Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru

Introduction, apologies, substitutions and declarations of interest. 

The apologies we've had are from Adam Price. The meeting is being broadcast live on Senedd.tv with British Sign Language interpretation available for item 11 later this afternoon. As a reminder, can Members ensure that all mobile devices are switched to silent? Senedd Cymru operates through both the medium of Welsh and English languages. Interpretation is available during today’s meeting. Can I declare an interest on item 11 in that my sister is profoundly deaf, and I've been supporting Mark with this legislation?

On to item 2, the Planning (Wales) Bill and Planning (Consequential Provisions) (Wales) Bill: evidence Session with Planning Officers Society Wales. Can I welcome our witnesses, Sara Morris, director of place and engagement, Pembrokeshire Coast National Park Authority, and chair of Planning Officers Society Wales, and Dr Sarah Groves-Phillips, corporate manager for planning services, Ceredigion County Council, and vice-chair, Planning Officers Society Wales. Croeso. Welcome. 

I now move on to questions. In presenting the Bills to the Senedd, the Counsel General and Minister for Delivery said that the purpose of the Planning (Wales) Bill and the Planning (Consequential Provisions) Bill is to ensure that planning law in Wales is clear, accessible and fit for the future. Do you believe these Bills will help achieve this purpose?

Diolch, Cadeirydd. Thank you, Chair. Planning Officers Society Wales do think that the Bills provide a clearer and more accessible framework for planning the law in Wales, and that they align with modern legislative drafting standards. The principle of consolidation and codification is greatly welcomed. We think that it will help practitioners to identify relevant sections of legislation much more easily. It's also very helpful in identifying which elements of legislation are Wales specific. Many of us are dealing with agents who work in both England and Wales, and having to advise on which bits of legislation in a complex system are Wales-only at the moment.

We very much welcome the fact that it's a bilingual Bill for a bilingual country, and note that a number of the elements of information provided alongside the Bill are particularly helpful, so things like the table of destinations. We welcome the improved terminology generally that is used, so things like moving from 'planning contravention notice' to 'enforcement investigation notice' that make it clearer what is happening and what is going on. Those elements are particularly welcomed as well.

Thank you. Do you believe that now is an appropriate time to consolidate planning law in Wales?

Yes, absolutely. The Planning Officers Society Wales do believe now is the appropriate time. We recognise the Law Commission made their recommendations in 2017-2018, roughly, but this is a big piece of work that's taken time to come to fruition, and we welcome it. And we believe now is as good a time as any, especially given the need to ensure the evolving policy landscape is represented in our Acts.

Diolch yn fawr. Thank you. Do you consider that you and your colleagues have had sufficient opportunity to share your views on the consolidation exercise to date, and what involvement have you personally had in the process?

Thank you. Yes, Planning Officers Society Wales have had ample opportunities to engage in this process. We are particularly grateful to Dr Charles Mynors, the author of the Bill, for attending a recent meeting with Planning Officers Society Wales to discuss elements of the Bill, and also grateful for the offer of future seminars with key practitioners as this work develops.

Diolch. Alun. 

Thank you very much. I think we are going to fly through this session, aren't we? You said that there had been a lot of work completed since the Law Commission's recommendations were published. Do you believe that the Bill implements those recommendations properly?

Yes, we do. We recognise that the Law Commission themselves have been asked this question and they themselves said they felt it did. We have no reason to disagree with that approach. We believe they have implemented the recommendations.

Okay, so you're very happy with the Government's approach, how the Government has managed this process and with the Bill itself. 

Yes, we're happy with the Government's approach. We recognise this is the first planning Act to have been undertaken and consolidated across the UK, and we believe Welsh planners will be in a better position for having it consolidated. At the moment, there's a significant number of Acts to wade through. Some apply to Wales, some don't and that can be tricky, especially when you're dealing with agents, applicants and the members of the public. This will allow us to articulate planning law in Wales more efficiently.

Okay. So, you don't have any improvements or amendments you'd like to see in this Bill?

We do have a couple of improvements we would suggest. It's tricky, because this is a consolidation Bill, and you're not supposed to be suggesting new pieces of legislation. That's always difficult when you're a practitioner in this area, because you have your own opinions on what would work better, but, of course, there are a couple of things that we could see going forward as making a difference. For example, we'd like to clarify whether the pooling regulations under the community infrastructure levy still apply and how we might manage that. There are drop-dead dates to local development plans. This is an issue, especially when it's difficult to get a plan across the line when you're in a sort of nutrient restricted area. There are other suggestions. For example, with England, they have made all enforcement action 10 years. We would like to see that in Wales. It's clarity for applicants and those people under enforcement action. But we recognise those are changes to law, really, rather than consolidation of the existing Act, and therefore not appropriate to do at this time. We hope they'll be considered in the future. 

So, you have those issues that you would like to take forward, which are outside the scope of this legislation. Do you have any specific amendments or improvements that you'd like to see to this specific piece of legislation?

