Aviemore shortly to actually spend a couple of days with the four home countries in UK Sport to actually just get into a lot more of the detail of what we do versus—. And Scotland have got a different problem. They've had a £40 million increase. They've got a different set of issues now, because of the money they now have to distribute in, potentially, new ways.

I think, to give some assurance, the board are across this. The board of Sport Wales are across it. We do have a medium-term plan, depending on the returns from the lottery. But I'd be surprised if we got any significant increase on the £16 million we got last year. But that does mean it constricts us on what we might be able to do with that money. There are rules that come with the spending of lottery money—you have to use it for additionality; you can't use it to replace Government investment. But the board have taken a very pragmatic view on budgeting and the medium-term budget.

And one of our board members chairs our audit and risk committee; they are all over this, because it's so important for us that we're able to track. There's a limit in how much money we can keep, but also we want to make sure that we're financially making really sensible decisions.

Diolch.

I have two very brief points. I think that you probably both remember when 'Walk, wheel or cycle a mile a day' was the mantra for schools. That's disappeared. Some schools are still doing it, but it's certainly not something that either you, the Welsh Government or anybody else is talking about like they used to. The second one is facilities paid for out of public money locked away when the school gates get closed, 3G and 4G pitches especially; you mentioned it briefly earlier. Are you putting any pressure on anybody you can to make sure that publicly funded sports facilities are available to the public and not locked away by school headteachers?

Can I pick up the 'Walk, wheel and cycle' first? So, I think this is one of the interesting things about how terminology changes. 'Walk, wheel and cycle' is still very much used in England, but, for us, some of our language has moved to the Daily Active. If we could unlock facilities behind school gates, that would give lots more options in terms of what we're trying to do. We'd have to get through—depending what time the gates are unlocked—safeguarding, staffing, lots of things. Actually, are we trying to—? Is there provision for young people after school to stay in school? There are lots of things where it feels like we're kind of spinning plates on this.

All I was going to say on the pitches is that there are a number of pitches that probably need upgrading, and what is now okay to put in is very different from what was okay to put in 10 years ago. So, I think the facilities consultation is really important for us to really clearly understand what's out there. Because we'll know a lot of it, the governing bodies will, but actually knowing what's behind school gates is really important to have the right offer. I'd really strongly support that, but school gates is probably an education issue.

It definitely is, but there's a role, certainly, for us to advocate. We're not a regulator, so we have no powers in that respect, but what I would say is, historically, during the twenty-first century schools process, as it was called then, we weren't consulted, but that improved towards the end of that project. It's now, I think, community-focused schools, or whatever the term is, which, hopefully, will expand to primary school provision. We are consulted. It's still not a statutory requirement, but officials do tend to consult with us and our partners, certainly the sport partnerships that we've established, on that whole point about being open for the community. They're fantastic assets that can deliver huge impact for the locality, and I'm sure the schools themselves, provided there's a sensible user agreement approach, would want people in their community to benefit from it as well. So, there are a few things. We can't regulate, but we can certainly advocate, and we can certainly put pressure to make sure we're consulted as much as possible.

Please will you start advocating?

Yes. It's in the whole-school approach of Daily Active. It is one of the eight domains that come—. User agreements are one of the things a school needs to have in place. Because, yes, without the facilities, it's very difficult to get some of the engagement that we want, for lots of different reasons: safeguarding, safety, accessibility et cetera.

Oh, one other thing, sorry, Chair—

All this discussion about facilities—one of the main objectives at the moment for improving the facilities base is for equality. So, if you talk to the Football Association of Wales or the Welsh Rugby Union, or any other governing body that has a stock of facilities, they were built by men for men, and that needs to change. There is a groundswell of change happening, but it does come at a cost. So, I'd commend the partners that we've got that are making those kinds of changes, because they're well overdue and they're desperately needed.

Women need different toilet facilities to men.

All sorts of things. We shouldn't assume that just because it works for the male part of society, it will work for the female part of society. And that untapped talent, that untapped potential for sport, is 50 per cent untapped.

Paul.

Thank you, Chair. I just want to come back very, very quickly to your funding model. Now, my understanding is that your funding model relies heavily on data and evidence when determining investment. How do you make sure that that doesn't actually create a disadvantage for smaller grass-roots organisations, particularly in rural or deprived communities, which may have fewer resources to collect data and demonstrate impact than the larger organisations?

Diolch. That's a valid question. And I think, in response, I'd say that the data and insight aspect of our investment is for the larger bodies that we invest in. That's a big part of our investment and we want to get it right. But it is also the reason why we open up the funding for community sports as well, and organisations, so that they can apply. We do take rurality into context in terms of the investment approach, but we also then prioritise applications through the community aspect, depending on things like rurality or economic deprivation or women and girls or ethnic diversity. There are priorities made.

