Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru

No apologies have been received. As a reminder, the meeting is being broadcast live on Senedd.tv and the Record of Proceedings will be published as usual. Please can Members ensure that all mobile devices are switched to silent mode? Senedd Cymru operates through the medium of both English and Welsh, and interpretation is available during today’s meeting. 

That takes us on to the second item, which is the legislative consent memorandum on the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill, evidence session with the Cabinet Secretary for Education and the Minister for Children and Social Care. Can I welcome the Cabinet Secretary, the Minister and their officials? Would you like to introduce yourselves for the record?

Lynne Neagle, Cabinet Secretary for Education.

I'm Dawn Bowden, Minister for Children and Social Care.

Alistair Davey, deputy director, enabling people, social services, Welsh Government.

Nicola Edwards, deputy director for equity in education, Welsh Government.

Iwan Roberts, lawyer, Welsh Government.

Thank you very much. If we can move on to the first question, which will be from me. The legislative consent memorandum states that

'discussions on the content of the Bill began in September 2024, and over the autumn these expanded to consider extending certain provisions to cover Wales.'

When did you first become aware of the UK Government’s England-only Bill given your regular meetings?

Thank you very much, Chair. Officials, obviously, hold regular bimonthly meetings with UK Government officials in the Department for Education. I first became aware of the Bill when I was briefed by officials on what was in the King's Speech, but, at that time, only very limited information was available. We were aware that there were provisions to cover home-educated children, but more details then became available over the summer as the UK Government officials outlined their policy proposals to my officials.

I was then briefed further by my officials in early autumn about the policy proposals and agreed that my officials should explore proposals further to determine whether there were benefits to extending some or all of the provisions to Wales, either by joining the Bill or making our own legislation. We were then made aware that the intention was to introduce the Bill ahead of Christmas recess, if parliamentary time allowed.

On 17 December, I had a letter from the Minister for school standards informing me of the introduction of the Bill. I also had a Teams meeting with Stephen Morgan MP to update me on the introduction of the Bill, and it was during that call that I indicated that I was keen to extend certain provisions to Wales, if possible.

I should say, Chair, that, in approaching this issue, I have looked at this through the lens that I look at everything in this job in terms of what is best for children and young people, and that has informed my approach to this throughout. I'll ask Dawn to cover the provisions that fall within her portfolio.

Thank you, Lynne. Thank you, Chair. Certainly, at the outset, we weren't aware of the social care elements contained within the Bill, because that was something that was developing as the Bill was going along. My officials were in conversations with the UK Government officials, again, through the summer and into the autumn, as it became apparent that the two provisions that relate to my portfolio would be included in the Bill. Those more detailed discussions started around the autumn time. Then I was fully briefed by officials in January about the provisions as they apply to social care. But all of the inter-ministerial engagement around the Bill has been directed via the Cabinet Secretary for Education, and my engagement in this process has been with my officials.

Thank you very much. Why did you wait until the day amendments were tabled in the UK Parliament to advise the Senedd of your intention to seek provision for Wales in the Bill? 

As the provisions tabled were as amendments to the Bill, for confidentiality reasons, I wasn't able to share the detail of these before they were made public through their tabling. We had very scarce information on the Bill up until its publication in December. Members of the committee will be aware that there are provisions in the Bill to prevent parents removing their children from education if they are subject to child protection proceedings, and that announcement was made immediately following the conclusion of the murder trial of Sara Sharif's parents, which I'm sure you'll all be aware of.

In December, when we had the further information on the Bill, I informed the UK Government I would like to consider applying certain provisions in the Bill to Wales. Discussions on that continued in the early part of this year. Policy instructions were passed to the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel at the end of January with some further exchanges on the provisions. The Secretary of State for Education wrote to me on 10 March ahead of the Commons Report Stage on 17 and 18 March, confirming that the necessary amendments to what were then clauses 11, 20 and 25 to 29 had been tabled, and that the UK Government considered a legislative consent motion would be required.

I replied to that letter to confirm that I would be tabling one of those, and then myself and Dawn tabled a written statement on the 10 March to inform Members that the UK Government would be tabling amendments to the Bill to include Wales in some of the measures. I was keen to make sure that Members had prior notice ahead of those being laid by the UK Government later that day, and I did that, obviously, to ensure as much transparency as we could ahead of the laying of the LCM. That reflects previous practice where Welsh Government has proactively engaged with the UK Government with a view to developing devolved provisions within a UK Bill.

I should say to the committee as well that as these discussions were ongoing I did endeavour to keep key Members of the Senedd informed. I met with Cefin Campbell as spokesperson for Plaid Cymru, Jane Dodds for the Liberal Democrats, with Buffy Williams as Chair of the Children, Young People, and Education Committee, and I also met with yourself, Chair, as a courtesy. We also kept the Children's Commissioner for Wales informed of our plans as far as we were able to, bearing in mind the very late information we had on the legislation.

Thank you. The memorandum was laid six days after the Report Stage proceedings were completed in the House of Commons. Why was there no account or summary of these proceedings included in the memorandum? 

Thanks, Chair. As far as I'm aware, we laid the LCM in line with the relevant timescales and procedures. It contains the details of the relevant amendments that extend certain provisions to Wales. The Report Stage proceedings did not include discussion of any further amendments in relation to Wales. Therefore, we didn't consider it necessary to provide a summary of proceedings. I included the relevant provision dealing with areas within competence in accordance with Standing Orders, and as I said, we issued the written statement. However, if the committee's view is that we should have provided more information in relation to that, then obviously we’re very happy to take that away and look at it. 

I don't think you’ll find a committee anywhere that doesn't think they need more information. Anyway, thank you very much. On to you, Alun. 

I'm grateful to the Ministers for their explanation of the genesis of this. It's very comprehensive. The omission that’s screaming out at me, though, as you'd expect, is that you did a lot of work in talking to different stakeholders around the place both here and elsewhere, and there certainly seems to be quite considerable interaction between the Welsh and United Kingdom Government over this, and the rest of it, and that's all to be commended, but the omission is any consideration of developing these provisions as a Senedd Bill. You haven't described any consideration given to that. Was there any consideration? 

Yes, we did have discussions about whether it would be possible to develop a Senedd Bill. You'll be aware that we have a legislative programme already. We're coming to the very end of this Senedd term. And I was also very mindful that I didn't want us to be in a position where children in Wales had less protection than children over the border. So, as far as I'm concerned—and, as I say, with that lens of what was best for children—this seemed like the most appropriate way to do that. There is the potential for cross-border issues arising from the Bill, and we were really keen, especially with the child protection aspects of the Bill, to ensure that those issues didn't arise. So, it seemed to me to be the quickest, most appropriate way to do this under the circumstances.