We've heard some of the other sessions and the discussion around the use of 'relevant' or 'material' consideration, and I think that is one of the areas where we would agree with Royal Town Planning Institute Cymru. We don't think that there's a particular need to change that reference. We understand that the Law Commission believes that the legal interpretation is the same. We're obviously working with community councils, with county councillors and the general public, and we've spent many years explaining what a 'material consideration' is, and we're a little bit concerned that we're going to have to spend a lot of time explaining what a 'relevant consideration' is, and that perhaps that's not a necessary change. That would that would be one point.

I think another point to pick up is just section 86, which possibly appears to go slightly beyond consolidation in allowing the combination of applications for planning permission with other applications. This appears to enable combined listed building and planning applications. And as Planning Officers Society Wales, we would have some concerns about that. We note that there is a requirement in the Bill for Welsh Ministers to consult local authorities or an association of local authorities before making regulations on that. But if that element remains we would suggest that that be slightly broadened to also include planning authorities, which would pick up on national parks and any specialist bodies to which the combined applications would be relevant, to allow for bodies such as Cadw to be picked up.

Okay. I think that makes sense. 

Just one thing, you used the term 'drop-dead dates'. Can you explain that for those people who will be watching this on television and those, more importantly, who'll be reading the transcript?

Yes, sure. So, a local development plan adopted prior to the Planning Wales Act in 2015 does not have an end date, so it remains the plan in place until a new plan is adopted in a local authority. However, those plans adopted post 2015, the Planning Wales Act, have, in effect, a date at which they cease to become a plan. Therefore, it's necessary for that local planning authority to ensure that there is a plan in place. That can be tricky, because of outside influences that you have no control over, such as nutrient issues in certain affected catchments, so without that, effectively, a drop-dead date to your plan, the plan would remain in place, and that's more preferable for planning authorities to manage development in their areas.

Thank you very much. Sam. 

Thanks, Chair, and thanks to witnesses. So, in terms of the Senedd's Standing Orders, consolidation Bills may only make provision in specific ways, including restating existing law and making changes to improve the presentation of law. Hearing what evidence you've given to Alun Davies so far, do you consider this consolidation Bill makes a comprehensive consolidation? Is there anything else that you thought could have been included—that's not new law, but could have been included—as part of the consolidation? I'm not sure who wants to kick that off.

I'll take that one. We think it does cover the fundamental planning legislation that it needs to. I think the explanatory memorandum was very helpful in using a few examples and explaining that legislation that might overlap with other areas has not typically been included. We have identified a couple of areas where we think consolidation in the future would be very helpful. There is a particular need, in my view, around legislation around the caravan Act and licensing, where some of it is very, very dated, but I fully appreciate that that is legislation that overlaps both with planning and with the licensing regime. So, I can fully understand why it hasn't been included in this planning consolidation bill. But, yes, broadly, we're very happy with the content. As Sarah said, we very much welcome it as a very important and useful piece of work.

Thank you. You mentioned there the explanatory memorandum, which states that legislation on hazardous substances, which was consolidated in the Planning (Hazardous Substances) Act 1990, is not included in this consolidation, as the 1990 Act is operating satisfactorily. Do you believe that there's a need for this Act to be restated as soon as possible in, obviously, both English and Welsh, so that it can also stand as part of planning code alongside the Planning (Wales) Bill?

We do believe, in time, that restating that Act bilingually would be a useful tool, but we believe that across most planning and interrelated legislation. We don't particularly, as the Planning Officers Society Wales, have a view as to the timeline in which that's undertaken, because in reality it is a lesser often used Act than some other pieces of planning legislation. But we would welcome it, in time, during your work programme.

Thank you. Then, moving on, section 11 of the Planning (Wales) Bill requires public bodies carrying out any function in relation to development plans to exercise those functions in line with the sustainable development principle in the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015. Are you content with the provision made in section 11 of this Bill?

Yes, we are. We're content with the provision. We would echo comments I think made by RTPI Cymru on this, that it might come better if it was positioned at the top of the Bill, so that it was clear that it applied to all elements of the Bill. At the moment, it's replicated in section 51, in relation to development management functions in relation to applications, but there's no reference, for example, in the section on planning enforcement, so we just wonder about the positioning of that statement.

Okay, fantastic. And moving on to semantics, the Welsh Government argues in the explanatory memorandum to the Bill that the term 'relevant consideration' is considered to be a more commonly understood term than the term 'material consideration', which appears in existing legislation. It also believes that the term has the same legal effect. And for these reasons, the Bill's referred to 'relevant consideration'. Do you consider that the term 'material consideration' is not commonly understood and do you believe this change in terminology will improve understanding?

Sara has already touched on this point. As practitioners in planning, material considerations are a daily discussion, whether that's at planning committee with one's officers or with members of the public. I suppose when you've spent many years undertaking informal training on what that means, it can be a big change to change it to 'relevant considerations'. If that aids the public's understanding and aids the transparency of planning, then we're not necessarily against it as a change, but we do think that there has been a long process of educating people on what 'material considerations' mean, and it does seem to us as planning officers that that's well understood.

