Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru

Hello. I’m Tanni Grey-Thompson. I’m chair of Sport Wales.

Graham Williams, director at Sport Wales.

You're both very welcome indeed. We'll go straight into questions, if that's all right. Firstly, obviously, at the moment we are looking towards the budget, and it would be useful for us to understand what effect you think there would be on Sport Wales if the budget simply increased in line with inflation.

Thank you. We do recognise that it's a really tough time financially at the moment, and it's probably worth noting that the committee's own analysis of the sport sector shows that it's funded lower than other comparable European nations, which we might pick up on later. But it's actually the value of sport to Welsh society. The chief medical officers have called it a miracle drug. We know that the impact of sport and physical activity on young people is really important and can make a difference. If you look at social return, what we're able to provide is good, but the challenges are there in terms of that we understand you've got to spread the money a long way, but we're really ambitious in what we want to do. So, obviously, it would be—. It's not necessarily money going into Sport Wales, but going into physical activity in the wider sector. So, there would be an impact in terms of the scale of our ambition, in terms of what we want to do, as we go forward.

I should have explained at the start, forgive me, that we've had an upgrade to our miking system. You no longer need to press the buttons, so it's all great. You wanted to come in, Graham, forgive me.

Just to re-emphasise that point, I think what it is is a missed opportunity if it is a flatline budget. We've got some great ideas and opportunities that are ready to go. In one way, you would say a settled budget is helpful, given the previous changes that we've had. But it is a missed opportunity, because there are many things we could do—we've laid some of those out in our manifesto—particularly aimed at young people and changing activity patterns, hopefully, for a lifelong enjoyment of being active in sport and physical activity.

Thank you so much.

Diolch. I think the problems are political as much as financial in terms of how this place is operating at the moment. It would be useful, I think, for our committee to understand, on the record, the Sport Wales budget since the pandemic, because the pandemic was obviously a disruption, where you had some additional funds and the rest of it, which doesn't give a true and accurate longer term view of where your finances are. So, I'd like to ask you to do two things, and if it's difficult to provide this information this morning, I'd be very happy—I think the committee would be happy—to receive written correspondence on it as well.

You said, Tanni, in one of your earlier answers to the Chair, that Sport Wales is less well funded compared with other, comparative sports bodies. It would be useful for us to see your numbers on that and how you would sustain that argument. I don't think you're wrong, by the way, but I think it would be useful for the committee to understand that. And it might be useful for us to have that element in writing, unless you want to—.

Sure. The top-line figure to put us in a comparable state to the other home country sports councils would be about £20 million a year. To put us in line with the average for European countries, it would be £200 million.

Wow.

So, it's—. I think, with what we have, we're pretty efficient; £200 million, I recognise, is a long way off. But actually, probably, what would be helpful would be multi-year funding, or an understanding of multi-year, both on capital and revenue. Our capital budget is £10 million. What we're able to do with that—the biggest contribution we're able to make to projects is about £300,000. More certainty of that or even a slight increase on that would enable us to do bigger projects, maybe offer up to £1 million in partnership funding, which could give some quite different and exciting schemes in terms of what we're able to do.

Okay, but it would be useful for us to receive something in writing on some of those issues so that the committee can take a more reasoned approach. Of course, with bigger projects, I think I'm right in saying, because of the way that lottery funding is actually delivered to Wales, that makes larger projects a bit more difficult as well. So, it would be useful to have your reflections on that element of capital as well.

But I'm interested in the budget line, if you like, the top line of the budget from, say, 2021, I suppose, is more accurate, to today and what you expect for next year, and how that compares with the pressures that you're facing, both inflationary pressures and then with funding for other sports councils or other comparative bodies.

Yes, and, Alun, probably those earlier years, 2021, 2022 and 2023, are difficult to recall right now, but we can come back specifically with that.

I'm happy to have all this in writing, because what I'm trying to establish here is absolute numbers, because this committee did a report on the wider arts and culture sector, and that looked at funding across a much wider field over a longer period of time. The Welsh Government are telling us that you’ve got money coming out of your ears and that you’re very well funded and you should be very grateful for what you get, so I’m actually interested in understanding the line, if you like, the top line, where we are today, where we were the last few years—we had that dip and then that increase—where that takes us and then how that compares with other countries. Does that make sense?

Yes. If we go back to, maybe, 2024-25, we had a 10.5 per cent revenue reduction—that's equivalent to £2.4 million—that was challenging in itself. We then, subsequently, in-year, got a non-consolidated sum of money, £1 million—

Non-consolidated.

It was non-consolidated in that year.

That's interesting.

Of the £2.4 million cut we had, we absorbed a lot of that. We did—. A lot of our money goes out to partners, so £800,000 of that cut was passed on to our partners. The £1 million amount came in and we utilised all of that for our partner network, so, in many ways, their budgets were slightly better than was predicted, given the cut. And then, this year, we’ve had a restoration of our budget that was in 2024-25, and, subsequently, we’ve restored the baseline budget for our partner network. So, it was challenging in the sense that there was a lot of change happening within a period of, arguably, 12, 13 months, and therefore how we deal with the here and now, with that budget reduction, versus how we can make the sector more sustainable were some of our key challenges. We had particular meetings with boards specifically around these issues to look at a whole range of how do we plan, given that change, in the short term but, importantly, looking to the medium term, how can we make our partners more resilient, for example. Tanni.

I think there was—. The sector, we were able to adapt to it pretty well; it took up a lot of time for us and our partners to work it through. I think where it was really helpful was in terms of that Welsh Government officials were part of the process when we were communicating to the partners what it might look like. But that did create an amount of uncertainty and then, actually, in the end, it was okay again. So, that's where we come back to that multi-year funding might be helpful.

I know Alun wants to do a follow-up, but Heledd also wants to come in. I'll bring Heledd in and then we'll go back to Alun. Heledd.

I just wanted to ask in terms of the impact of the changes with national insurance and whether you have been reimbursed or received funding from Welsh Government to cover the increase.

Yes, we have, substantially. It's not the full amount, because I don't think Welsh Government received the full amount, but it's—. I haven't got the actual figure, Heledd, but it—

Would you be able to provide the evidence to us, please? 

Yes, we would.

Thank you.

Thank you. Alun, you wanted to come in.

I was just—. That would be very useful, actually. I was just thinking about the way in which you would manage resource, because, when you have a 10 per cent cut, you have to communicate that to people and then they have to take decisions. And 10 per cent involves staffing, I'd imagine—you can't just shave that off a budget with no consequences. So, you go through this process and then, all of a sudden, you have £8 million additional, which is non-consolidated, so it's almost like capital, isn't it, in terms of how you can budget with it. So, it creates inherent instability, I would have anticipated, both for yourselves, your relationship with bodies that you fund, and those bodies as well, because you can't plan six months ahead, really, or much more than six months, if you've got £8 million here, you don't know what's coming next year, and that's non-consolidated, so you could see another real-terms cut in the following year, or a cut in terms of where your budgets are. And so, it feels to me like an unplanned, almost panic budgeting, as you'd find in some sort of financial crisis—it takes me back to 2010, actually, 2009.

I think there's an element, because when we were informed, and we were given a range of what that might look like—I think at one point, it was 10.5 per cent, or it might have been, sorry, slightly lower than that, up to, even something like 21 per cent—the board and Brian and the exec team, we went straight to talk to all our partners and funded bodies to give them time to plan. So, we were able to have a recruitment freeze and look at things internally, but, actually, that transparency was really important. And it was also really important that the sector as a whole worked together and understood where we are, but, actually, for our partners as well. Some partners maybe weren't able to expand in the way that they wanted. It wasn't an easy time for anyone. I actually have to say 'thank you' to the board, because they gave a lot of extra time to this as well, and also the exec team. We understand it is a difficult time, but, actually, in terms of what we're trying to do, it doesn't make it necessarily as easy as we'd like.