Well, you can't guarantee that it's the quickest, of course, because you don't have any control over the process in London, and your colleagues have come here and said that earlier in the Senedd term, only to find themselves in situations where that hasn't been the case. But there was no conversation with the Senedd over the potential for a Bill being presented and becoming law before dissolution.

We had discussions amongst ourselves as Ministers and obviously with the Counsel General—

But there was no discussion with the Senedd. 

Well, who in the Senedd would you—?

It would probably be the Business Committee, I would imagine. There was no conversation between business managers—

Not as far as I'm aware, no.

I think the conversation was about the existing Welsh Government legislative programme and what we were already struggling to deliver, and knowing that the timescale just would not have enabled us to introduce further primary legislation in the last year of this Senedd term.

Understanding what you mean by that timescale is the purpose of my question, because it feels to me, without going through any process with the Senedd, what you're actually saying is that the Welsh Government didn't have the capacity to deliver this Bill, not the Senedd.

Obviously, there has to be time found for legislation. We did look at the capacity issues, and there will be capacity issues arising from dealing with the secondary legislation associated with this legislation. And it would also have been a question of officials to work on that then as well.

Sure, I absolutely appreciate that. I'm just trying to understand the meaning. But it seems to me, and that clarification reinforces my view, that it's an issue within Government, not the Senedd, that you are really describing, because without having any conversations with anyone in the Senedd, your Government can't really form a view as to what the capacity of the Senedd is. So, we are looking here at this LCM being put forward for the reasons you've given about child protection and the rights of children, which I accept completely, about your wish to ensure that you've got equity both sides of the border, I accept that as well, but what seems to be clear to me is that the capacity issue lies with Government and not with the Senedd.

We haven't had those discussions with the Senedd, but I think it's also important to re-emphasise that we are in the last year of the Senedd, so there are bound to be capacity issues within the Senedd as well, I think.

But that's for the Senedd to determine, of course. Okay, let's just move forward a little bit. In terms of the scrutiny of these provisions, the provisions were introduced at the final Stage of House of Commons consideration, so there's been no opportunity for MPs to really seriously scrutinise these provisions. It's very much a Report Stage, it's not a scrutiny stage. And, obviously, nobody in the Senedd has had the opportunity to scrutinise them either. I very much, as you know, Cabinet Secretary, admire the way in which you've been single-minded in putting the rights of children and the welfare of children right from the beginning at the heart of your agenda. I have no doubt that that is your purpose, but you haven't been scrutinised to justify that.

I recognise that the way that this has been done does impact on the scrutiny to date, but what I would say to the committee is that we will have further opportunities to scrutinise the detail of this, because we are going to have to bring forward the implementation through secondary legislation, and there will be lots of opportunities for scrutiny through that; lots of opportunities for consultation through that. My officials have already been talking to the children's commissioner about leading on the consultation with affected families. So, while I recognise that, from a committee scrutiny point of view, it's not an optimum situation, I have had to balance that with the decision that I've taken around protecting the rights of children and doing what's best for them.

You and I were both Members here before 2011—

We were.

—so we remember that sort of scrutiny and we both found it inadequate at the time. You remember that, and I remember it as a new backbencher at the time, so we recognise that that is an inadequate form of scrutiny for primary legislation.

The other concern I have is that the Welsh Government, I believe, has done a very good job of creating a body of law in these sorts of areas, and by inserting these provisions via a UK Bill, to what extent are we confusing the legislative framework? And to what extent do you—both of you, really, as Ministers in this field—still feel that you have control of the way the policy is developed? Because we will know that, whilst we might have disagreements in our family in Westminster from day to day at the moment, there might be two entirely different Governments either side of the M4, and there have been for most of our experience. So, to what extent do you feel that the Welsh Government, with this series of provisions, still have the opportunity to control that agenda and to do what you said, which is what is best for children in Wales?

Well, I think it's important to recognise that this is part of a suite of measures in relation to children who are educated at home and children who are missing education. We published statutory guidance on elective home education in 2023, which was in response to numerous concerns that were raised about home education, and you'll be aware that some of those situations had in fact led to tragedy. So, we introduced the statutory guidance on home education back in 2023, but we and local authorities were concerned that we needed to do more. Not so long ago, I took the regulations on the children missing education database through the Senedd. That is separate but aligned to this, because that is designed to make sure that we know where all the children are, which, at the moment, is quite challenging, and we're piloting that in seven areas.

But this latest provision, through the UK Government's primary legislation, is really designed to strengthen our position through the children not in school registers, through the strengthening of school attendance orders, and vitally through the child protection proceedings as part of it. So, I think, taken all together, they form a suite of actions to protect the rights of children, to safeguard them, and also to ensure that they get a high-quality education, which is their right. But there will, as I said, be further consultation. We will have control over how this is taken forward through subordinate legislation, which will be subject to scrutiny of the Senedd and full consultation.

I accept that; I've no issue with that final point. My concern remains that this suite of provisions, as you've described them, was developed for a situation in England. Now, you know I share your concern on a lot of these matters—I've got a question for you on Wednesday on these matters. My concern is that we've taken something off the peg when, really, we could have developed something that is more appropriate, perhaps, or more in tune with the policy that you've both been developing and pursuing, and your predecessors in Government in Wales. My concern, therefore, is: are we trying to knock this square peg into a round hole here, or have we got something that is really appropriate for Wales?

No, I definitely don't think that we are doing that. I think that, if you look at the history of this issue, and there have been calls for many years for strengthened legislation in this space, since the death of Dylan Seabridge back in 2011, you'll recall, Alun, that the Children's Commissioner for Wales used her legal powers to review the Welsh Government's activity in this space in the last Senedd. At the time, I was Chair of the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We supported the children's commissioner in her actions and also wrote numerous letters ourselves. And a key ask of the children's commissioner and the safeguarding board for Wales was for there to be a register of children who are not in school. So, I think that it is entirely in keeping with the way that policy has been developed in Wales for several years. I think that it consolidates it and strengthens it in a way that we can have much more assurance through. 

I'm content—

Can I just add to that, Chair, if I may? I think that the provisions as they apply to social care are slightly different, in that one is about closing a loophole in legislation that we weren't previously aware of, and that is about the protection of 16 and 17-year-olds who remain in the care system. That was a loophole identified when the UK Government was developing this legislation, and it would just seem ridiculous for us not to be in a situation where we would also want to close the loophole for 16 and 17-year-olds in Wales. And the second aspect is about us continuing with the situation that we currently have, where looked-after children in Wales can be placed in accommodation in England, if that is considered to be the most appropriate accommodation for them. And what this UK legislation is introducing is actually a new kind of accommodation. It's an intermediary, semi-secure accommodation, similar to what we're developing here in our regional centres for children with very complex needs closer to home. And that may well develop in a different way or in a similar way to England, but the provisions of the amendment as it applies to Wales means that, if there is a new type of accommodation that is ahead of us in terms of its development in England, we would be able to place Welsh children there if we considered that to be appropriate. And it may well be that we will have to legislate similarly to enable that to happen the other way around, from England into Wales as well. And I see very much the regional centres that we've got for children with very complex needs is probably developing in the way that this new accommodation in England is likely to develop.