But it is very hard to shift the dial on some of the smaller governing bodies when the finite sum is what it is, because it could be an area we look at if we get increased investment, but it is difficult for the smaller governing bodies, I appreciate, because we do ask a lot of them as well. They do have to hit a lot of safeguarding standards et cetera. We do our best, but we are aware that they would regard themselves as being underfunded.

And you've made it clear today, of course, that funding affects your priorities. How has the reduction in your budget actually affected your priorities and your strategic objectives?

I don't think it has. I think what it's affected is the outcome, as in the sum—the moneys we can distribute. I guess we've made some internal cost savings, we've made reductions in budgets over the period, albeit with increases in capital. But the priorities have stayed the same, pretty much. I don't think they've adjusted much. That's the whole point of the long-term approach, really—that you don't shift them too massively in the short term. So, I think it's more the outcomes than the priorities that have been impacted.

I know this is really hard, but a longer-term commitment for funding—. So, we're year on year, aren't we?

We are, and we make a long-term indicative commitment to our partners, but that's difficult if we don't know what we're getting, Tanni's right.

And it is difficult, we get that, but it would just give us a bit more stability.

Okay. Diolch.

Diolch yn fawr. I think there's a really exciting opportunity when it comes to the preventative health agenda by working with our schools and young people, just to ensure that they have a better understanding of nutrition and exercise. I know the Swansea City AFC Foundation in my area do some really good work with local schools. I'm just wondering, in terms of Sport Wales, what discussions have been had regarding this opportunity with the Welsh Government and other stakeholders. Also, what work is being done to stop the drop-off in participation when children actually leave a school setting? Diolch. 

Diolch, Rebeca. It's an interesting question. Sport Wales is not necessarily a deliverer. We invest in partners to deliver, and what we give through our new investment approach is the flexibility for partners to focus on particular areas that they think are important, given the vision for sport in Wales. So, there will be some sports governing bodies that do a lot of work in their communities, like you've just mentioned with the Swans. I know Ospreys in the Community, Cardiff City FC Foundation, Wrexham AFC Foundation, and even the large governing bodies like the WRU and the FAW do direct work in the communities along those kinds of lines, but it does vary because it does depend what's needed in those areas.

So, we definitely don't see it as our role to instruct people to do anything in particular like that. But hopefully, when it comes to the power of sport, it's fairly obvious to people what can be done in their areas through the medium of sport and physical activity, and it's great to hear that someone like the Swans is doing that kind of work. Hopefully that is in response to needs in their community. And I'm sure it is, and I'm sure it will be impactful.

I think that's where sport partnerships are really important, because Daily Active might end up being delivered in quite different ways depending where you are in Wales, and how far away you live from school and things like that. Although we talk so much about young people, it's our ability to impact things like social prescribing and have conversations around that. Actually, healthcare professionals need to be fitter and healthier as well. It's not just what training teachers or volunteers get, actually it's somebody who's involved in social prescribing, how they do it and what options they know about in their local area. So, the sport partnership, because of who sits around the table on the sport partnership, that has a massive potential as well.

Yes, it's worth noting that those sport partnerships, around the decision-making table for them—there are five of them—they will have health boards, housing associations, they'll have higher education or education, police and crime, as well as sport development and local authority representation. So, they can make those kinds of decisions about priorities in their area. Now, that is a very powerful—I don't know what—quintuplet of people, organisations that deliver more directly than we do as a national organisation. But we will work together closely with them and we will invest in them to deliver.

Sorry, I forgot to say as well, something else we're doing is a diary study with 16 to 24-year-olds, to understand why they drop out of sport. Because we make big assumptions about why anybody drops out, but actually it could be quite different. So, I think that's quite interesting, again, asking people themselves, not just assuming why they're no longer involved. 

Yes, I wanted to ask about the review that's been commissioned, and presuming you are running it. 

Yes, we're leading on it. 

You're leading on that review, okay. And is that just asking what we've got now, or is it asking people: 'This is what you've got; what do you want?' Is it a big ask? And are we talking down to every little club, or are you going through sports associations?

We've agreed with Government that there'll be three stages. We're obviously at stage 1. The first part of that stage was desk-based research on the information we already have available to us, either through governing bodies, local authorities, sport partnerships or anybody else in this field—maybe even commercial organisations. So, we've done that stage. We've done the desk-based stage. What we've now done is gone back out to our partners to say, 'This is what we found. What are you finding? What are the gaps? What information have you got that's needed to complete this piece of work?' We've set a deadline for responses to that of 23 October.