I do recognise in the explanatory memorandum, though, that they make a valid argument in terms of the fact that the translation of the term would be easier, because 'material' means different things in different parts of the legislation. So, you've got a material change of use, meaning significant change of use, in my view. Then you've got material considerations, which they're arguing means relevant considerations. And when you look at the bilingual translation of those, it would be simpler to have them separated out. So, I do reflect on that, and we're not, as the Planning Officers Society Wales, against the change necessarily, but we do think that it could have issues going forward, particularly around legal arguments and whether it still stands. We wouldn't want to see the planning process tied up further by legal arguments over whether this was 'material' or 'relevant', and is there a differentiation between those, although we acknowledge the Law Commission makes it clear, in their view, that 'relevant' and 'material' are the same thing.

Okay, thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you, Chair.

Alun.

You've covered all of that territory now; I don't think we need to go any further on that. In terms of where we're going now, do you think that the quality and accessibility of the documentation that is provided alongside the Bill is sufficient to enable people to understand the changes being made? 

Yes, we think that the standard of the explanatory materials prepared alongside the Bill is very high. It is very helpful. The table of destinations is particularly helpful for practitioners. If it was possible—. Welsh Government have been very good in the past at producing template documents for LPAs, so template decision notices, template advertisements. Those sorts of documents could be very helpful for LPAs and would stop 25 authorities having to scratch their heads and start from the beginning. So, we would welcome further tools along those lines, if it was possible. But we do think that the information that has been put out there at the moment is very clear.

Okay. Just one final question I'm actually going to go through this afternoon with you: the Welsh Government has assessed that, if the Bills are enacted, planning authorities will need to update various documents and webpages to ensure that references to the legislation are now correct. Their anticipation is that this work could take four days for a planning officer at an opportunity cost of £1,000 per planning authority. Is that your estimate as well?

It's tricky. We recognise that a ballpark needs to be given, and that seems about appropriate. We would suggest it's probably likely an underestimate, because it wouldn't necessarily be a planning officer making changes. We would have IT requirements, supporters amending the websites, if there was an issue on there. We also may need to contact our database providers to change templates. These things can take time. But we've done it for the Historic Environment (Wales) Act 2023, and we'll do it for this. And it does take time, but we're open to doing that. We think there probably have been a few documents that haven't necessarily been considered, for example, tree preservation order letters, enforcement, appeal notices, templates for delegated officers, supplementary planning guidance, the LDP itself, potentially, and annual monitoring reports. So, there's probably a wider range of things that need amending than has been set out. But I don't think the ballpark is too far out. I think that's probably about right.

Okay. You seem quite—how shall I put it—relaxed about this piece of legislation. You don't seem to have any major issues with it. You don't seem to have any serious concerns about it. If I've understood you correctly, there are some things you might wish to amend with it, but they seem to be relatively minor issues in the scale of things. So, in terms of where we are now, is there anything that you believe the committee is not covering in its analysis, or are there any areas that you would like to pursue?

I think it is fair to say that we're relaxed about this. We've known it was coming. We've been a part of the consultation. We've met with Dr Charles Mynors. We've had seminars. We welcome it. We believe it will simplify law for planning officers and the wider public. I don't think, at this stage, there's anything that's been specifically missed out that we would have raised a red flag over. Do we have a list of wants as planners? Absolutely we do, and we will feed that into the consultation. But, in terms of what this piece of legislation is set out to do, we believe it's been delivered well. We welcome it and look forward to its publication and it going through the various stages.

I don't have any further questions.

Thank you very much. Sam. 

Thank you, Chair. Now, in terms of ensuring wider understanding of the legislation, the Welsh Government have stated that, as part of the Bill's implementation, it will create new guidance, run familiarisation webinars and cancel a technical advice note on simplified planning zones and the demolition direction. Do you think this is sufficient or is there anything else that you'd be advocating for to help improve understanding?

We think all of those are excellent ideas and welcome them. I think I mentioned that Dr Charles Mynors has offered to do two particular seminars with the Planning Officers Society Wales, which is great. I would stress the need for some of those seminars to cover private practitioners as well. We have a significant number of private practitioners across Wales. We have local planning agents networks that we can direct Welsh Government towards that are a valuable way of getting the message out. And, as I mentioned, I think the other the other opportunity is potentially some draft templates for LPAs would be would be hugely helpful. If some key updates to documents, such as the development management manual, could happen reasonably quickly, that would be very helpful for practitioners. We can of course look at the new legislation and learn what the new references are, but having those tools in place would be really helpful as well.

Okay, thank you. Do you anticipate that bringing the Bills into force will require extensive amendments or restatements of any other relevant documents?

I think we have touched on this already. Yes, it will, and, in terms of local planning authorities, our understanding of what we've had to do for the Historic Environment (Wales) Act 2023 meant that conservation area appraisals, for example, that form part of supplementary planning guidance, they have all needed updating, and that does take time. We still have some to do, in reality. You often have a programme of updates as you go through and republish. So, yes, there will be additional documents that perhaps haven't been picked up on, but this will be work that's undertaken by local planning authorities as time goes on.