Yes, it's important for us as a committee to be able to understand the effect that these decisions have on you, I think. Heledd wants to come back in. 

If I may, I was able to quickly glance at your latest annual report, which was published yesterday. It remains at a medium risk, in terms of your financial concerns. But you did note in the annual report that you were due to undertake a review to review the impact of the investment model. Was that work able to progress last year?

Yes, I think—. It's an ongoing piece of work. When we changed the investment model, some of the partners liked it, some didn't, some liked it until they potentially saw what their budget was going to look like. So, it has been a real transition. But I think also it was important for us to let the model bed in before making any wholesale changes, I think, in terms of what we're trying to achieve. You know, that stubborn challenge, in terms of participation—I still think that, actually, how we fund things is the way to keep nudging that. We've got to look at it differently. So, the piece of work is— 

It's ongoing. 

Yes. 

And when is that due to be completed and report back? 

It will be ongoing. We'll be able to provide you with substantive pieces of work next year, for example. But there is no endpoint to this review, because I think what we're trying to do is—. We're really confident in the model, but we'll continue to refine.

How is that being fed back, then, to those who are funded by you? Because I think what was anticipated would have been a review and reporting back. So, how is that work happening?

I think some of the partners and governing bodies are in quite different places—I don't really like the phrase 'journey', but, sorry, I can't think of a better one—in terms of how they're transitioning to what we're asking. We want to be in a different position. So, in the past, it's been very much a parent-child relationship, where Sport Wales gave money to partners and they took it. Actually, it's about having a different relationship with them as well. We've got lots of different sized governing bodies. They're all doing slightly different things. I think it's important—not just the funding model, but it's how our relationship evolves with them, and we listen and learn from them as well. It's not us just giving them money and they report back once a year. I think it's really important that we're in a different place with them.

I'd appreciate it if you were able to provide further information in terms of how you're reviewing that, how it's evolving and so on, because for us to be able to, obviously, scrutinise and have that assurance—. I'd be grateful if that additional information could be provided, please, Chair.

Yes. A key milestone will be the 2026 school sport survey, which we're already actively planning. That will determine patterns of activity, reasons why people participate, barriers to participation, looking across a whole range of equality strands, which sports are popular. That ultimately underpins our investment approach. So, we're listening to the young people of Wales in terms of what they currently do, what they'd like to do more of, what they're not doing and why they're not doing it, what's the latent demand. And all of that factors into a very comprehensive review of what that then means subsequently for investment on a sport-by-sport basis. We actively engage all our partners in that, because it's really important that we get as many young people as possible to complete that survey. We've had over 100,000 young people in Wales complete the survey previously, so it's a really robust piece of information that helps drive and steer our investment. Then we work, clearly, really closely with those partners on how that investment then translates to meet those aspirations that are coming through from that survey.

And the last survey was 2022, which was on the back of COVID. I think for us it's really interesting. I'm not sure there's anywhere else, certainly in the UK, that asks young people what they want to do. It's actually quite important that it's their view, it's not my view, in my 50s, because school sport and sport has changed a lot since I was that age. It's actually engaging with young people to help them.

And what other measures are used, because, obviously, it's really robust in terms of getting an insight into that cohort? Obviously, a lot can change and shape the access to specific sports available. Actually, the focus on a specific sport at that point in time sometimes can influence and help shape, and so on. So, what other measures are used? Say you had vastly different answers in 2022 to 2026, obviously, that can create instability in terms of funding and so on.

I think some of the data that came out of the last school sport survey was that a lot of young people wanted to play basketball. That was one of our governing bodies that was on the lower end of funding. So, we don't just suddenly throw a lot of money at the sport, because actually it needs to be sustainable and there needs to be a process in place. I don't think we'd have any very dramatic changes in that. I probably would expect—. This has been an amazing summer for women's sport. It feels like we might be at a turning point. I would imagine, potentially, that, next year, we'll see a lot of young women wanting to play football, rugby, maybe golf because of Porthcawl. We also have to take into account the impact of big sporting events on these things. Also, it's not just what the young people want to do, they've also got to have the opportunity to do it. They've got to have a place to do it, and they've got to have the money to do it. We weigh all those things up.

I think Alun wants to come in, because you mentioned golf, possibly, I'm not sure.

Sorry, you're tempting me into various conversations. [Laughter.]

It has been a great summer for women's sport—you're right about that. I presume you mean the football and rugby, primarily. It was great to see the participation. The results weren't great—as somebody who's been following Welsh rugby and football all his life, I've been through it a number of times. But, my question to you is this: we're a similar sort of age, and when we look back over our lives, one of the really great changes has been in the development of women's team sports. I'm thinking particularly of football and rugby, but I recognise it's not those alone. Really fantastic, brilliant, and I think we've all enjoyed it. I've taken my son to football internationals for a few months, and it's something I wouldn't have done when my daughter was his age. He really enjoyed it. I enjoyed it. It was fantastic. So, how do we—and this is a question for you, and it might come back to the budget question, I accept that—ensure that the fantastic scenes we saw in Switzerland earlier in the summer, where you had great support for the team, and I was very, very proud of that team, how do we and how do you, in terms of your funding and your actions and your decisions, encourage more girls, if you like, into those sports and those levels of activity, and work with the governing bodies to create the pathway? I remember my daughter was fantastic, as she really enjoyed sport, in primary and then in secondary it slipped off. That was, at the time, very, very common. So, how do you intend, what are your plans, to create those pathways? I'm thinking particularly of girls in this context.

Big sporting events matter, because they're that kind of window and provide those moments of aspiration. But, we see after every Olympics and Paralympics that there's a spike in participation and then it drops away. If I look back to 2012, when Jess Ennis won, in my athletics club the week after, we had 150 young girls. Then, you get to winter and it's not so much fun training through the winter outdoors. So, the sporting events matter, but it's down to the governing bodies, the partners, to think about what that legacy is. 

Now, 2012 was the first Olympics and Paralympics that talked really about legacy. There was some investment beforehand into the schools programme, and there was a lot of thought about what would happen to the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park. But, actually, if we're going to look at these sporing events, the investment in legacy has to take place sometimes years before. It's about having the right volunteers, it's about the clubs being ready for this increase in young people, young women, wanting to come. I think we've got to look more to what we do around school. It's one of our asks in the Sport Wales manifesto, which is looking at what we do through the whole school day and how we develop that love of activity. If we've got more people being active—the elite side doesn't quite look after itself—we've got to broaden that base. And we know about the stubborn inequality, especially girls who disengage at eight and 13—it's about what they wear, it's about the media coverage. There are all these things. I think we've got to be looking at school age and giving them a different opportunity to engage.

But you've got to go further than that, haven't you? If you look at my constituency in Blaenau Gwent, the opportunities for people, the facilities, are nowhere in comparison with what we have here in the city of Cardiff, and where my son is growing up in Powys, the facilities are worse still. So, you do have a role, because, in a city like Cardiff, you do have more opportunities for sponsorship, you have more facilities because you've got a greater density of population, and the rest of it, and that's all fine—it's not an attack on Cardiff. So, that begs the question, then: what is the purpose of the public purse and what is the purpose of public funding? And from my perspective—and I would say this—the purpose of public funding is also to extend equality to where the market or market forces cannot deliver, and, in this case, it would be you saying, 'Actually, we're going to put more money into places like Blaenau Gwent or Breconshire and the rest of it, because those facilities already exist around the M4 and in places where you've got a greater density of population.' So, if you're looking at real equality for, say, boys and girls in these places, you would be saying, 'We will be prioritising poorer, disadvantaged areas.'