At that point, we will set up a steering group with Welsh Government officials in the sport policy unit, which is stage 2, which would commission more around the bits that you've just asked about—what are the gaps? What is needed based on what we know is in existence? And then, the third stage would be likely to—I don't want to lead it on—produce some sort of platform where people can update all the time as to where we are with facilities in Wales, some sort of open-format platform to be able to update their facility, either requirements or what is now in place. 

It's a fairly big piece of work, but stage 1 should be fairly manageable. Stages 2 and 3 are unknowns at the minute until we know.

So, when the Government's got all this—and you can't particularly answer that, but can I have your opinion about it—information to hand, some sports require a lot of investment to do the sport, for example, swimming. I know there's such a backlog with swimming pools, and we know what local authorities are struggling with: turning the temperatures down and things to keep them open. That's obviously an expensive sport, whereas those other sports—I always talk about orienteering, because that's my favourite—don't actually need a lot of funding at all, and participation is obviously not as much. So, what's the Government going to do with that information? Have you got any idea of what they're going to do with all of that knowledge of where the money's needed? 

I think you were right when you said that I don't know what I would be able to say to that question. I think it will be a useful tool for us though, because we will still, hopefully, should we get capital funding from Government, need to make decisions on applications that we've got or prioritise which areas we want to invest in. Is it 3Gs? Is it energy saving? What is it that we want to do? Is it cycling routes? So, it will still be useful for us to make decisions, but in terms of the actual amount that we might get given to be able to invest and how the Government use it, I don't know. Hopefully it will be useful for them.

Is there anything glaring that's an obvious, 'Oh, we're really missing on that'? Is there anything that's come out so far?

I would—[Interruption.] Sorry.

Sorry. I was just going to jump in in terms of—

It'll give me time to think.

—solar panels. There are a number of clubs that have said they've been saved because of that investment, and it's helping inform us on what else we can do next, which I think is really important. It would be interesting, in the next stage—. I think there's an interesting conversation about what people want and what people need. I've used this example loads of times before: my first athletics club was Bridgend Athletics club, where we had this grass track and we went to Swansea twice a year. That was a million years ago. Actually, what they built quite a long time ago was a 300m track, which, if you talk to any hardline athletics fan, the thought of a 300m athletics track would be, 'Oh', you know. But it's being able to balance that, because there isn't a finite amount of money. Oh, gosh, this was years ago, looking at facilities, probably—. I was going to say  it was more than 25 years ago, when you went to each sport and said, 'What do you want?', they all wanted too much, and you ended up crossing over and there'd be athletics tracks three miles from each other and all sorts of things. So, I think it gives us this helicopter view of what's there. We know about a lot of it, but we don't know everything. But, actually, the updating of the data is really important.

It's key, otherwise we'll be in this position in another term of Government, or whatever, because we're not sure of the data.

Having had time to think a little, in terms of the glaring gaps—. I've got to be careful because each partner would probably have a different view. So, if I picked a governing body, they would say, 'This is the glaring gap.' So, we have to be careful. But there will be gaps. There will be gaps in each of the governing bodies' priorities, I'm sure. 

We did a study during COVID with a commercial company that estimated the gap. I'll use the words 'fag packet', although it's probably not the most appropriate in a sport committee—

We get it. [Laughter.]

It was a very back-of-the-envelope study, which at that point in time, back in 2020-21, was identifying a gap of £0.25 billion in terms of investment into local facilities.

A quarter of a billion?

Yes. Things like leisure centre stock renewal, regional centres that were built when the lottery was flush, and we built a lot of regional performance facilities. The national centre in Cardiff, a 1970s building, has fallen way behind now to be competitive with our opponents. The figure's likely to be higher than that, I'd have thought, because everything's doubled since then in terms of capital cost.

You will get different views on what a glaring gap is, but it will at least give us some information that decisions can be taken upon, and, a bit like the investment approach, at least you can defend your decision based on data and insight rather than gut and emotion.

When we talk about the state of facilities, I was wondering about community clubs at the moment because, as we know, they're the ones who are really feeling the direct impact when it comes to the cost-of-living crisis. I know you've mentioned it already, but I've heard as well how impactful the energy saving grant was that Sport Wales provided to so many of these community groups. As we know, energy bills could potentially increase by 25 per cent come January again, so I was just wondering what your overview was of what community clubs and groups are facing at the moment. Can you give us—obviously short, because we haven't got a lot of time—a short picture of that? I think it's really important.