And finally from me, the Welsh Government proposes to update and consolidate subordinate legislation to be made under the Bills. To what extent do you believe this will contribute to the accessibility of law in this area?

We welcome that and we recognise, I think, that that may be a bigger challenge, actually, because some elements, such as the general permitted development Order, that will be quite a job. There are so many updates to it that it will be a big piece of work. But it is very much needed and will be very welcome. RTPI Cymru did raise this point about transition arrangements while some of those Orders are being prepared, and we would reiterate that point, that there is a need to ensure that we don't have a period of time without a use-class Order, for example, and that we have those transition arrangements in place. We know Annabel Graham Paul, giving evidence last week on behalf of the Planning and Environmental Bar Association, raised a note of caution on the risk of oversimplification, and suggested that this would be a bigger challenge for some of the regulations—so, they need to be consolidated but not oversimplified—and we would recognise that point and reiterate it.

Okay. Thank you. No further questions, Chair.

Finally from me, the Welsh Government states in the explanatory memorandum to the Bills that it is not possible to consolidate all subordinate legislation in relation to planning law by the time the Bills are expected to be commenced, and that its legislation will be consolidated later, in a phased approach. Do you believe that adopting this approach is appropriate, or do you think it would be better to wait until a time when it could all be put together?

I think, personally, if we were to wait for a time when it can all be put together then we would be waiting quite a significant period of time, and, as Sara touched on, some of the subordinate legislation will be more tricky to do than this has been, and this, I believe, has been quite tricky for the team doing it. So, I think a phased approach is appropriate and practical. I would hope there's a clear road map and that we can have stakeholder engagement to inform which bits come first or which are prioritised, but absolutely it makes sense to take a phased approach to this work.

Thank you very much. Can I thank you for coming along and giving your evidence to us? Can I also tell you that you will have a transcript to check for factual accuracy? We're very grateful for you coming along and giving evidence, and just thank you very much. We're now going to have a five-minute break.

We're now in back in public session. We're moving on to item 3, instruments that raise issues should be reported to the Senedd under Standing Orders 21.2 or 21.3. The Free-Range Poultrymeat Marketing Standards (Amendment) (Wales) Regulations 2025. These regulations make changes to the existing rules for marketing poultry meat in Wales. Specifically, they update existing EU rules as they apply in Wales.

The main change is about how long poultry like chicken raised as free range can be kept indoors with no access to open-air runs due to health protection measures, while still allowing their meat to be sold as free range. The amendment has removed the previous maximum time limit for the restriction in Wales. Senedd lawyers have identified two technical reporting points. A Welsh Government response has not yet been received. Can we move on to our legal team for any update?

Thank you, Chair. Both technical reporting points request further information from the Welsh Government. The first point notes an inconsistency between the headnote and the preamble for the regulations in terms of the provision under which the regulations are laid before the Senedd. And the second notes that references are made to 'the Act' as a defined term in the preamble to the regulations, but there is no definition of 'the Act' included in the regulations or the preamble. We are awaiting a Government response for those points.

Thank you. Any comments? 

Item 4, instruments that raise issues to be reported to the Senedd under Standing Order 21.2 or 21.3, previously considered. The Amendments to Subordinate Legislation (Minimum Landing Size and Miscellaneous Corrections) (Wales) Order 2025. Committee considered the instrument in the meeting on 15 September and laid its report the same day. Members are invited to note the Welsh Government response to the report, which has since been received. Jen, do you have anything to raise from the Welsh Government response?

Nothing further to add, Chair, in addition to the comments that were made regarding the previous omnibus regulations in last week's meeting.

Thank you, Jen. The Health Impact Assessment (Wales) Regulations 2025. The committee considered this instrument in its meeting on 29 September and laid its report the same day. Members are invited to note the Welsh Government response to the report, which has since been received. Jen, do you have anything to raise from the Welsh Government response? 

Thank you, Chair. Just to flag in relation to one of the reporting points that regarded the passage of eight years before provisions had been commenced in relation to health impact assessments from the Public Health (Wales) Act 2017, the Government confirmed that preparatory work began in 2017, but due to Brexit and COVID, staff were redeployed. Work resumed over 2022 and 2023, and consultation was carried out in early 2024, which yielded a significant number of responses, facilitating further policy development in this area.

Thank you. Have Members got any comments? No.

Item 4.3, the national health—

Hang on, hang on. I don't accept that explanation from Government. I think that's a ludicrous explanation, frankly, from Government that this Bill was passed in 2017, and then three years later, when we have COVID, there's an issue with their ability to deliver the provisions here. That's not acceptable. That's simply not acceptable. We've been here before with other pieces of legislation. I think we should push back hard on Government on this, and be very clear with the Government. Because Ministers have come here saying that they need legislation urgently, and the rest of it, and therefore they've got to go to London because this place hasn't got the capacity to do it. And then, all of a sudden, we've got the Welsh Government taking seven years to deliver these provisions. That's simply unacceptable, and I think we need to be very clear about that.

Three years of which were before COVID.

Yes. That's the point I was trying to make.

I was just amplifying it, Alun.

Using COVID as an excuse, three years later, is just not credible.