And we do through different—

Sports partnerships.

Yes, but putting the money there as well is what I'm talking about.

On that point, I think Heledd actually has a few questions she would like to ask on participation as well, so it would make sense if we went to those.

Thank you very much. I've noted, in the national survey for Wales, that there's a decrease in the latest figures—they've fallen. Thirty-five per cent of people say they participate in sport or physical activity three or more times per week. That's a decrease from 39 per cent in 2022-23. Obviously, you have your own Wales activity tracker as well. I just wondered about the barriers to participation that you've cited in particular. You've talked about emerging considerations, severe weather events, technology and engagement, and safety concerns, with 15 per cent reducing participation due to safety concerns. There are a number of elements there coming through. Also, the financial constraints remain a concern, with 39 per cent saying the cost-of-living crisis affects their ability to be active, but I note, in your annual report, that you've archived the risk in terms of the impact of cost of living. I just wanted to understand why that risk has been archived, given the high figure as a barrier to participation.

If I could pick up on a couple of those. There's not much we can do about weather, but, actually, what we can do in terms of—[Interruption.] That is slightly beyond me, I'm afraid. [Laughter.]

Weather-proof facilities, which is what they do in Iceland.

I think that might be what you were about to say.

That's what I was going to pick up on. In terms of what we're doing in terms of facilities, I think that's really important, because you look at some of the weather trends and what's happening with pitches and flooding around the whole of the UK, and the number of football pitches that flood in winter that stop participation. So, I think that's very much at the heart of what we're thinking about in terms of the future in terms of sustainability and where some of the funding goes.

In terms of safety, I think a lot of this came to light, especially around women, during COVID—about them feeling safe on the streets, running and being able to do activity. That's not just an issue for Sport Wales, it's an issue for, actually, the whole of Wales, because if women don't feel safe on the streets, that is a real problem. 

On the cost of living, it is a really difficult time, because we don't either—us as Sport Wales—have the money to be able to offer lots of things for free, and the governing bodies don't, but I think they're really mindful in terms of their participation figures as well. They've got to understand the challenges that are out there for people. But if you've got two or three children, with the summer holidays, the cost of summer clubs, things like that really do eat into—. Or people just make the choice. We know already, in the summer holidays, that children with free school meals, in the summer, if there's no support for those families to feed their children, they're not going to have the money to actually do physical activity. So, some of it's about what physical activity they do as well.

I understand. It was just the point that you've archived it as a risk, in terms of your auditing.

Yes, and at the time when we were looking at the Wales activity tracker, some specific questions around issues of affordability allowed us to archive that risk. It's a very fluid situation. We've now got the national survey for Wales, albeit the number of respondents is a lot lower than we would expect to have had in comparison to previous years. But we'll look at that data in detail. I think what the pattern overall tells us, Heledd, is that there's a long-term stubborn pattern of inactivity here, and it's going to require something quite different if we are going to shift that pattern of activity. With an amount of resource, but finite resource, we have taken a strategic view to focus on young people, giving them the skills, the confidence, the experience of a wide range of activity that hopefully will set them up for lifelong enjoyment of activity. There's much more we can do, and some of our aspirations around our manifesto ask, particularly around a whole-school approach to physical activity, how young people get to school, what they do when they're in school, what activity can be built into traditional lessons, not just PE and physical activity lessons, what they do after school, and how we can get schools to become more community focused. We've been working with Public Health Wales now for several years on a new initiative, and that's something that's ready to go.

So, linking back to some of the budget conversations earlier about what a flatline budget means for us, I guess it means that with a type of initiative that we've got a huge amount of confidence that can really start to make an impact, we can't take it forward, and that's what we're really committed to trying to do. Part of today's session and other engagement with our manifestos—and we've got some copies here that we'll leave with you—is to really get collective investment into young people's activity patterns. If you get the right pattern of behaviour at a young age—. We want to normalise activity, and if we can do that, I think you will see, over the longer term, activity patterns in teenagers, young adults, adults, older adults, really starting to make a difference.

We've challenged the Minister, because for four or five years we've had a line in an update for annual scrutiny saying that sport is important in terms of prevention, but something needs to happen almost to progress that. But it doesn't seem to progress beyond that line. So, it's well evidenced and everything. What do you think needs to happen for us to see that shift? I understand there are asks in the manifesto, but what are the barriers currently in place? If we've got this agreement, how do we move forward, then? 

We're developing our relationship with Public Health Wales, and I think that's really important, because it's not just Sport Wales doing it. We've got to work with lots of people. I think, if I could have a magic wand, it would be thinking about how differently we do social prescribing. We know that, actually through the whole of the UK, obesity is a massive problem, and people probably only tend to think about physical activity. If you're not physically active, they tend to think about it when it's too late, and it's about making earlier and better decisions. So, it's actually through GP surgeries. I think more could be done to encourage people to think differently about what they do. So, unfortunately, there's not one lever.

No, but in terms of the resource available to you to be able to play your role, that requires further investment to be able to unlock that, I presume. 

Yes, it does. I appeared in front of the inquiry around obesity earlier this year, and one of the things we were discussing with the committee was making physical activity everyone's business, in terms of planning and how we make spaces more attractive and lit for people, to make it easy to be active. So, in some ways there is an issue about us feeling that there is some more funding that could come to us that would really make an impact, and we've set that out in our manifesto ask. But I think it's a whole-of-government approach to physical activity—how we use figures for physical activity to help meet real targets around education in terms of attendance, attainment, mental well-being, not just physical well-being. There's some really good evidence that means that if we make it everybody's business and take a really co-ordinated approach, that will start to have the population change that we would all wish to see.

On that point, this is the first Government, certainly in the UK, possibly in the world, to adopt the Marmot principles. How do you think that Sport Wales could contribute towards making that a success? Because as Heledd has said, we've had this same sentence given to us by the Government year after year, and it's quite telling that they don't say that it is the most valuable preventative tool, but that it can be. Do you think that having these principles adopted will make the difference, and what can Sport Wales do to make sure that it actually happens?

To go back, I think the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 is a really important lens, because it's helped Sport Wales to think differently about what we do. But also I think if you look at Marmot, to give every child the best start in life, I think that's also really important because if you're not active from the youngest age—. I mean, people dip in and out of activity. It'd be too easy to say people are active and not active, because lots of circumstances mean they dip in and out, but actually it's got to start at the youngest age. And there has to be some personal responsibility to this as well. We can't expect schools around the school day to do everything. It's got to be something families need to think about.

This is data from England, but we've got a generation of young people that, because of inactivity, could be more likely to die before their parents, which is a really bad place for us to be in, because I don't imagine that the data is that much different in Wales. So, I think Marmot's really important because it doesn't just help us, but it helps everyone and how we can join together because, as I said, we can't just do it on our own. Actually, if you look at not just the budget of Public Health Wales, but the reach they have and things, we have to be much better at doing that.

When I look at the eight principles, I think there's a real opportunity there. So, I'm really pleased that we've made that commitment. Picking up on some of the other observations, it's how do we move that from co-ordinated action, and what will really happen. We're keen to play our part in that and we feel we've got some contributions we can make.