I'd say I admire their resilience, because they are facing lots of things but they continue as best they can. They may need to make changes and cuts and cut back a little on what they do, but most of them are very robust in their approach rather than anything else. Resilience is an issue that we're working with governing bodies in particular on, in terms of: can we do more to generate income? Have we been innovative enough to help these kinds of clubs? Can they do more to encourage commercial revenue? We are keeping the energy savings grant going at the moment. We're learning a lot. In that initial stage of the energy savings grant, we just provided solar panels, now we won't do them unless—we encourage them to put in battery usage as well, because it makes it so much more usable and efficient. So, we're learning as well about what does and doesn't work. But they are resilient, they are really resilient. I think it's the nature of people who are involved in sport and physical activity: they give it a go, whatever. We want to make it as easy for them as possible, but there will be restrictions. We're hearing good and bad about the sector at the minute.

It's hard—cost of living, people under pressure, volunteering time—it's not easy, but the number of volunteers that we have who are involved in sport in Wales is actually hugely positive. It's about how we can support them to do more.

The follow-up on that is to do with participation and it ties in with the cost of living as well. The area that I represent is quite a deprived area: Blaenau Gwent Caerffili Rhymni. I feel like there's been really great movement when it comes to getting women and girls into sport, I've seen that across the board from rugby to everything, but I still feel personally that there's a significant gap in deprivation when it comes to people from deprived areas participating in sport. I was just wondering how you guys are trying to address that. I know you're looking at different ways of trying—. It's so difficult. I can appreciate it's really hard. There are so many different barriers as well when it comes to transport, uniforms. But how are you as Sport Wales looking at that and trying to address it as best that you can?

One thing is the investment approach, that it does prioritise deprivation. Then, we allow our partners to prioritise that as well, which they hopefully will. We do something called 'what matters' conversations with our partners, so that we can explain what matters to us as a national organisation, deprivation being one of them, and then they can explain what they're doing in that area or maybe what might be more important to them. We have those kinds of communications and interactions. But it is difficult. Tanni touched on something earlier, which is being innovative—partners being innovative in their approach, what they ask of people and what they're presenting to people. Can they make it affordable? Does it have to be costly? A simple example, and it might still be a barrier for some people, but if you look at Tennis Wales and what they did with their court access, you can now access a court for £4.50. You don't need to be a member anywhere, you just download an app. Clearly, if you've got digital poverty, then it's still a barrier. But I use it as an example of thinking differently about what you provide, and I think that's what we need to encourage. We'd be willing to help, but we don't have all of the answers. I think that the people in the communities have better answers than us, so I'm sure sport partnerships will help in that regard as well. 

There are lots of sport governing bodies that are changing their thinking. You mentioned what women and girls are allowed to wear. There are sports that now allow women and girls to wear shorts, which they didn't before. A challenge is we're not directly delivering, but some of the impact I think we can have is in some of our work on menstruation, which is working across a number of governing bodies. We're actually talking about things like that; it's educating young women, but also young men, about these things. These are conversations we couldn't have had—nobody would have had—a few years ago. I think that bringing that level of knowledge, understanding and support just helps across the piece.

We're also doing something called partner progress and learning. We bring partners together to learn from each other. Nick mentioned the annual report. The narrative and the qualitative pieces in that annual report are just a snapshot. The partners are brought together to learn what they can do together, do differently or learn from each other as well. That's another method of trying to shift the dial in these areas where barriers do exist.

What would you say, in your personal opinion as well as that of Sport Wales, is the main barrier for people in deprived areas? I know there are so many, but what would you say is that distinct one you see year on year coming out, or maybe getting worse, as the main barrier to sport for people in deprived areas?

I'm not sure there's one thing. It's very hard to be physically very active if you can't afford decent nutrition. You can't outrun a bad diet. I think there is a challenge on food and the cost of living. Some of it comes back to the fact that, if you're a family that's struggling to survive, you're probably not going to be thinking about physical activity as something to do. You've got a family that is busy working and, you know, public transport—. It ends up being a mix, which is why I think we have to take this sort of helicopter approach to look at things differently. If, where you live, there isn’t a bus stop to get you somewhere, or you can't even afford the bus, but it's a 3-mile walk at night with bad lighting, this is going to be so far away from what you even think you can do.

I think your question, in effect, exemplifies the fact that it's a complex system. There is no one thing. There are lots of things and maybe they will differ from Blaenau Gwent to Conwy to Caerdydd, and even within Caerdydd there'll be differences. I think that's the reason we devolve to sport partnerships, to some extent, to look at what they see as their priorities in their area and not dictate to them, other than through broad priority examples for them.