Okay.

Item 4.3, the National Health Service (Concerns, Complaints and Redress Agreements) (Wales) (Amendment) Regulations 2025. The committee considered this instrument last week, and the committee's report was laid the same day. Members are invited to note the Welsh Government's response to the report, which has since been received. Jen, do you have anything to raise from the Welsh Government response?

Nothing to add, thank you, Chair.

Any members? No.

Notification and correspondence under the inter-institutional relations agreement. Correspondence from the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Welsh Language on the Procurement Act 2023 (Specified International Agreements) (Amendment) Regulations 2025. The Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Welsh Language informs us of the intention to consent to UK regulations amending the Procurement Act 2023, noting that only transitional provisions require Welsh Ministers' consent. The regulations are due to be laid before Parliament on 21 October. The Welsh Ministers anticipate making separate regulations in relation to Wales under the Act in November 2025. Do Members have any comments? No.

Item 6, papers to note. A written statement by the Counsel General and Minister for Delivery on a draft of the Senedd Cymru (Member Accountability and Elections) Bill. The Counsel General and Minister for Delivery informs us of the draft Senedd Cymru (Member Accountability and Elections) Bill, which introduces a recall process for Members of the Senedd who commit serious misconduct or are imprisoned. It strengthens the Standards of Conduct Committee and expands the Senedd Commissioner for Standards' powers. The Bill is published for information and is still subject to the Llywydd's determination. Therefore, changes may be made before its formal introduction this autumn. Do Members have any comments? No.

A written statement by the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Welsh Language on a draft of the Development of Tourism and Regulation of Visitor Accommodation (Wales) Bill. The Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Welsh Language informs us of the publication of a draft Bill that sets out a legislative framework for licensing visitor accommodation in Wales, building on the existing register established by the Visitor Accommodation (Register and Levy) Etc. (Wales) Act 2025. The Bill is expected to be formally introduced this autumn. Do Members have any comments? No.

Item 6.3, correspondence to the Cabinet Secretary for Housing and Local Government on the Building Safety (Wales) Bill. Members are invited to note the outgoing letter we sent to the Cabinet Secretary following our consideration of the Bill on 29 September. We'll bring back the Cabinet Secretary's response for consideration when it's received, which should be in sufficient time to inform our consideration of the draft report. Do Members have any comments? No.

A written statement by the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs with an update on the review of the control of agricultural pollutions regulations. The Deputy First Minister informs us of the Welsh Government's commitment to implement all 23 recommendations from the independent review of agricultural pollution regulations. A new stakeholder group will guide the development of proposals, with technical work under way on issues such as slurry storage and soil protection. Enforcement improvements, including the consideration of civil sanctions, are being explored to ensure fair regulation. Do Members have any comments? No.

Can I move the motion, under Standing Order 17.42(vi) and (ix), to resolve to exclude the public from the following items: 8, 9, 10 and 12? Okay.

Welcome back to the meeting of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee. Can I welcome Mark Isherwood MS, Member in charge of the Bill; Gareth Rogers, Bill manager, Senedd Commission; Aled Evans, legal adviser, Senedd Commission, on the British Sign Language (Wales) Bill? You're going to be giving evidence to us. If I can start: why do you think this legislation is necessary, Mark?

Let me turn the sound off on my phone before we start.

There's a huge demand within particular deaf communities across Wales, and their families and friends and people who live and work with them in their communities at large. The main issues that keep arising—and we all know this from our own casework—are educational under-attainment, lack of true access to health services and an inability, therefore, to communicate directly and be fully understood, and to ensure understanding on the other side, with doctors, clinicians, nurses, consultants and otherwise, which jeopardises things like medication or perhaps ensures the wrong or inappropriate treatment. We know there are double the rates of mental illness amongst deaf people compared to the general population, although deafness, as you know, is not a learning disability or a mental illness. We know that there are lower employment rates and higher rates of disadvantage and deprivation amongst the deaf community. There's clearly an unmet need, despite the legislation that exists and the policies that exist at both UK and devolved levels. So, something needs to be done.

This was first highlighted to me, in the context of legislation, at north Wales's annual 'Lend Me Your Ears' conference held at Bangor University in 2018, run by and for the deaf community, in collaboration with the university, for families in north Wales who have a deaf member or more than one deaf member. The focus was on the Scottish legislation, and the calls from speakers, ranging from deaf academics through to people sharing lived experience, was for Wales to have equivalent legislation. So, that set the trail.

You'll recall, those who've been here long enough, that at the end of the last Senedd I won a Senedd debate proposing a Bill, and there was support for the principle of introducing a Bill. After the last election, with a new Parliament, I had to start again. I won another ballot, won the same debate again, and then had to wait for a further ballot before I was able to bring forward the proposal for the Bill itself. So, it's taken so far, all in, about seven years to get to this point, but during that period the needs expressed by the community have only grown.

Thank you for that. I should have told the viewers that we've got a sign language interpreter for this session. I missed them at the very beginning of the meeting, but now I can see them.

Thank you.