The Minister is tempting us into a much longer conversation, and certainly it's a conversation that this committee may wish to have with you at some point—

Indeed. 

—on the place of 16 and 17-year-olds in the secure estate, because this committee has had some significant concerns about the current situation there, and I know that the Welsh Government is pursuing the devolution of youth justice. That is an absolutely critical thing for us to continue to discuss, but probably not this afternoon. 

It's for another day, yes.

Diolch yn fawr, Cadeirydd. Good morning, panel. I was on Pembrokeshire County Council when the Dylan Seabridge case was going through the scrutiny committees there in 2017, following the tragic death in 2011. So, why then is this seen as the earliest opportunity to legislate on this, given that it's over 14 years, nearly, since that one specific case in Wales?

I think that that's a fair question. I have set out some of the background to this in terms of the children's commissioner's review, the statutory guidance. I can only really answer for myself. I came into post at the end of March last year. The children missing education database regulations were in the process of being worked up then, and obviously I supported those. Then the opportunity arose, and I saw immediately in the King's Speech that there was an opportunity to strengthen the legislation, and I have been keen to take that opportunity to do that. So, as far as I'm concerned, I have taken the earliest opportunity that I could to follow up an issue that I have raised concerns about consistently for many years.

No, I appreciate that, Cabinet Secretary, given your tenure in the position. So, would you say then, and I'm not looking to lead you into criticism of predecessors of yours in this position, but would you have argued that maybe this should have been a priority in previous years, given what's happened before and the reported cases, and that you've taken the earliest opportunity afforded to you within this position, but an opportunity could have been afforded to your predecessors to be more proactive with the legislation in this area rather than, quote-unquote, as the Counsel General's used, the 'piggybacking' on an England-only Bill?

Well, the children's commissioner's report of her legal review went to Kirsty Williams when she was Minister. I've got the highest regard for Kirsty Williams. I know that her position was that she wanted to make sure that we had exhausted all the possible secondary legislation opportunities, and that was put in train, and of course we were then hit, in the middle of that, by a global pandemic, where the whole effort of Welsh Government and their legal capacity had to pivot towards dealing with a global health emergency.

Yes, and obviously, the home-schooling that COVID provided shone an additional spotlight on this and raised it once again.

But just a quick point, Minister Bowden, you mentioned the Welsh Government is struggling to deliver, as in, the Welsh Government's legislative agenda. Is that one of the reasons why a parallel Bill wasn't looked upon, as in, to bring forward a Welsh Government Bill in parallel with a UK Government Bill for England, so that joint scrutiny could be happening concurrently at the same time across the border, so that there was uniformity, so that there were no gaps in provision between England and Wales, but then there was afforded an opportunity to both Parliaments to be able to scrutinise accordingly? Was a parallel Bill ever thought of?

As I said in answer to the earlier questions, we did consider our own Bill, but it wasn't felt to be practical in terms of timing, et cetera, in terms of the work that was already in train by officials in education, and also in terms of an already packed legislative programme.

Okay. No, no; thank you. But how does the approach of being asked to be included in an England-only Bill fit the principles of this Government, using UK Bills?

Well, I'm quite content that it does fit with the principles that the Government have set out. Our principles state that it would be appropriate where Welsh-made provision could not otherwise be delivered within a suitable time frame, and also where the interconnected nature of the relevant Welsh and English administrative systems mean that it is most effective and appropriate for provision for both to be taken forward at the same time in the same legislative instruments. So, I spoke earlier about the fact that I'm concerned about the cross-border issues and the implications of having less protection in Wales when there is more protection for children in England. So, that was a consideration in relation to that.

Okay, thank you. So, you're satisfied, in that sense, that everything has been done because of the timeliness, the speediness and the ensuring that there are no gaps in provision, that that fits within the criteria of Welsh Government when looking at legislating in those areas.

Moving on to the financial implications, the memorandum notes that there will be financial implications for Wales, but they're not quantified. Why is that?

Well, there was financial information published by the UK Government that included an approximation of what the likely costs would be for Wales, but I do have to say that, obviously, that is something that we have to work on. We'll be taking forward the secondary legislation and, as usual in Wales, we will work on that in partnership with stakeholders. So, as part of that work, we're going to have to look at the financial implications and develop those financial costs in more detail, and we would expect to publish that with any information then, aligned to any secondary legislation.

It is important to recognise, of course, that local authorities are already working on supporting families who home educate, but what we need to consider is to what extent there will be any additional burdens that we would need to take account of.

Okay. And you think it's entirely appropriate for the UK Government to be calculating the financial implications for Wales?

Well, they've just given—. They're not calculating the financial implications for Wales. As I understand it, they've provided the costs for England. Nicola.

They haven't calculated the costs for us. If you look at their regulatory impact assessment, they've got a range of what they think it might cost, which looks at quite a broad range, actually. It ranges up to about £3.3 million. We've had a look at their costs. We've had a look at our situation. It's a little bit different to theirs in terms of the provision, the arrangements and also the proportion of children that are home educated. At this point, based on the number of children that are currently home educated, we think our costs would be somewhere between 15 per cent and 20 per cent of their costs, depending on how numbers change and expand, probably averaging down to around 16.5 per cent, 17 per cent. But we'll need to see how that progresses and how the numbers of home-educated children go up over the next few years, because, as you're probably aware, they have been increasing quite dramatically in the last few years. So, that's obviously got to be taken into account as well in terms of whether that trajectory is going to continue to increase. So, we're trying to futureproof that in terms of some of our calculations.

Okay. And then in terms of scrutiny of those figures—thank you, Nicola—scrutiny of those figures by Members of this Senedd, are you confident that there'll be sufficient scrutiny of those financial implications, given that you're looking at secondary legislation going forward?

Absolutely. We'll have a full, detailed cost analysis that officials will undertake when we're developing the subordinate legislation and when we're working up the RIA to sit alongside that. We'll be consulting on that subordinate legislation with the costs, with also workload burden a consideration in that. So, there'll be full opportunity for the Senedd as well to have comments on that.

Okay, thank you, Cabinet Secretary. Thank you, Chair.

Diolch. The memorandum does not make substantive reference to clause 30 and Schedule, clause 60 or clause 63. Can you explain the Welsh Government's position in relation to these provisions in the Bill as introduced and why it believes consent is not required?