That's great. Alun wants to come in on this, and then I'll come back to Heledd. Alun was making it very clear to me that he wanted to come in. 

I'm always very wary about these things. I've sat through enough conversations on some of these things and—. When I look at the Marmot principles, I'm thinking, 'Well, weren't you doing that anyway?' When I hear Ministers saying, 'We're going to make Wales a Marmot nation', I was thinking, 'Well, I thought we were doing that 25 years ago.' I've heard Ministers say these things for perhaps too long as I've sat here. Therefore, I'm thinking, 'So, what's going to change then?' What are you going to do next year that you didn't do last year as a consequence of this? How are the people of Blaenau Gwent going to see and recognise this change? What is it for my constituents that you are going to do differently in order to achieve that? And what are the targets you are setting yourself, so I will be able to hold you to account for doing these things differently? 

Gosh, that could be quite a long answer.

Yes, if there are some things you'd like to write to us with as well. 

No, Chair, I want to hear it verbally from them.

So, do the people of Blaenau Gwent need to know what the Marmot principles are? 

Why wouldn't they?

If there are the right services and support around them to help deliver that, I think something like having eight principles focuses everybody's minds in terms of what we need to do. So, I think a lot of this stuff probably has been done before in different ways, but actually having it as a collective of knowing what Marmot is—. So, there's part of me that thinks it would be amazing if people know what it is, so that they can actually ask for these things, for their children and for them. But if the services are right as well, do they need to know? There's probably a whole discussion around that. I personally think it provides a really helpful focus to get everyone—. But it's got to be us, it's got to be local authorities, it's got to be Public Health Wales—

Yes, I understand that.

—it's got to be lots of people to make this happen.

Sorry, my question was: what are you going to do differently?

So, part of what we're doing differently—. In Gwent, the support partnership in Gwent, we've got an advert out right now for an independent chair, which will bring those five local authorities together. We already invest in staff, through local authorities, who are in those communities. That partnership is about being closer to communities than we are, to take some of those key decisions, using the insights that we have through our surveys and data to really focus on where the challenges of inequality are. Sat alongside that we have national partnerships with organisations like StreetGames, where we make sure that there's that co-ordinated effort. But I think the point, Alun, we're trying to get across here is that all of that is good, but we could do so much more if we were resourced.

Oh, I get that.

So, I think the mechanism is in place for us to understand local need, local challenges, local facility infrastructure and where the positives and negatives sit within that, and the wherewithal in which to develop strategies. I guess where, sometimes, the impact doesn't come from is through limited distributed resources we've got—

So, we're going to create new partnerships and write new strategies 

No, that's not what—. No, that's not the outcome. That will help us. In some ways, we need to—. When you've got limited resources, we need to make sure they're directed in the right communities, and therefore having somebody that's close to the ground, working in partnership with local agencies—

I'll suggest that the committee writes to you for that, because I'm not convinced they are very convincing answers, if I'm quite honest with you. So, I think it would be useful to continue this in correspondence.

Just very briefly—apologies—we haven't had a direct conversation with Welsh Government about Marmot, so it's evolving for us as well.

Okay. That's fine.

Of course, we appreciate that fully. Mick wants to come in on this.

Just following on, you just started to mention the issue of resources. Adopting principles, and so on, is all very well and very laudable, et cetera. But it just seems to me it comes down to the fact that, unless there is a specific additional resourcing in terms of Marmot, in reality, not very much is going to change. Is that right?

I don't know the answer to that because we're at such an early stage of what Marmot could be. So, I think part of it is about having an ongoing discussion with Welsh Government about what it means as it rolls out. I think, for us, certainly, as I said, the first bit, about giving every child the best start, that is just really helpful for us to focus—

There's nothing new about that—

Please let—

No, there's nothing new, apart from it's defined as eight principles. For our partners—. It might be an area that we might be more used to working in, but, for some of our partners, they may not. So, it helps us in terms of being able to pass that on and get them to think differently. We're on this progression with our partners in terms of what they do, how the funding's changed, the challenges with local authorities and with facilities, and all those different things. So, I wouldn't discount it in terms of actually being able to help us.

But I want you to prove it.

Prove it?

Yes.

Okay. I think that we're going in circles a little bit with this, so we probably do need to move on, but I appreciate what you're saying. We are coming back to Alun, actually, just on another topic.

Actually, we've covered many of the issues that I was actually interested in. I think your problem is that I was scarred by Sir Jeremy Beecham's processes, 'Making the Connections', and people-centred services, about a decade and a half ago, when I heard much of this rhetoric from Ministers and others at the same time. What I'm interested in is not the strategy, frankly, but the difference it makes in the lives of the people I represent. I think that, quite often, we strategise to avoid doing things rather than doing things. I think that's a great weakness, both in Government and in parts of the public sector. But in terms—. I said that, and I am very happy if you to want to respond directly to that.

But in terms of how we move forward, you mentioned earlier to Heledd and to myself about participation, increasing participation, and the impact of big international events and the rest of it. The Tour of Britain cycled past the bottom of my road in Tredegar, and I was very pleased to see it coming down Sirhowy hill and just going round Sirhowy bridge and off up Church Street, and it was great to see. Part of the Tour de France is going to be in Wales, and then Euro 28 as well, and I'm interested in the work that you're beginning, I imagine, at the moment, to start to seed activities ahead of that, and how you believe that these events can actually promote, then, participation. Because one of the things I constantly think about is Wales must be perfect for cycling. Our researcher's a great cyclist, perhaps he could join—. But it seems to me that, through some of the work that we did on mountain biking up north around Corris, I think it was, and then some of the stuff that we do in the Valleys—I've never been to the mountain bike centre in Merthyr, much to my shame, although I drive past it every week—is something that we could be doing to actually encourage and seed more activity in our communities, if that makes sense.

So, the question that you'd be asking is—?

Is about the major events.

Major events. So, I think it's useful to have a discussion: what do we want legacy to be? So much of the time when we talk about legacy, we think about improvement in participation, and that could be one thing. One thing I was talking to Graham about, you know, you talk to any elite athlete, and they're asked what their inspiration is, and most of the time, they'll say an event or a person. Some of that is because you get asked that quite a lot, but there will be these moments, so we can't underestimate the impact a moment might have on some people.

But also I think we need to be thinking about an economic legacy. We need to be thinking about how, when we have these events, that we link to Visit Wales, and we get people coming in as tourists. So, I think, for me, we should get away from just thinking about the physical increase in participation, because there are lots of different things that you can have.

So, some of the events you mentioned, we are not directly involved in, but part of our work with partners is to get them to think about what the legacy would be. So, we've got Iron Man. Where's Iron Man?

In Tenby.

Thank you. Sorry. We see around Tenby, the number of people who do triathlon is because you have this amazing event. We've had paratri in Swansea, and that has a boost. So, I think we've got to be thinking of the widest possible bit of legacy. If you look at when the Grand Départ was in Yorkshire, if you drive through Yorkshire, loads of people bought broken bikes and painted them yellow and stuck them in their gardens, and they are still there in lots of places. So, I mean, that's not a particularly—. But it brings a happy memory of things. You can't measure happy memories, but I think we've got to think in the widest possible way about—. And I think it is important that we have events in Wales. Sadly, I don't think we could ever probably host the Commonwealth Games, but we could host bits of the Commonwealth Games.

Why? Why?

We could host bits of the Commonwealth Games.

No, no, tell me why we can't hold that. We have before.