Next question: what discussions have you had with the Welsh Government during the development of this Bill? We've already spoken to Jane Hutt about it.

Absolutely. You may recall that when this was debated in the Senedd Chamber in June 2024, initially the then Cabinet Secretary, or Minister, responsible said that the Welsh Government couldn't see a need for this legislation. But, over the following months, the Welsh Government's position changed. I had spoken with the Cabinet Secretary and told her that this Bill was too important to lose; we needed something at least equivalent to the other UK nations. Obviously, there was Scottish legislation, there was legislation in England, only some of which applied in Wales, leaving huge gaps, and there was legislation being taken through in Northern Ireland by the Executive, their Government. Wales needed this legislation. But if it meant losing it, as currently drafted, let's talk about compromises, if necessary, to ensure that the deaf community in Wales has at least as much legislative provision in these areas as the other parts of the UK.

Thank you, Mark.

I would conclude by saying that that led to a series of meetings with the Cabinet Secretary, initially alone, to discuss how we could agree to take this forward, and ultimately with the Cabinet Secretary and the Counsel General, clearly, who's had to find time in the legislative timetable to accommodate this.

Thank you, Mark. Do you consider that all the provisions of the Bill fall within the legislative competence of the Senedd?

Yes, we believe so, particularly in the context of the Government of Wales Act 2006, which is the primary measure against which this is being considered. We are satisfied, after consideration by Senedd lawyers, and I think Welsh Government lawyers, that it does fall fully within the powers that exist in this place.

And do you consider that any human rights issues arise in relation to the Bill?

No. Again, it's not actually a human rights Bill; it's a language Bill. BSL is not a learning disability, it's not itself a communication tool; it's a language. So, this Bill is very much being presented on that basis. But notwithstanding that, we considered both the human rights and equalities aspects of this and found that they do fall not only within the legislation that exists for human rights and equalities, but also in many respects adds to them for the population concerned.

Thank you, Mark. Sam.

Diolch, Gadeirydd. Good afternoon to you, Mark. Do you think that the correct balance has been struck between what is required on the face of the Bill and what is left to the discretion of the Welsh Ministers?

Essentially, yes, although I look forward to hearing what recommendations you may make in this area, and what the other committees who have been considering this may make in this area. But this is a framework Bill to promote and facilitate, and ultimately it will be for the Welsh Government of the day, under close scrutiny from the Senedd, and with input and advice from the BSL adviser and the assisting panel, who themselves will be working with the wider deaf community, to ensure that the strategy and guidance that are subsequently issued by Welsh Ministers add the detail that, on the face of the Bill, we can't actually do, both because of the issues involved—and no Bill goes into that level of detail, potentially dozens of different issues—but also because it is a framework Bill to enable and ensure that future Welsh Governments, not just the next one, do promote and facilitate BSL and put in place measures to ensure that the changes we all hope to see come into force.

Fantastic. So, did you consider including more specific duties on the face of the Bill in terms of the promotion or use of BSL?

Not in terms of promotion and use. Obviously there are many specific things that certainly have been raised with me in the other committees, and which you may have given some thought to: should we be specifying the provision of interpreters, for example, or teachers of the deaf, for example, or how health services should be configured, for example, or what should be done to close the educational attainment gap, for example. But it is a framework Bill and that will be a matter for future Governments within that support and advisory framework, and the consultation framework I referred to a few moments ago, to take forward. But if there are aspects to this that you feel need strengthening, I look forward to learning what they may be.

Lovely. Thank you. In their evidence, the Cabinet Secretary told us that the detail of the national BSL strategy would be for a future Government to develop, something that you have alluded to in a previous answer. So, what do you anticipate being set out in the national BSL strategy? 

Primarily, how the Welsh Government itself and its component parts will promote and facilitate in practice the use of BSL, but also its expectations of the listed public bodies and how they should also do so on a local or co-operative regional basis. But they may, and, I hope, will, also make reference to some of the specific points I just touched upon, because a lot of this will hinge on there being sufficient and appropriately qualified numbers of interpreters, teachers of the deaf, and so on. And that will require workforce planning, because we won't get the numbers overnight simply by writing down on paper that we should be doing x, y, z.

We need a workforce plan, which I hope that might address. If it's a health board, or social care, we need to address the matters I alluded to earlier, to ensure that people can fully understand, and be fully understood, when communicating with officers or health professionals with regard to their conditions and needs. But similarly, when accessing training, employment, education, we need to ensure—and I hope the strategy will ensure—that there's a little bit more meat on the bones about what they would expect, not only from themselves, but from listed public bodies in those respects.

Thank you. Eighteen months is the time that the Welsh Ministers will have to publish the national BSL strategy if the Bill passes. Where do the 18 months come from, and do you think that allows enough time for proper consultation and development of that strategy?

We considered various options. We know in Scotland, for example, it's two years. But in the process of discussion with the Welsh Government, we actually got some wins as well, one of which, unlike Scotland, means that the listed public bodies will be required to produce a report within 12 months of publishing their plans, providing an update on implementation. Ministers will have an opportunity then—and we hope they will flex that opportunity—to require amendments if those public bodies have either failed in their plans to touch all bases or if, despite appropriate plan content, they've failed in their implementation. That is a stronger provision than in Scotland. So, 18 months was considered a good compromise between the time required to reach a point of publication of strategy and the need to be moving forward with what the Act is intended to deliver for deaf communities across Wales. 