Thank you for raising that issue, Chair. I just wanted to explain that I think that has been an oversight on our part. Obviously, I'm sorry that we have made that oversight. By way of explanation, the work on this has had to be worked up at pace when we only saw the detail of the Bill just after Christmas. We will bring forward any necessary LCMs that relate to those clauses. I'm grateful to the Children, Young People and Education Committee for bringing those matters to our attention. I think it shows that scrutiny is working and is helpful. Did anybody want to add anything on that? 

No, nothing to add. Thank you.

We'll take that as a compliment, scrutiny being helpful. How many regulation powers does the Bill provide to Welsh Ministers in total?

Ten. Is that right?

Yes.

Ten.

Thank you very much. Alun.

I'm largely content with what we've heard this afternoon, quite honestly. Just one final question, though. In terms of where we are, you seem to be saying two things, and I'm not really sure where—. I'm thinking you seem to have had a very good relationship with the UK Government in terms of developing the policy, shall we say, and having conversations, which aren't necessarily focused on this particular Bill and the rest of it. And a couple of times in answer to questions, you seemed surprised or you didn't have the detail, what you've just said. Those two things sort of rub, I think, up against each other in my thinking. But, without wishing to spend too much time on that, my question really is that we are where we are today, and I accept the points that both Ministers have made in terms of developing a policy and delivering the policy. Do you anticipate—? Are the provisions that we are debating today the final position, or do you anticipate that there will be a supplementary legislative consent motion and further provisions inserted into this legislation before it completes its parliamentary process?

Okay. Shall I start on that? As I said at the start, a lot of this information was in confidential discussions with the UK Government for a period. It's only been since December that we had full sight of the legislation, and now we are in very regular dialogue. They've given us assurances that they will keep us updated. There will be no surprises, hopefully, in terms of what's in the legislation, and I’ve already made a commitment that we will address the issues arising from the oversight that the Chair asked about. There is one matter that I’m aware of that could arise, going forward, which is around the child employment provisions, which are not currently in the Bill but could come into the Bill. That is complicated by the fact that, obviously, that’s partially reserved, with it being employment, but it has an implication for devolved services, so we’re in discussions and they will keep us updated. And obviously, if there are any necessary LCMs, I’ll give you my commitment that we’ll table that as soon as we possibly can.

I don’t have anything further to add to what the Cabinet Secretary’s said. There are going to be further amendments, as we understand it from our discussions, and they will be part of the normal process of scrutiny, and, as the Cabinet Secretary said, they will be subject to LCMs.

My point was that—. I can understand that there’s a need for confidentiality in the development of policy within Government; I’m not sure why that confidentiality should apply to you as the Minister, from a UK perspective. That’s why I find it a bit curious. I can understand that you publish stuff for us to see and I’ve got no issue with that—I’ve done it myself—but I would’ve anticipated a little bit more openness from the UK Government, from the UK side. But that’s something we can look at again.

Well, I’ve not been involved in a process like this before. I’m told that this is usual. There were also sensitivities around this matter because of the criminal case that I’ve referred to. I don’t have any complaints about the way UK Government Ministers have liaised with me on this issue; I’m very happy with that situation. And let’s look at it from their point of view: they had to hit the road running with this legislation, very quickly, in the King’s Speech, and it is a very broad, wide-ranging piece of legislation, which isn’t without its challenges. Did you want to add anything? You were looking like you did.

Just a point just to clarify that there are some provisions around child employment in relation to England in the Bill at the moment, and we’re looking at how they might apply to Wales if we wanted them to, given the reserved nature of some of those elements.

That's fine.

Okay. Well, one of the last things the Minister said was that she was happy. I think that’s a good place to stop proceedings. Can I thank the Cabinet Secretary and the Minister and their officials for coming along this afternoon? I’ve found it very useful; I’m sure my colleagues have. Thank you very much.

Thank you very much. Diolch.

Before we have a break, can I report that we've got apologies from Adam Price?

Can I welcome the Cabinet Secretary for Transport and North Wales and his officials to the meeting today? If you'd like to introduce yourselves for the record—. 

I'm Ken Skates. I'm the Cabinet Secretary for Transport and North Wales. 

Hello. I'm Alex Walters, deputy director for public and integrated transport at Welsh Government.

Hello. I'm Catrin Dellar, and I'm the head of bus reform for the Welsh Government. 

Hello. I'm Hannah Dudley, lawyer with legal services for the Welsh Government. 

Thank you very much, and croeso. If I can start with the first question, which is a standard first question: are you satisfied that the Bill is within the Senedd's legislative competence? 

Yes, thanks, Chair. Yes, we are, absolutely. Subject to a small number of provisions needing consent, we do believe that this firmly falls within legislative competence. 

Okay, thank you. The explanatory memorandum does not discuss human rights. What account have you taken of human rights in preparing the Bill?

Well, Chair, as with all Senedd Bill proposals, the Welsh Government has to carry out a full human rights assessment before introduction, and we're satisfied that the provisions in this Bill are compliant. 

Thank you. It's taken a long time, as you know, because you're the person responsible. Back in 2020, you introduced the Bus Services (Wales) Bill. We had COVID then, which slowed everything and stopped everything, and it was withdrawn due to COVID. What were the reasons for laying this Bill, given that the previous bus services Bill was withdrawn in 2020? 

Well, it may be helpful if I ask Alex to just add her views and observations on this. But essentially, you're right, Chair, COVID upended our legislative programme, but it did give us an opportunity to revisit this particular Bill. We were moving at speed up until 2020 to try to introduce a Bill that would reform bus services. And so, what we proposed then is not as ambitious as what we've been able to propose today, and we've used that time to effectively move from a position where we gave tools under the previous Bill to local authorities to actually requiring, on a national basis, franchising across Wales. So, it takes it a huge step further, what we're proposing now. If you compare it to the UK bus Bill, the better buses Bill, that effectively offers those tools to local authorities that we were proposing with 2020 Bill, but we're going much further with the legislation that we're proposing under our bus reform today. Alex is probably the most consistent person who's been in transport for some time, and so will be able to give a bit of an outline of what took place when I was out of Government and how we shifted from the previous Bill to the one that you're scrutinising today. So, if I could just bring in Alex, briefly, that would be really helpful, I think, Chair.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. Yes. I think I'd endorse what you say, that restructuring this framework in a way that best delivers what we set out in the White Paper has been a really complex undertaking, and it's important that we take that time to get it right and put buses on a stable footing. This Bill is very different to the 2020 Bill and, as the Cabinet Secretary says, much more ambitious. I wonder if it's also worth mentioning that, in the intervening period since 2020 and since the withdrawal of the previous Bill, there has been a huge amount of work carried out, including a consultation in 2022, the publication of the road map, which is a really important document, and a huge amount of direct engagement with stakeholders. So, it's really given us that opportunity to engage and bring in a really wide range of stakeholders into the process.