Yes. What facilities are required to host the Commonwealth Games, even a narrower Commonwealth Games, which we will be having in the next iteration? If you look at athletics, do we have a stadium that could have the seating? So, we have a pool, we've got a velodrome, we could do—. There are lots of things that we could do. The next iteration of the Commonwealth Games is not doing any road events because of the cost of policing—or that's one of the reasons. So, there are things that we could do to contribute to that. But then, you know, in Birmingham, because of where the Alexander Stadium is they were able to put in temporary seating, because you've got to sell a lot of tickets for athletics, and that offsets the cost. So, do we need a different facility strategy? And, apologies, I think back to the Manchester bid against Sydney for the 2000 games back in 1993, and we had 100 years of rain data that showed there was more rain in Sydney at that time of year than Manchester, but they just held up a picture of Bondi beach. Actually, we wouldn't have been ready to host the games in 2000, both in terms of facilities and in terms of participation. It would be amazing to have a Commonwealth Games on home soil, but that's a longer term set of decisions and strategy, because it's about having the infrastructure and it's about having the legacy. So, whatever you spend on facilities and making the things happen, you've also got to invest in—.

But don't you think it's quite a commentary on the state of Welsh sporting facilities that, across the whole country, we don't have the facilities to stage a Commonwealth Games? We simply don't.

We've got many of them.

But we don't have the facilities.

And that links back to some of our aspirations we have in terms of the facility infrastructure, both in terms of our own national centre, which is—

But this didn't happen over COVID or last week, this is the consequence of decades of underinvestment, I would imagine.

But also—

Much agreed.

Apologies, because all my comparisons are 2012—

Yes, that's fine. With very good reason.

But, you know, at the time—. So, the basketball venue—basketball is massive at the Olympics. The velodrome that was built for the Olympics and Paralympics was the biggest Olympic/Paralympic velodrome built for the games. You could have sold it out 100 times during the games. You've got to think about a legacy. The basketball venue, I think, cost £80 million—and I do need to check these figures—but the venue, as a temporary venue, was more expensive than a permanent venue, but nobody in legacy wanted to run it, as it would operate at a deficit of £5 million a year. So, they basically flat-packed it and sold it on to someone else. So, if we're going to be looking at hosting, I would say, big, major games, then that's a different conversation, but we could do Grand Départ, we could do lots of other things that would be really important for Wales and important for the economy and for tourism and lots of things, but that comes down to money.

Some of the practical things we do around events, noting that it's a governing body or bodies collectively that are responsible for it—. So, if we take some of the women's sport that we've just had, a clear priority within our funding for community clubs is around how we can ensure the right environment is there, that we've got the right coaches, that we've got the right changing rooms, the right facilities, and so on. Our comms team spent all summer promoting the really good, new developments that other clubs could then look at and think, 'Well, what does that mean for my local club?'—a real spotlight on where those athletes had come from, linking them back to the local community.

So, I think there are definite things that we do in and around major events that isn't about running the event per se, but we can use our influence, our resource, our communications and our platforms to really amplify what we want to see.

I was going to say SHE Thrives as well—something else we're working on in terms of getting women and girls to think differently. So, yes, our influence is different. 

There's a more fundamental point as well, but I think we're going to move on, so—.

Thank you. Just a few questions now just with regard to, I suppose, the governance of Sport Wales, which we're obviously interested in. There's obviously been a difficult history, going back to 2017, with the removal then of the chair and deputy chair and so on. I'm just really wondering if you could just summarise how you think Sport Wales has changed—how its governance has changed and how its ability to challenge and to question itself has occurred over the last sort of four, five, six, seven years?

Thank you. So, we now hold annual board and committee effectiveness reviews. We've just gone through an internal audit review process of governance and risk management. We have independent members on our audit and risk assurance committee, and on the equality, diversity and inclusion committee. We've got a corporate governance manual setting out expectations of the board, including what we expect as behaviours of our board. Our next planned review is next year. We're just going through the process—we're about to appoint five new board members, which is quite a big transition. But the jigsaw of what we require for Sport Wales in terms of backgrounds—where people live, the Welsh language—you know, it was quite a big process. We had a lot of applications, which was great, but in terms of the process of induction, that is a longer and more in-depth process than I think certainly happened seven years ago.

I think also we're maximising the work of our sub-groups, and they carry out deep dives, in terms of areas of work. You can't be complacent, ever, about governance, and also, I think, in terms of the message we sent out to the wider governing bodies and partners, it's actually helping them with their governance. Again, a lot of chairs of our governing bodies are volunteers, and they're working towards a new capability framework. So, I think, in terms of our monitoring, we come here and we have our quarterly monitoring meetings with Welsh Government. They're really important, in terms of what we do, but you can never be complacent, because we've seen, in the wider sector in sport, both in Wales and UK, there have been and there will be governance challenges that we have to tackle head-on.

You've just completed, I think, the 2024-25 effectiveness review. I just wonder if you can summarise what you think were the main lessons you've learned from that so far? What are the things that have gone well? What are the things that you think are still very much either work in progress or need further work?

I think we have a very engaged board. They're not afraid to ask difficult questions, but I think, around the table, they do it in a very professional manner, which I think is really important. I think we have good relationships with board members outside the meetings as well. The big thing is the induction of five new members. It's a big turnover for a board of our size, because of the jigsaw of what we need. We've got some really great appointments, but they come from quite a varied background, not just sport, because, actually, you don't want people who just know sport, because they'll ask the same questions all the time. We need people who'll be like that critical friend to us. So, the big bit is inducting those board members and making sure that they're up to speed, in terms of making them comfortable.

In the last year, we had some board shadowing. We had two people who came in and shadowed the board through a Welsh Government scheme. I actually asked for two. We were, potentially, going to be allocated one person, but I felt two was better, for them as individuals, to be able to kind of talk about it. And I think we learned a lot from that kind of induction process as well—not to take anything for granted about what people know or don't know about what we do. We don't just want sports fans. I think, if there's anything you can learn from what we've seen in other governing bodies, UK-wide, where things haven't gone right, it's you need people who'll do that challenge.

Thank you for that. One of the things I know you were looking at and that you've been involved in, of course, is—. Obviously, Sport Wales doesn't exist in isolation, in terms of partnership across the border with England, Scotland and so on. But the issue of soft power was, of course, one of those things that was being raised early on and, of course, there was a meeting in Cardiff, which I attended, and I think you've been involved in as well. Is that something that is developing? Is that something, in terms of the engagement and the sharing of best practice across the UK—are there lessons there? Has the soft power aspect—is that still ongoing? Because it seems to have been a bit of a fad and we've not heard anything of it since.

Yes, so I was invited to join the Soft Power Council, which is quite a large group of people. Changing Ministers at UK level has had a little bit of an impact. I'm trying to think—the biggest meeting I've been to, there were about 30 people around the table, sitting on the Soft Power Council. One thing I'm really pleased about is that they're getting out of London, which I think is important. I think coming to Cardiff—. I'm not sure, if I'm being brutally honest, if it's had the impact on Wales. I'm not sure they quite understood, coming to Cardiff. I frequently have to mention devolution in Westminster circles, which is a little bit frustrating. We don't have as Sport Wales a direct role in soft power, but there is soft power with things like the medal tables. That is the ultimate soft power, I think, in terms of where we finish, at a UK level. We don't ask for medals of the partners that we support; we believe that if you produce well-rounded athletes, the medals will come and the stories will come from that.