Excellent. Six years is the period for review. Can you explain where the rationale for six years came from?

As I understand, and we looked at equivalent legislation elsewhere, I think it's six years in Scotland—

Yes, that's the case in Scotland under that Act. 

And England is—

I'm not sure on that, but it's the six-year period in Scotland that we looked at there.

Yes. So, we started with Scotland, but, again, we strengthened this, because we not only have the six-year strategy review, but we have the at least three-yearly requirement on Welsh Ministers to publish progress reports. And in so doing, the expectation would be that they would be incorporating the progress or otherwise delivered by the listed public bodies, because if they fail to deliver, then Ministers themselves will also fail to deliver. 

Excellent. Thanks, Mark. No further questions, Chair. 

Alun. 

Thank you very much, and thank you for this, Mark. I know you've done a ferocious amount of work on this, and your knowledge of the subject and the field is shining through at the moment, if you don't me saying so.

Much of the ground I was going to cover has actually been covered by Sam, and by you in your answers to him. So, I want to ask you how you see this legislation potentially bedding down. You've got guidance on how public bodies may promote and facilitate the use of BSL, and we've already had a conversation about that. But do you see a role for the Senedd in scrutinising the guidance?

It is an expectation that Senedd Members and Senedd committees will have a close eye on not just the guidance but how the legislation in its entirety rolls forward and how it delivers on the matters it was intended to deliver upon. Generally, though, as you know, guidance is not normally directly scrutinised by the Senedd or parliaments in general. Guidance is issued subsequent to the passing of legislation by the legislature, and then the legislature keeps a close eye on that through its various scrutiny processes as it goes forward. So, we've simply adopted normal practice for guidance. Is there anything you want to add on that perspective?

That's correct; there's nothing formal on the face of the Bill itself about the Senedd looking at that guidance. You have got that role for the Senedd in relation to the strategy and the guidance is just seen as something that will follow on from that. As the Member said, in general, codes of practice et cetera may be looked at by the Senedd, but guidance itself doesn't particularly tend to be subject to that.

So, the line you're following, the approach you're taking, is that, assuming that the strategy has a level of democratic input through the Senedd, the guidance implementing that strategy doesn't require it.

That's been the position we've taken, yes. There's not an absolute precedent, but the normal precedent indicates that's the way guidance on these equivalent Bills would go forward. But future Senedds—

That's absolutely fine, Mark.

I just hope that future Senedds will, as you indicate, have a very close eye on this.

What other information do you intend to have included in regulations, making use of the power in section 4(1)(c), and could some of that have been placed on the face of the Bill?

We felt that the two regulation-making powers in the Bill were sufficient at this stage, because Ministers will be empowered through the Bill to introduce regulations in the future, but that would be subject to scrutiny by the Senedd. Again, I don't know if you have anything you wish to add.

Within that section 4, it already states that they have to describe how it intends to promote and facilitate BSL, and then also how it intends to follow the guidance, or to explain why it does not intend to do so. So, we feel that those are the two substantive provisions here, and that (c) just covers anything else they may want to add.

In section 5, there's provision for a BSL adviser and reference to a panel to be appointed by Welsh Ministers. I wonder, Mark, if you could outline to the committee how you envisage that panel operating.

The adviser will have a substantive role, not only a formal role. It would be unexpected, putting it politely, if that adviser was not strongly connected not only to deaf BSL signers and groups across Wales, but also to the listed public bodies charged with delivering on this legislation. There are certain things that the Welsh Government must do. They must consult the adviser on the strategy, on the guidance. When they consider the local plans as they come in, there will be a key role for the adviser there. We suspect, and hope, and the intention is, that the adviser should be a continuous critical friend, raising matters as they are raised with him or her. That person, as you know, and it's one other concession we secured from the Welsh Government, must be a BSL speaker themselves, fluent in BSL, hopefully a member of the deaf community themselves. The hope and expectation is that the assisting panel will also be representative of lived experience, and possibly, looking at equivalent panels or bodies in other areas, with around six to eight persons. I know in England they have 15 people, but that's not a statutory body in the way it would be here.

I'm grateful to you for that. And finally from me, how would you anticipate the section 8 powers provided to Ministers for adding or removing public bodies from the legislation?

Unless bodies change—so, the Welsh Government replaces existing bodies with new bodies or merges bodies or increases the size by having more smaller bodies and therefore replaces existing bodies—I wouldn't envisage current bodies or other bodies necessarily being removed entirely. But it's highly likely that future Welsh Governments may wish to add further bodies. A number of bodies have been named; they were named when I made my statement in the Senedd in July by some Members, and they've been named by some of the other committees scrutinising this legislation. Questions are being raised with me about, for example, Transport for Wales and Estyn, and there may be other bodies for future Welsh Governments to consider or for committees to make recommendations regarding as they take forward their scrutiny. 