Okay. Thank you very much. Sam.

Thank you very much, Chair. Good afternoon, Cabinet Secretary. Just quickly, given the Bill contains six parts, why does it not include an overview section?

That's a very good question, Sam—a very good question, Chair. I'll ask Catrin to come in with the legal angle on this, but I believe that it was on the basis of advice from the drafters of the Bill. I agree that an overview can help to contribute to the accessibility of legislation, but in this instance we're of the view that the structure of the Bill and the type of provision that's included in it is actually relatively easy to follow in its own right. So, an overview would essentially just restate the various cross-headings and sections that are already set out in the table of contents, and so we felt that duplication was not necessary and certainly not desirable. But I'll bring in Catrin.

Yes, Cabinet Secretary. Thank you. That says it all, really. We did take a look at other legislation—other Acts and current Bills of the Senedd—and I don't think it would have added. We don't think it would have added a lot, and the drafters were of that view, and we took their advice. It would just restate the cross-headings that we've got in the section titles already. So, I think the Bill is an easy one to follow compared to some, I think.

Okay. Thank you very much. And then, there are several amendments and the Bill disapplies certain provisions in Acts of Parliament, for example removing the restrictions on local authorities in Wales from providing bus services. So, are you confident, Cabinet Secretary, that all of the necessary changes have been made to primary legislation to enable the Bill to operate efficiently?

Yes. I mean, the Bill makes amendments to the existing requirement for local authorities in Wales to secure public passenger transport services that, obviously, wouldn't be provided, and the power to subsidise such services, but we are planning to table further consequential amendments at Stage 2 in respect of other existing powers—for example, in relation to the powers within the transport Act that relate to quality partnership schemes and quality contract schemes, and also ticketing schemes.

Okay. Thank you. Moving on, the explanatory memorandum explains that a response from the Ministry of Justice is expected in relation to the justice impact identification assessment on or around the introduction of this Bill. So, as the Bill has now been introduced, when will the full assessment be published?

Thank you, Chair. As the Member outlines, we completed that full justice impact assessment and I'm pleased to say that it's been cleared by the Ministry of Justice and we're due to publish that imminently. I'll make sure that you're alerted at the point at which it's published.

Okay. Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. 'Imminently'—now, are we talking this week? Are we talking before the half term recess? When would 'imminently' be, in your definition of the term?

If I may bring in Hannah, she may be able to provide a date or at least a week when we expect it to be published.

Catrin, are you able to speak to that question?

Yes. I would say in the next week or so. It's not going to be any longer than that. I think it's a matter of, now that we've had the comments back, translation and just administrative issues now.

Does that mean before half term?

Yes.

Yes. There we are. Thank you. Thank you very much, Cabinet Secretary, and your team there. In summarising the powers to make subordinate legislation under the Bill, the explanatory memorandum refers to the negative and affirmative procedures. However, the Bill itself uses the procedures as named once the provisions of the Legislation (Procedure, Publication and Repeals) (Wales) Bill come into force, namely the Senedd annulment and approval procedures. Should the Senedd pass that Bill and it subsequently receives Royal Assent, will you amend the explanatory memorandum to ensure consistency within the Bill?

Yes, that's certainly our intention. The legislation (Wales) Bill is currently in Stage 3, so we're looking at updating the EM to reflect the wording that's captured within that particular piece of legislation. We are looking at doing that at the end of Stage 2.

Lovely, thank you. And forgive me, Cabinet Secretary, but it's me again with another series of questions. What are the key differences between the definition of 'local bus services' in this Bill and the definition of 'local services' as per the 1985 Act?

This is a really, really good question, and I may have to provide you with a briefing paper on it because the definition in the 1985 Act was just overly complicated. Essentially, under our Bill, a local bus service is a service with one or more stopping places in Wales using one or more public service vehicles for the carriage of passengers by road as separate fares. That's where passengers are picked up and then set down within 15 miles. So, the definition in section 1 is similar to the definition under section 2, and obviously it aligns with the existing definition for all practical purposes. But there are three key differences, I think. First of all, and it's for obvious reasons, services must have one or more stopping points in Wales. Then, secondly, we're excluding excursions or tours and rail replacement services from the definition. I don't think it is reasonable to expect Welsh Ministers to secure and provide excursions, days out and holiday tours. So, that's been removed. And clearly, it's for the likes of TfW, Avanti, CrossCountry and GWR to provide rail replacement services. So, that's not captured within the definition. And then, the word 'bus' is included in the definition as well. That doesn't appear within the definition in section 2 of the 1985 Act. But, if any further briefing is required on the differences, I'm more than happy to provide that, Chair. But I think I've captured pretty much all of them.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. Looking to the Chair, I would welcome a briefing on that. But I do take your oral, substantive answer there, which was very comprehensive.

The Bill defines a flexible local bus service as a local bus service that is so flexible that it would not be practicable to identify its route for the purpose of the Welsh bus network plan. Will you determine which routes are 'so flexible' so as to fall within this definition? 

This largely relates to demand responsive transport, and it's going to be for Transport for Wales on behalf of the Welsh Ministers, and, crucially, in collaboration. It will be undertaken in collaboration with councils to agree that a service should have no fixed route and, therefore, as such, be included in the plan as a flexible service.

Okay. Thank you. Diolch, Cadeirydd.

Diolch. Alun.

Thank you. Cabinet Secretary, I'm interested in the structure of the Bill and the powers it provides to Ministers. In section 4, Welsh Ministers must only have regard to the objectives that are set out in section 4 of the Bill. Why is that? Surely the purpose of the powers being provided to Ministers is to deliver the functions that are set out on the face of the Bill rather than simply to have regard to the objectives. 

Yes, another fine question. Essentially, it's because there has to be the flexibility for Ministers to be able to have regard to duties rather than tie Ministers' hands to achieving a particular outcome at all costs. If we were required to meet those duties, then we could end up in a situation where you don't have the finely balanced measure of meeting each of the duties. You end up prioritising one particular one at all costs to the others, where that particular one might be more difficult to achieve. So, it's all about giving flexibility to enable us to deliver better bus services across Wales.

Oh, I know it's all about flexibility—it's giving Ministers powers to do what they choose. This committee's concern is to limit those powers to the powers that are required to deliver the legislation, and my concern is that a have-regard power certainly does provide the Government with flexibility—that’s certainly true—but perhaps too much flexibility. My concern is to ensure that the powers delivered to Ministers and to Government are delineated in a more structured way.