So, I think it's kind of interesting. I think most people who don't come from a sport background think about soft power as major events, so we've had a lot of discussion about big events, but I think it's much more than that. I think it's about how you use sport to change people's lives, about how you get young people engaged to think about their self-confidence, to think about how they are in school, about their behaviour. So, I think we probably—. A lot of us have got quite a different view of what 'soft power' means, but I think Wales—. Well, this could be a whole 45-minute discussion on soft power. The role of sport in Wales and Wales using soft power, I think we could explore more in terms of how we use it. Laura McAllister, who is vice-president of UEFA is the highest serving member on any world governing body, and I'm not sure that people in England necessarily realise that. So, actually, we have a lot of soft power that we could be using. We need to think, probably, a bit more whether we want to use it or how we use it.

Yes, I think there's a whole debate there, which obviously we haven't got time for, but thank you for those particular comments.

Of course, one of the focuses on sport, particularly with the Welsh Rugby Union, is the various allegations of sexism, homophobia and racism and so on that were raised with regard to the WRU, and, of course, they've had their own investigation and have looked into this et cetera. What has been Sport Wales's engagement with this, and what is your assessment as to how that has worked through in terms of beginning to assist in the solution to that particular problem?

I think it was really important that the review process was done by an independent person, and that was Dame Anne Rafferty. Unfortunately, I've been involved in a few cases like this over the years. It's always pretty brutal to go through. I think the first part is acknowledging the failings and then doing something about it, so that's why the independent review was important. Dame Anne reported back in November 2023, and the failings were around culture and governance, and so the conclusions of the report—. There wasn't evidence that things arose from sex discrimination, but it was those process and leadership failings.

So, I think we learnt from it in lots of different ways, because I think previous to that, a lot of the very public failings had happened in UK bodies. It hadn't happened in Wales. And however brutal that is when it's close to home, I think that shows you that you can't be complacent. You can't just think that it's over the border that it's happening. Sport in reality is a microcosm of society. Our support and challenge was around the review and then the quarterly review process, and also we undertook a board observation earlier in 2025 with BDO. We're not a regulator, and our ability to ask WRU questions is based on the funding that we support them with. [Interruption.] Sorry, did you want to—? Okay. And we're able to check and challenge on the support that we've given, so we've been really tight on the funding that we give them—them hitting all their deadlines and their targets in terms of us releasing money to them. But I think what happened with WRU has informed a lot of the work that we do now, in that we now have a chairs forum. We had one last week. I meet with all of the chairs of the governing bodies to talk through things. And actually the chairs have been really open about the challenges that they face, what they want to do, what they can do. And I think that, however painful it is going through those moments, it's important—. I think that, actually, what came out of it is the fact that the players felt able to raise the issues, and we've got to learn from it and just be aware that these things could happen again.

Yes. Thank you. I suppose the key thing is the lessons that are learned in terms of governance more broadly, because society is going through a process of, I suppose, culture change, generational change and so on. Do you think that those lessons are now much clearer and that the systems are there to actually engage? You mentioned the meeting with chairs and so on; presumably, that is where some of these lessons are being brought forward and distributed in terms of best practice.

Yes, and there's also a CEO forum, but I think it has also informed our new capability framework as well, which—. Did you, sorry, want to pick up—?

Yes, I was going to pick up on the capability framework. We also undertook some international analysis of governance failures to see if there were some key themes that were coming through, and there clearly were. I won't go into the details of those, but we can certainly share those separately with you. And again, through our engagement mechanisms, we've ensured that those findings have been shared with our partner network, and more importantly, what underpins our investment into partners, which is the capability framework, it's informed that framework. Inevitably, the key issue is around people and culture. It often isn't about the hard governance structures and processes, it's about behaviours, and therefore how we ensure that we recruit the right individuals. How we can observe boards behaving in the appropriate manner is key to move forward. It's much less tangible, if you like, but we certainly make sure we share all the learnings that we have looked at post these particular issues.

Thank you very much. I've no further questions, Chair. 

Thank you very much, Mick. Gareth, did you have any further questions? I know that Gareth had indicated that there was something that he wanted to ask earlier, but I think it might have been covered already. I just wanted to check whether Gareth had any further questions first.

Yes, thank you very much, Chair. Good morning, everybody. I just wanted to come back in on Cricket Wales, if possible. How is Sport Wales involved in planning decisions relating to sports facilities, and how can the concerns raised by Cricket Wales about the impact of new developments on cricket grounds be addressed?

Thank you. Firstly, we are a statutory consultee on all sport-related planning applications. I think that the challenge comes, Gareth, where potentially there are things like a housing development that might border the sports facility and therefore the planning authority may not view or consider the impact on the sport and therefore we're not consulted on that particular aspect. I think that there are some issues there that have been raised by the chief exec of Cricket Wales. We've got a follow-up meeting to see what more we can do to help and support with those issues. We proactively try to respond to all sport-related planning applications, but this was quite new to us and we will work directly with the governing body to see how we can support it moving forward.

Gareth, Heledd wants to ask a follow-up question on this. Was there another question on Cricket Wales that you wanted to ask as well, after that?

Only from a slightly more local perspective, as a north Wales Member. Colwyn Bay Cricket Club has lost the Glamorgan games in the summer, unfortunately. Has there been any assessment or any response from a Sport Wales point of view on that? How, in your opinion, can we enhance sport in north Wales, given that, in one strand, we've lost the under-20s six nations games, the Welsh games, at Eirias Park in Colwyn Bay, and then also the Glamorgan cricket fixtures over the summer, as I've mentioned? Is there any assessment that you've done of that and how we can encourage participation and people in north Wales being able to engage with the sport at a local level? Because I believe that it's important that everyone in Wales has the chance to be exposed to as much live sport as possible on their doorsteps.

Before you answer Gareth's final question, I think Heledd had another question on Cricket Wales.

I just wanted to ask, in terms of planning, if you could provide further details to us on how you discharge your statutory duty as a consultee, and also, if you have any views on whether you should be a statutory consultee in terms of local applications.

It says in the guidance that they may find it helpful to consult with you, but in England it is different. Sport England are reviewing this at the moment, but they've been quite strong in their representations about the importance of Sport England being able to provide that guidance and advice.

What is the resource that you put into this? Is this an area that you think should be explored with more and more developments and so on? Because I believe it's not just cricket, and that other sports are impacted—golf, I understand, is another one that can be impacted. So, I just wanted to really understand if you could provide additional information to us on how you discharge that. 

Also, I failed to find on your website anything about your role in planning, which is very different from the information I've been able to find on the Sport England website. So, if you could signpost us, I'd be very grateful.

In terms of Sport England, I've been in a couple of meetings with Sport England, Sport and Recreation Alliance and other partners, talking about Sport England's potential changing role. I have to say that they only challenge a very small percentage of planning applications—I'll send you the figures to make sure you've got the right figure.

In terms of what we do, I think if there are planning applications, thinking about how active travel works and how play is built into those planning applications would be really important. Because a lot of the time, in planning, they're just thinking about the houses, they're not thinking about everything else. So, whether it's us, or whether it's a role that sport in Wales or local authorities—. But I would love there to be more thought around planning applications in terms of what happens.

Just picking up on the question about Glamorgan, it's not a conversation I've had with Glamorgan about games in north Wales. That is unfortunately Glamorgan's decision, but I will follow up with them to ask why. I shouldn't make assumptions about why they've done it, but I think, just in terms of making it work for them financially, that's probably one of the considerations, but I will follow up with Glamorgan.

Thank you. Alun, you didn't have a final question, did you?