Okay, Mark. Thank you for that. 

Sam.

Thank you, Chair. Just building on that, Mark, in terms of consequences, the Bill doesn't provide for any for failures to promote and facilitate BSL. So, could you develop that point a little bit further for us, please?

That's been a concern that has been picked up by members of the previous two committees that we've given evidence on this Bill to. You're technically absolutely correct that, once the local authority has published its progress report, there's nothing there that mandates the Welsh Government or any other body to penalise failure to deliver. But there are the ongoing mechanisms that I referred to—the Welsh Government's own three-yearly reports, its six-yearly strategy reviews—and its scorecard will be determined across Wales by how those public bodies perform. They can require those public bodies to revise their plans. If, say, a public body is required to revise its plan, then it must publish a new plan and then a further review within 12 months of that, or a progress report within 12 months of that. So, there are some mechanisms in place that prevent a listed public body simply walking away and forgetting, but a lot of that will be determined by the vigilance of future Ministers and officials in giving this the due regard and importance that it should be given. It may be inappropriate to go so far as to threaten criminal proceedings or direct sanctions for failure to deliver, but if you have views on how this might be strengthened, I'd be interested to read those once published.

Thank you for that, Mark. In terms of the conclusions of your equality impact assessment and whether you think there could be any overlap or conflict with the provisions of the Bill and existing equalities legislation, you've previously said that this is a language Bill, so a little bit more on that would be valuable.

As you're very well aware, I'm sure, the Equality Act 2010 applies to disability in its entirety and essentially requires bodies to make reasonable adjustments to tackle the barriers that people encounter in consequence of their impairments and that prevent them achieving what they should be able to achieve in their lives. However, we knew before I even proposed the Bill, because of some of the issues I raised early on about education, health and otherwise, that despite the Equality Act, people were reporting that their needs and rights were not being addressed. This, therefore, although a language Bill, will add to the requirements of the Equality Act but in a very specific and focused area. Existing legislation, whether it's the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 or the Equality Act, are general and miss out the specific needs of populations such as the deaf community. So, this is focused on their needs and therefore complements and adds to the protections available to them under existing legislation, including the Equality Act.

And then finally from me: section 8(1)(c) of the Bill specifies the Welsh Ambulance Services University NHS Trust in full, but refers to the other NHS trusts as simply 'Public Health Wales' and 'Velindre'. The Cabinet Secretary told the committee that the meaning is clear from her perspective, but do you think the drafting of this could be improved? 

We think this is just a drafting issue. I think for most people the meaning is clear. It's understood that the drafters just lifted the phrase from the violence against women, domestic abuse and sexual violence Act, which used the same terminology—

It was from the well-being of future generations Act.

The well-being and future generations Act used the same terminology, so it was literally just a cut-and-paste issue. I'm completely comfortable with the idea of adding the full names in. I shouldn't think that will cause any problems whatsoever; it's purely a drafting issue. Although I do agree with the Cabinet Secretary that for most people the meaning is clear.

Thank you Mark. No further questions, Chair.

Thank you, Sam. Mark, you talked about who these translators would be. My experience of BSL translators is a lot of them are children who have been brought up in households where either both or one of the parents is deaf, and they've learnt BSL from birth, effectively. These make exceptionally good translators, and they can even translate me, and I do tend to talk faster than a translator would like.

I completely agree. It would be nice, would it not, if the people who apply for the positions that we hope to become available would be the very sort of people you're referring to, not only who are fluent in the language but also understand everything that goes with it and the needs of the whole person, as well as the broader issues applying to the deaf community.

Thank you, Mark. Have there been any suggested amendments that could be made at Stage 2 to improve the Bill or make it more effective?

I'm waiting to hear the suggestions from the committees before I start trying to amend my own Bill. It might be an approach for me to start saying specifically what I would hope to see beyond what I've already said, the intention I think I've hopefully outlined, but notwithstanding the fact that it is only a framework Bill—it's not here to go into the minutiae of what future strategy and guidance might include. Nonetheless, there are some specific areas where, as I've indicated, committees may have a view.

Thank you, Mark. And finally from me, are you pleased with the number of Members from across the parties who are very keen on having this Bill become law?

Absolutely. It's been evident from the beginning, with the free votes, that there's strong cross-party support for this; it's not a party-political issue—as in Westminster it wasn't; it was brought forward by a Labour Member working with a Conservative peer and the then Conservative UK Government agreed to back the Labour-led Bill and it became, with cross-party support, UK legislation. In Scotland, similarly; in Northern Ireland, I understand it's got broad cross-party support. So that's very encouraging and helpful as we move forward.

Thank you very much, Mark. None of my colleagues have any further questions. Thank you for coming along and answering the questions we've raised for you regarding the Bill. Thank you.

Thank you.

I've got to tell you—and you normally do this—a transcript will be available and you'll have an opportunity to check it and correct any inaccuracies.

Thank you.

Do you recognise that, Mark?

For those who don't know, Mike is a member of the committee I chair.

Can we go into private now?