But this shouldn't be read in isolation from the other form of scrutiny that's going to be taking place and the collaborative work that's going to be taking place by Transport for Wales on behalf of Ministers with local authorities. So, the flexibility doesn't just apply to Welsh Ministers, it applies to the system, to be able to co-ordinate and construct a network that has regard to those duties but doesn't become overly obsessed with meeting each and every one in equal terms.

I didn't say that. The position I'm seeking to clarify is the powers and how powers can be delineated. And whilst I welcome the Cabinet Secretary's commitment to consultation and collaborative working, that's all fine, but this still provides you with quite wide powers. And my concern is, if you require those powers, then surely it is better to describe what those powers are and to delineate how a Minister is able to exercise those powers rather than simply deliver those powers on a plate where it's a matter for the Government to decide what those powers are. It should be a matter for this Senedd to decide what those powers are.

I'll bring in Catrin, but there's a risk that we're conflating the powers with the duties on this, and I think the powers are pretty clear. Having regard to the duties gives us that flexibility that I've spoken about the need to have. But, Catrin, do you want to come in? 

Yes, Cabinet Secretary. Thank you. I think we have to bear in mind that, in the short term, we're talking about bus reform, but. in the long term, it's a business-as-usual way of delivering a dynamic bus service across Wales. And I think the nature of the generational change that we'll see with buses is that, in the first instance, it might mean that some of the objectives may conflict, or even one might be more pre-eminent than another in order to get where we need to get to. So, for example, in establishing a new model, we may be more focusing on promoting the use of services rather than reducing emissions, which is obviously very important and we're tied by other legislation there and rightfully so. But this will need to be the case because we may still need to buy diesel buses in order to provide more services to encourage more people out of their cars. And in this way, all of the objectives need to be considered, but one can have pre-eminence over the others. And that, I think, is what we're really encouraging and why flexibility is really needed in this case, because we need to be dynamic. We need local authorities and Welsh Ministers and Transport for Wales to work with other partners to understand which of those objectives we can focus on. But, at the same time, we'll still have to be able to demonstrate that we are considering all of them as part of our policy making.

I think, Chair, in addition, if we were to place Ministers under a duty to achieve a certain outcome, there is the risk that Ministers would then come into conflict with local authorities during the process of consulting on network maps and on outcomes. So, having that flexibility isn't just about making sure that Ministers can deliver for passengers and for people in Wales; it’s about making sure that we can work with local authorities to do so.

I don't think anybody objects to either flexibility or the capacity to deliver change. I remember campaigning on bus reform with Huw Lewis back in the 2007 Senedd, so we’ve waited for it for long enough. So, I don't have any issues there. My concern is how do we hold Ministers and the Government to account when they are taking decisions where the powers have a level of flexibility to enable Ministers essentially to—I don't want to say 'do as they like'—operate in a way that is, perhaps, beyond the reach of scrutiny or accountability. 

There are various means for scrutinising Welsh Ministers on this. First of all, the plans have to be consulted upon within the regions. We're establishing a memorandum of understanding as well with the corporate joint committees to ensure that, effectively, CJCs are able to then propose the networks to Ministers. And then furthermore, the Bill requires Welsh Ministers to report to the Senedd on the extent to which the exercise of their functions has contributed towards achieving the objectives in section 4. There'll also be then, further to that, an opportunity for the Senedd to examine and scrutinise Ministers' actions. And then, the reporting requirement, coupled with the duty to lay revised network plans, ensures that the Senedd is able to keep a watching brief over what Ministers are doing.

I'm confident that the Senedd has the capability and the capacity to be able to fully scrutinise what Welsh Ministers are striving to achieve with the network map and the plan as a whole, and, in so doing, curtail any powers that Members feel might be excessive. But I feel that what we are proposing is both proportionate and pragmatic. I think flexibility is absolutely vital in order to achieve what we have laid out in our aspirations in the road map to franchising.

I don't think anybody disagrees with the flexibility being appropriate. I think the issue is where the flexibility starts and ends, and where proper ministerial powers are delineated. I haven't argued against flexibility in that way; I simply want those powers to be delineated. But in terms of where we are and where we're going here, you talk about the different objectives and your officials have spoken about how those objectives can work together, and how some can sometimes potentially be in conflict, and that's fine. I appreciate and understand that.

But in the reports that you outline towards your section 4 objectives, the EM also sets out additional matters that you will be including in there. I accept the reporting mechanism that you've described in the Bill, but surely this should be on the face of the legislation to enable not just the Senedd but others who are affected by the work of the Government to understand what is required and what the Government will be reporting, because that surely underpins a greater sense of accountability than simply including something in an EM.

Chair, what I wanted was an approach that included on the face of the Bill what balances the need to make progress towards the objectives with the need to demonstrate how the functions are being exercised. Further information in the report may include matters that are connected to the wider delivery of bus services or the network that don't directly relate to the objectives, and they may include actions that we plan to take going forward and wider achievements or issues identified that require an improvement. They're not included in the Bill because we need to allow, again, the flexibility to understand exactly what they would be.

Technology is moving on at pace. Different behaviour patterns will influence the provision of bus services. But we think that any additional matters that are relevant to the Senedd or the public in the delivery of the objectives should be included in the report. I think it's absolutely vital that we're completely transparent with any additional matters.

I'll leave it at that. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Sam. 

Thank you, Chair. Apologies, Cabinet Secretary—it's me again. But looking at section 5(2) of the Bill, it sets out the key particulars of local bus services that must be included in the Welsh bus network plan. Was consideration given to including a delegated power that would allow this list of key particulars to be amended by secondary legislation?

Chair, I'm not of the view that a power to amend the description of the key particulars is necessary, I'm afraid. They're very unlikely to change in this context, I think.

Why do you believe that they're very unlikely to change?

Because it is a pretty consistent approach that we're taking, and I don't believe that that power is required at all. Catrin.

They're standard services in terms of what we traditionally think of as bus services; they have stopping points along a given route. And the same with demand-responsive services—Fflecsi services. We can't see how those would change. They're pretty new compared to the standard services. But consistently, it's about geographical area and, potentially, any other key points that we want to include in there, but the geographical area is the main particular there. 

One thought I've been having with regard to this is the future of flight and autonomous mobility using drones, but if they were to be introduced as a form of transport, they could not possibly be considered bus services. So, I think we're safe in the position that we're in, as outlined by Catrin.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. It's nice to know that you're looking to the future, as well, with potential drone travel. Sections 6 and 8 of the Bill set out a number of stakeholders that must be consulted during the preparation of the draft Welsh bus network plan, or when preparing a revised draft plan. Why shouldn't there be an express duty to consult with English local authorities when an English authority may be affected by a cross-border service? 