I just wanted to come back to an earlier idea. There seems to have been a crisis around Welsh rugby for many years now. I recognise that you don't have responsibility for the elite game, but you do have responsibilities for participation and you do fund part of the grass-roots game. I'm interested to understand whether you've used your role as a catalyst, or as senior representatives of sport in Wales, to participate at all in the conversation that is currently taking place and the consultation that the WRU are following at the moment on the future of the elite game. We're down to two regions—I suppose that's what it boils down to. Because it appears to me that the WRU have failed completely to win over or to engage with stakeholders in this conversation. And it appears to me that there is a decision being taken that is driven by the finances of the game—which is completely understandable; I don't criticise them for that—but they don't seem to have brought stakeholders with them. That will have fundamental consequences in terms of participation and the structure of the game in Wales, and that will impact on some of your responsibilities. So, I'm interested to understand whether you have participated in this consultation at all or whether you intend to.

We've not formally responded to the consultation, because that is about the elite game, but in terms of pathway and development, we have ongoing conversations and discussions with them in terms of how our funding is spent, where it's spent, and that's the level. I think, possibly, us responding to a question on the elite game would be slightly overstepping where we are.

But do you not see yourself as having a role as a catalyst for conversations about the future of sport? Also, perhaps, going back to your function and your role, if you halve the number of elite regions, then that will have, I believe, consequences for participation that will have consequences for you, and we did discuss in earlier questions your ambitions for participation in the game. So, I'd be surprised if you simply said, 'We've got nothing to say on this.'

I have a personal view on it.

We've all got personal views on it.

As Sport Wales, I think the conversations we're having about what we currently fund is where we should sit.

And you're not going to be drawn any further. Fair enough.

All right. On that note, can I thank you—. 

A transcript of what's been said will be sent to you for you to check that it's an accurate record, and, as I say, we will be writing to you just with some of the points that we weren't able to raise. But we've been able to cover an awful lot this morning, so thank you so much for your evidence. 

If you'd like to introduce yourself, Chris, for the record.

My name is Christopher Catling. I'm the secretary or chief executive of the Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Wales.

Vice-chair of the royal commission.

Could I ask you—? So, we are—. Obviously, a lot of our focus at the moment is on budgets. Were the budget of the royal commission only to increase in line with inflation, what would the effect of that be, please?

Right. There are three strands to our budget. There is the revenue budget that we receive from Welsh Government. In addition to that, there are targeted funds that are of a specific duration to do a specific job, and then there's external funding that we go out and acquire.

The question really, I think, relates to the first of these, and the answer to that is that a standstill budget leaves us—. It's a slight decrease, because the 3 per cent, for example, that we've had this year in uplift doesn't fully pay for the 3.8 per cent salary settlement, the pay settlement that's being negotiated with the unions at the moment. So, the effect of this is that it constrains our recruitment. We lost five staff to voluntary severance and three who've moved on in the last 12 months, so many of our staff are now doing more than one job—they've had to take on the jobs of those people who've left. We've frozen recruitment partly because of the budget constraints and partly because of the discussions that we're having with Cadw, so we're not sure what the future holds, whether the posts that we need to recruit to will even be necessary in the future, and whether people would be wanting to work for an organisation whose future is uncertain.

So, just in terms of the revenue budget, it's very tight, very difficult, but we manage to work within it. We've been very grateful to Welsh Government for some targeted funding, some quite generous targeted capital funding. We're creating new capital assets by digitising some of the most used parts of the national monuments record of Wales. Those are the aerial photographs, the site files and the pre-Ordnance Survey maps—there are 700 maps. So, we're digitising those and making those available to all users everywhere in Wales on a self-service basis. And that funding has been not only generous and helpful, but we've been encouraged to think that we might get a similar amount of money in the coming financial year.

Then, on the money that we go out and try and raise for ourselves, we're absolutely thrilled that the National Lottery Heritage Fund has given us a grant towards our Capeli Cymru project, which we can go into later, but, effectively, this is to understand better what's happening to chapels in Wales and what the future holds for them.

Wonderful. Thank you ever so much. In terms of the picture that you're painting, particularly with revenue, then, you had told us in the autumn of last year that the commission isn't funded adequately for the work that the Welsh Government expects the commission to do on its behalf. So, would you still say that that is the case?

I would still say that. So, we have a set of key performance indicators that we report on every quarter and we're scrutinised by our sponsor division in Welsh Government on our performance in relation to those. And increasingly we're having to say in relation to some of the KPIs, 'We cannot deliver this because we don't have the capacity to do anything.'

I think Alun wants to come in on this. No, Alun was just—[Laughter.] No, I misread Alun's face. I often do.

I'm very happy—. I'm interested in that, Chris. It's a really fundamental point, of course, about the work of the royal commission. So, which KPIs are you not able to deliver?

We'd like to do a great deal more in the educational sphere, contributing to the Cynefin element in the school curriculum. We'd like to do a lot more work with young people. We can talk about that later, but there is a mental health crisis amongst young people that we are sure that we could contribute to helping to resolve.

Tell me how.

Apprenticeships, social prescribing. So, things that are not core to our commission royal warrant, which is effectively creating an inventory of significant buildings and monuments in Wales, but that we can use our work and our activity to achieve other social ends and it’s those social purposes that have tended to suffer.

The Chair has been asking questions on the impact of a standstill budget, and the impact, I imagine, is partly the nature of that sort of budget, but also the context in which our budget would be delivered. And I don't want to put words in your mouth, but my expectation would be, given what you told the committee last year, last autumn, that you have found the recent funding context very difficult.

We have found it very, very difficult. As I say—I think I said this at the last evidence session—we really are cut to the bone at the moment; we don’t have any spare capacity, any fat. What has helped us, however, to continue operating effectively is that we’re not creating substantive jobs, permanent jobs, any longer, but we are taking on people on a short-term contract of nine months or a year in order to do specific tasks.

Okay. So, describe to the committee the funding context in which you've found yourself over recent years. Have you seen real-terms cuts—

Yes. Yes, we have.

—over recent years?

Yes.

And how does that compare to similar organisations elsewhere in the world?

Ah, that’s a very interesting question. I think we’ve tended, in the past, to look to Scotland as a very generous nation in terms of arts, culture and heritage funding, but there is quite a discussion going on in Scotland at the moment, because the extra funding has largely gone to the creative arts, which, of course, are very important and are fundamental to the Scottish economy, but it has meant that the historic environment services that are operated by Historic Environment Scotland, for example, are in a similar situation of really not being able to fulfil their potential. To put that in context, we had 54 staff 10 years ago; we’re now down to 21. And if you can imagine—. My staff are passionate and committed and they tend not to want to give up anything, so they are all trying to deliver the same thing now as we did 10 years ago.

Yes, we can only begin to imagine the strain that would be putting on staff members. Finally from me, before we move on, you mentioned about the income that you've had from the lottery for Capeli Cymru—that’s a very exciting project. Where would you see that there might be scope to increase the amount of income that you get from elsewhere? Where do you see that?

We’re constantly monitoring all those potential sources of external income. We're back as a nation in the Horizon research funding stream from the European Union, but we’re not able to apply in our own right; we apply as partners with—we are often approached by—universities and other research institutions. So, European Horizon funding, the Arts and Humanities Research Council—we are constantly being asked to partner UK universities in projects where we earn perhaps £10,000 out of a much, much bigger budget for contributing to the historic environment aspects of those projects. We are constantly looking at philanthropic charities who give money. The problem there is that we’ve not been able to align yet with any of their charitable objectives, but we keep a very close eye on that.