I think I’d come back to saying that the sector has been amazingly resilient, given everything we started with, in terms of the cost of living, the challenges and the financial situation. I'm really proud of our sector. I think it delivers way above the investment that goes into it, and our economic studies and our social return on investment studies with Sheffield Hallam University demonstrate that in spades. I think there's a challenge for us all to stay positive about the sector in these difficult times. I'm sure, with the consultation, if we all get together—. We're a small nation; we should be able to join up a little bit better than we do sometimes, and that can be our superpower. I'm optimistic that we can improve the situation for everybody concerned, and we can still win medals as well, Tanni, can’t we?

Absolutely, yes, we can do all of that. I think one of the things that's really important where we're based is that you see everything from the boxers, fitness, yoga, we've got para fencing next week, Europeans—there's this constant reminder about why we're doing what we're doing. I think there is a bit of, in both our introductions to the annual report, saying 'thank you' to the people who do it, who are from hugely different backgrounds and contribute. It is really positive. Sitting in the middle of Sophia Gardens, we can think about all those barriers, but it comes back to sport partnerships. I think as a sector we're very solution driven, and it's finding the right key to unlock it.

Thank you very much for that.

Diolch yn fawr iawn. You've touched on women and girls in sports and things around the lighting of facilities, and so on. There's evidence that's been presented to the committee raising concerns about safeguarding in sports, especially the experience of women and girls. Are you confident that current arrangements are strong enough to safeguard women and girls in sports in Wales, and is there a need to do more to ensure consistent standards across governing bodies? 

We're very mindful of that, and we continue to work on it through the Child Protection in Sport Unit and the Ann Craft Trust. We've seen lots of examples over the years where governing bodies have had issues. I think we're very mindful in Wales that, just because most of the issues have been with a UK or an English lens, it's really important that we don't get complacent about any of the issues.

I think there's a lot of training and a lot of support that goes out for the governing bodies and partners. They obviously have governance arrangements. It's something that we've just always got to be aware of. I think, if you look at it, probably the worst example I've ever seen is what happened in the States with gymnastics and Athlete A. People didn't report it for years and years. So, you can have policies, you can have processes, they are really important, but it's also a feeling that there's somewhere that you can put your hand up and say, 'This is not right'. I'm really keen that we keep working, whether it's at governing body level or club level, to support that kind of safe space.

But also, I think there's always more that we can do. A certain amount of my work on the athlete pathway is actually educating young people and coaches about what is a positive relationship in coaching and sport and what's not. Because when we've seen issues at UK level, it's actually been young people not understanding what a positive relationship is, and it's some of the drive for medals, which we've moved back on, because you can get lots and lots of medals with a really unhealthy set of relationships. I think you can win medals and have really positive relationships. But it's something that I'm really mindful of all the time.

It's central to a lot of our work. Tanni mentioned that we've got contractual arrangements with both the NSPCC Child Protection in Sport Unit and the Ann Craft Trust. For those who don't know, the Ann Craft Trust is for vulnerable adults, and the NSPCC is obviously children in sport. We've got those contractual arrangements where they provide resources, facilities and support to governing bodies and some of our other partners. So, there's lots of activity in that area, but we are aware of—. We've got a meeting, it's either this week or next week, with Kyniska, who I know wrote a letter to the Welsh Government. We've got a good relationship with them, but it is challenging; they challenge us and they challenge the sector, quite rightly, as Tanni said. We're also aware of the independent safeguarding governance review with Jan Pickles and we've been feeding into that. We have a governance unit at Sport Wales and child protection is an important area within that governance framework. So, they are connected with that review. We aren't a regulator, which makes it difficult, but we do make it an important part of our arrangements with partners. If we are to invest in them, they have to have arrangements in place for safeguarding; but that can always improve and be better and develop.

I just wanted to have a discussion around the letter about Clic and S4C. There's a lot of questions and it's going to take some time for officers to respond to them, so we need to discuss how much time officers are going to put into it. From what I can gather, it's sort of—. I can understand the argument on both sides. So, I think that does need some discussion outside of the meeting.

Secondly, the related courses. My only question was—. It's about these arts courses that some children—they're not children anymore, are they, they're young adults—have applied to be on for this September, which we're now in, and they've not been able to get the funding. What the letter says to me is that there's only a small number of courses that don't have that funding allocated to them, and they may never have that funding allocated to them, but the majority of courses do. So, it looks like that's going to be sorted out, I think. I don't think we need to respond to that, unless I've read it any differently.

We can discuss it later.

And then just the draft budget. Again, I'm not clear as to what exactly they want from this committee.

Okay. We can discuss that.