Well, Chair, I live in a cross-border area. I can see the English border from where I live, so I know how important cross-border services are when preparing and revising a transport plan and its nature. So, consultation with English local authorities is covered; it's covered by sections 6(4)(g) and 8(4)(g) of the Bill. Under these provisions, Welsh Ministers will be required to consult with English local authorities. But they'll be required to consult on cross-border services when it's considered appropriate, rather than the entire network map. We didn't feel that it'd be appropriate to have to consult with English local authorities on all of the map. That would not be proportionate or desirable.

No, I understood that. You mentioned section 6(4)(g) and 8(4)(g), which do allow Welsh Ministers to consult with any other person. So, you're satisfied that that 'any other person' is sufficient when it comes to English local authorities?

Yes, I am. It's also just worth highlighting that the process of getting to where we are has meant that we've had to work very collaboratively on a cross-border basis already. So, systems, functions and bodies are already established for that form of cross-border consultation—in this area, for example, with Growth Track 360 and the Mersey Dee Alliance. So, those bodies, those processes of consultation, are already in place. And it's not just about the local authorities as well, because we can also—through the likes of Growth Track 360 and the MDA—draw in education institutions on both sides of the border, as an example of how we're going to be consulting on the network that's cross border in nature.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. Subsections (7) to (9) in section 6 provide that the Welsh Ministers may prepare a draft of the Welsh bus network plan and seek views and consult in relation to that plan, prior to the rest of section 6 coming into force. Why were these provisions considered necessary?

That's basically because a huge amount of work has already been done by Transport for Wales and others to develop and, indeed, to consult on the network plan, as the intention is to publish the initial version, subject to Royal Assent, as soon as possible in the new year. So, these powers enable us, essentially, to capture the work that's being done already, as part of a requirement for the development of the network plan, in time for rolling out the bus model next year.

Thank you. Section 7 provides that where any revision is made to the Welsh bus network plan, that revised plan must be laid before the Senedd within the period of 13 months, beginning with the date on which the plan was most recently laid. Can I ask why 13 months was deemed appropriate? 

It gives a little bit of flexibility. It allows for recess, it allows for slippage. We would aim to be able to publish the plan around the same time every year, but given that recess dates do change, it just provides that small amount of flexibility of one month. 

Understood. Section 8 provides that some of the requirements around seeking views and consulting on a proposed revision to the Welsh bus network plan do not apply where the proposed revision is, quote, no more than minor or it would, quote, not be reasonably practicable to consult over the proposed revision. How will you consider what is no more than minor for the purpose of the exception, and in what circumstances would it not be reasonably practicable to consult on a proposed revision?

Well, obviously, given the nature of transport and road works, there will inevitably be times when minor revisions are required due to emergency works or resurfacing and therefore a route is diverted. In those circumstances the work might actually not take as long as consultation would take and so it wouldn't be desirable, it wouldn't be necessary to conduct consultation because it would be such a small and unavoidable change and one that wouldn't actually change the stopping points for the overall time frame of the journey.

Okay. Thank you, Chair. 

Thank you very much. Moving on swiftly, I think, to me. We've made very good progress today; let's hope that we can continue. Section 17 provides that the Welsh Ministers may directly provide a local bus service so long as they are satisfied that doing so would be a more effective way than entering into a local bus service contract. How would you determine whether the direct provision of service would be more effective?

Well, there are some examples that I could perhaps outline to demonstrate this. One might be that if, under the franchise model, bidders came back and highlighted that within a package of routes one would be incredibly expensive to operate, it might then be more desirable for us to operate it directly. The whole purpose of this measure is to make sure that we can keep wheels on the road and keep the network operating in the best way possible in those circumstances and, indeed, if a business was to fail. And then equally, and I sincerely hope and I doubt that this will happen, but equally if there was a package of routes and bidders came back to say it's not cost effective for them to bid, then in those circumstances Transport for Wales could provide them directly. So, again it's about making sure that we take a pragmatic approach and one that is flexible to enable us in all circumstances and all eventualities to provide bus services across the entire network map.

Okay. Thank you very much. Section 25 gives the Welsh Ministers power to give notice to current and former operators to require those operators to provide certain information to them. Section 25 provides that the regulation may make provision about appeals. Is it appropriate for a provision about appeals to be set out in secondary legislation rather than on the face of the Bill?

Chair, if I may, I'll invite one of the lawyers, the experts, to talk to this piece, if that's okay—perhaps Alex. 

Thanks, Cabinet Secretary. Yes, I’m happy to. So, the content of this provision might vary as we move through the process from the current deregulated model through a relatively lengthy transition and into business as usual under the franchise model. Transport for Wales are already working with industry representatives and operators to understand the sort of information they currently hold and the means in which they retain it, which can obviously differ quite significantly between small and large operators, and we want to be able to work with all operators to ensure clarity and fairness in our expectations around the sharing of information. So, given that this provision about appeals may need to be amended over time to make sure it remains fit for purpose, it's considered appropriate for provision to be made in regulations rather than on the face of the Bill. Again that word—it's important that Welsh Ministers have the flexibility to reflect those changes.

Section 16 provides that appeals relating to local bus services permits may be made to the first-tier tribunal, whereas appeals relating to the enforcement of the restrictions on providing local bus services under section 24 and those relating to the enforcement information required under section 31 are to be made to the upper tribunal. Could you explain why 24 and 31 rely on appeals being made to the upper tribunal, rather than the first-tier tribunal?

Yes, of course, Chair. So, both sections 24 and 31 make provision for appeals against enforcement decisions made by a traffic commissioner under sections 23 and 30 to be dealt with by the upper tribunal, and, as the role of a traffic commissioner is quasi-judicial, it's appropriate therefore that any appeals go to the upper tribunal for determination as a superior court.

Okay. Before I call Alun Davies in to ask some questions, I'll just ask you one. The big problem we’ve got with buses at the moment is they spend a lot of time stationary because they can't get ahead of their timetable, and their timetable is controlled by the fact that they get financially penalized if they end up late getting to the final destination. That has stopped through-buses. We used to have—it doesn't mean anything to you—a Morriston to Mumbles bus. We don't any more; you have to change in Swansea, because, if you're late in Swansea, you'll be late along the rest of the journey. And also buses really do spend a lot of time stationary, waiting to move on, just in case they get caught in a traffic jam. Is this going to deal with any of that? Is the penalty going to come off, and are buses going to work as efficiently as possible, rather than making sure they are not late?

Yes, that's absolutely the aim, and, through our engagement with the sector and with drivers themselves, it has become clear that there are certain penalties that do not act in the interests of passengers. So, we're working on the package of contracts, the package of routes, with operators to make sure that they do serve the needs of passengers, rather than have these bizarre arrangements in place that can sometimes detract from what we're trying to achieve.

Okay, thank you. I spend a lot of time stationary, looking at the stadium, waiting for the bus to be able to move on again. Alun, you've got some questions on franchising?

Very briefly, Chair. The whole Bill seems to be predicated on the policy of franchising, but the Bill itself seems to be relatively quiet on that. So, I'm just interested as to—. The Bus Services (Wales Bill) 2020 you referred to earlier referred specifically to Welsh franchising schemes. So, is there a reason why the Bill has been written in the way that it's written?

Yes, really good question, actually, and this relates to existing law and the lack of definition for franchising. But I think probably one of the lawyers would be better able to explain the situation as it currently stands. I think Hannah is probably the person that I should bring in for this.

Yes, sure. Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. So, the UK doesn't have laws that exclusively govern or define the relationship between franchisers and franchisees. That relationship is governed by the contract in place. So, for that reason, it was felt unnecessary and potentially unclear, given the lack of a legal definition, to refer to franchising in the Bill. The system proposed by the Bill is different to the system proposed in 2020, which focused on changing the existing legal framework in respect of local authority powers to secure bus services. So, the terminology used won't necessarily be the same. I know, in the previous 2020 Bill, there was a reference to Welsh franchising schemes. So, whilst the current Bill doesn't expressly refer to franchising, it refers to the mechanism by which franchising will be achieved, and that is that the Welsh Ministers will enter local bus service contracts with operators.

Okay, thank you. That's very clear. And do you believe, Cabinet Secretary, that you've got the necessary legal framework for procuring franchise packages for current legislation, in terms of that the Social Partnership and Public Procurement Act 2023 and the Procurement Act 2023 provide the framework and basis for procurement practice in Wales? Are you confident it provides you with the sufficient powers, if you like, or sufficient structures that you're able to deliver this in practice?

Yes. Yes, I am confident recent legislation is relevant to this and provides us with the powers necessary to be able to undertake franchising. I'm more than confident; the advice that I've had from lawyers amounts to the confidence that's needed to go forward with franchising arrangements.

Thank you. Cabinet Secretary and your colleagues, can I thank you very much for coming along and giving evidence to us today? You know that a transcript will be coming to you, and you've got an opportunity to correct any factual errors. So, again, thank you very much.

Diolch yn fawr iawn. Thank you. Thanks very much.

Can we move into a short break for five minutes so that everybody moves around?

Croeso yn ôl. Welcome back. Item 4: instruments that raise issues to be reported to the Senedd under Standing Order 21.2 or 21.3. The Procurement (Wales) (Amendment) Regulations 2025, paper 4, draft report: these regulations make substantive amendments to the Procurement (Wales) Regulations 2024 to enable the implementation of the Procurement Act 2023. Senedd lawyers have identified eight technical reporting points. A Welsh Government response has not yet been received, though I think you'll update me if it has. We have Kate from our legal team, who would like to run through the reporting points and any Welsh Government response we've had.

Thank you. One of the eight technical reporting points relates to potentially defective drafting in relation to a definition. Two of the points identify inconsistencies between the Welsh and English language texts, and then the remaining five are seeking further information from Welsh Government about particular issues. So, for example, one of the points seeks clarity as to why there's an inconsistency between how periods of time are described in the existing 2024 regulations and in the amendments made by these regulations. In addition, although not noted in the draft report, Members might want to note that these regulations are addressing reporting points that were raised by this committee on previous procurement regulations, and we're still waiting for the Welsh Government response. 

Thanks, Kate. Members, do you have anything to raise? Okay.

Moving on to item 5, instruments that raise issues to be reported to the Senedd under Standing Order 21.2 or 21.3 previously considered. The committee considered this instrument, the Agricultural Wages (Wales) Order 2025, at its meeting of 24 March and laid its report the same day. We have correspondence from the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs, which responds to our letter on 30 April requesting clarification around the response to point 4 in the committee’s initial report.  

The Deputy First Minister states that the issue highlighted in point 4 does not affect the provision’s functionality within the 2025 Order, and confirms that the issue identified will not be repeated in the 2026 Order. Have you got anything to add, Kate? No. Do Members have anything they want to add? No. Okay, thank you very much. 

Notification and correspondence under the inter-institutional relations agreement. Correspondence from the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs: the Phytosanitary Conditions (Amendment) Regulations 2025. The Deputy First Minister informs us of his intention to consent to the Phytosanitary Conditions (Amendment) Regulations 2025 being made, which will apply to Wales, England and Scotland. He says in his letter that:

'The Regulations protect biosecurity and support trade between Great Britain and support trade between Great Britain (“GB”) and third countries by introducing and amending protective measures against pests of plants.'

Do Members have any comments? No. Item 6.2 is correspondence from the Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Energy and Planning on the Interministerial Group on UK-EU Relations. The Cabinet Secretary's letter informs us that the next meeting of the Interministerial Group on UK-EU Relations is due to take place today, 12 May. Are we content to note it? And do we know if it's taken place?

We don't know if it has.

Okay. Correspondence from the Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Energy and Planning on the memorandum of understanding on the economic inactivity trailblazer in Wales. The Cabinet Secretary’s letter informs us that a memorandum of understanding has been agreed between the UK Government’s Department for Work and Pensions and the Welsh Government for the overall delivery of the economic inactivity trailblazer in Wales. Do Members have any comments they wish to make? No.

A written statement by the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs on the third biannual Welsh Government REUL Act update. The Deputy First Minister’s written statement provides an update on regulations made under the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Act 2023 between June and December 2024. He states that, during the reporting period, Welsh Ministers have not made any regulations under the powers conferred on them by the Act, although they have consented to the use of concurrent powers in the Act for one statutory instrument, the Official Controls (Amendment) Regulations 2024. He goes on to note that the UK Government laid two statutory instruments using powers in the Act, and that both are in wholly reserved areas, and the UK Government did not seek consent from Welsh Ministers. Do Members have any comments they wish to make? No. 

We move on to the next item, papers to note. Correspondence from the Finance Committee to committee Chairs, 1 April 2025. The Finance Committee is requesting the views of committees on the scrutiny of the Welsh Government draft budget 2025-26 and how improvements can be made for the 2026-27 draft budget. The deadline for responses is 23 May, in advance of the Plenary debate on the budget priorities 2026-27, which will be led by the Finance Committee. Do you want to return to that in private session? Yes.

Item 7.2, correspondence from the Cabinet Secretary for Housing and Local Government on the draft Senedd Cymru (Disqualification) Order 2025. The Cabinet Secretary’s letter informs us that the draft Order will be brought forward in October, and provides attached information regarding proposed disqualifications. The Cabinet Secretary has asked for our views, and asks for responses by 27 June. Shall we note it now and return to it in private session? Yes. Okay.

In accordance with Standing Order 17.42(vi), I invite the committee to resolve to exclude the public from the remainder of the meeting. Do Members agree? Yes. Okay.