And then the National Lottery Heritage Fund, which has given us grants over a number of years—. We've just finished the Pendinas community engagement project, which they funded, which was working with the local community in Penparcau to excavate and understand better the Iron Age hill fort that rises from the midst of their village. We did a number of other projects with funding, and we are looking at another possible community engagement project to look at an intact Romano-British lead mining and processing landscape near Talybont that’s been discovered by metal detectorists.

[Inaudible.]

Yes, just north of Aberystwyth.

That’s very exciting. Well, thank you very much.

Diolch. If I just may pick up just on your point around KPIs and your response to Alun Davies in particular around education, what is currently the resource that you have within your team to focus on education?

We employ a full-time educational officer.

So, one person. 

One person, who is making a substantial contribution of training materials to the Hwb. But she has suffered a bereavement; her husband died of cancer recently. So, she's on leave at the moment, but when she returns—. She's a former teacher.

I'm very sorry to hear that, and our condolences as a committee, I'm sure, Chair. But obviously one person—. There have been huge changes in terms of the Curriculum for Wales and Cynefin, Welsh history and so on. Is this something that, in an ideal scenario, you would like to see properly resourced, so that you had more than one person, given the need?

Absolutely, because we're contributing remotely at the moment. We're creating teaching materials, but we don't know how useful they—. We need much more direct contact with the teachers who are delivering the curriculum.

Thank you. And if I may—you've provided a briefing note for us in advance—I think, given you have 21 staff members, what you achieve in a year is phenomenal. The amount of queries as well—2,538, that's significant.     

The national resource—sorry, the national monuments record of Wales—is very heavily used. And when we only had two staff, they were overwhelmed with enquiries and we were slipping back in terms of the speed with which we could respond and were beginning to get, for the first time ever—. We always get feedback from clients, and some of them were reporting unsatisfactory performance on our part. But the mitigation funding that we received from Welsh Government last year enabled us to employ another assistant, a third person, and we caught up. So, you can see just one person can make a big difference to our performance.

Certainly, and I presume that these are very live discussions with Welsh Government about how you can contribute and so on. 

Yes. 

But I think the point comes across very clearly, because, in terms of if you look at one person and 4,000 names added to the enwau hanesyddol—  

Oh, the Welsh place names, yes. James does far more than just compile the register. He spends a lot of time out, advising place name officers working for local authorities on the naming of new streets, developments, shopping centres, industrial estates. And he does a huge amount of work with local communities, going out and holding workshops, where they can come in and contribute what they know about the local place names—a lot of farmers with field names, for example, that are not normally recorded in documents or maps. So, there's a fascinating oral history, intangible history element to his work as well.

And it obviously ties very closely to Cynefin again— 

It does. 

—in terms of the curriculum. Can I ask, in terms of your risk register, then, it must be quite high in terms of that you have one member of staff responsible for lots of key areas?

Yes. Singleton posts. So, if we lose a member of staff and aren't able to replace them, we lose their activity. And I think the most critical example of that is we lost a member of staff whose speciality was supporting local authority conservation officers. He was available to any conservation officer to be called out to look at buildings that had escaped being listed, but were felt to—. You know, suddenly, you discover in what looked like an ordinary barn that there's actually a medieval cruck frame or something. He was very, very good at giving pre-planning advice to owners, and persuading them to value the significance of their building, and to enhance and protect it in whatever they were planning to do in extensions and buildings and conversion of farm buildings. That's a great loss, and Cadw has acknowledged that that's a great loss that they feel too. So, that's a priority for recruitment when we're able to do so.

Thank you. 

Alun, did you want to come in? 

I'm interested in the information you capture in terms of place names and in terms of understanding the history of place, because a place name reflects the history of that place and human habitation of it. I'm wondering the extent to which you're able to capture that, because one of the things that I worry about—. I worry about lots of things, but one of the things I worry about is that we're losing our ability to capture oral history and people's knowledge, but also the richness of language. Are you able to capture and record, and I presume work with the national library or local museums to capture, some oral history of places as you investigate place names and the rest of it, so that that history, that knowledge, that richness and use of language and linguistic identity isn't lost at the same time?

Yes. I think what has changed significantly within the last decade is that our focus was once exclusively on architectural and historical significance. We didn't take people into account. Now, we very definitely want to put people right in the middle of the picture. We also now talk not just in terms of heritage, architectural and historical value, we now talk about community value and associative value. There are many places in Wales that have got very strong associations with particular influential individuals who are important for Welsh history.

In terms of the language, I think the major way we capture that is through our work with People's Collection Wales. We're one of the three partners, with the library and the museum, and that is very substantially an intangible history collection.

But it's not just the Welsh language. We're very proud of the project that we have delivered that was funded with the 'Anti-racist Wales Action Plan'. I was very aware that the histories of other communities in Wales were not documented. We tend to be very white, very middle class, very medieval—a 'churches are more important than anything' approach. So, we worked with Asians in south Wales to document the buildings and the places that were significant to them, and produced a booklet and an exhibition based on that, which attracted a record number of people to the Oriel, the gallery here. Partly because we had people on the stand helping to interpret it to visitors, and a lot of Asians came to see it.

That's why I refer to the linguistic richness, rather than simply—. I think we all worry about the increasing vulgarisation of some Welsh language names, particularly in areas of high tourist input. But also, the industrialisation of a place like the one I represent, Blaenau Gwent, created a new way of looking at landscape and place.

Yes, that is reflected in language change.

And it's reflected in what we call things.

We would very much like—it's on my wish list—to produce a booklet called 'Learn Welsh through place names', because it's a very good way into the Welsh language and vocabulary. It tells you so much about the topography and history.

We could wander into a seminar here, but can I just ask you one final question? There's an almost disappeared history in the Valleys of south Wales, which is the history of the Jewish community in south Wales. We had the anti-Jewish riots in my hometown of Tredegar, of course, and in other places as well. And we've got the work going on to restore the synagogue in Merthyr, and the rest of it.

We're working very, very closely with the Foundation for Jewish Heritage.

My knowledge is only about the Valleys, unfortunately. But there will be many Valleys communities and Valleys towns that will have an old synagogue and the rest of it, and other remnants of that community. I'm interested as to how we can record and understand that, because I think it's very difficult sometimes to come to terms with our own history and what happened in our own history when it's something we might not always be very proud of.

And it's very alive at the moment, isn't it? There are three things I'd want to say to that. First of all, thank you for mentioning Vanished Wales, which is a tv series on ITV at the moment, which has depended a lot upon our material and is a fascinating programme.

In terms of contemporary Jewish history, there's an academic at Bangor University, Nathan, and I cannot remember his surname for the moment, but he's doing a lot of—

Perhaps you could write to us with his surname. 

I will, yes. And then, in terms of the past, the synagogue in Merthyr is going to be a centre that will send people out to explore other physical survival heritage from the Jewish contribution. Their financial prowess was fundamental to the Welsh industrial revolution. It's a proud history that we need to tell.

Yes, absolutely.

Diolch. We're going to discuss Cadw and the royal commission once again, because obviously the review has been under way. What's your understanding about where we're at currently?

We've had nine months of a working group meeting monthly, and we have investigated a number of different strands of the implications for merger. I'll bring Hayley in in a moment to help me with this. We've reached the position where we feel that it's a finely balanced decision between merger and remaining independent but collaborating much more closely, and that we need to do a bit more work on the cost analysis and the benefit.

We believe there are some quite substantial costs involved in rebranding, in terms of the IT transfer, in terms of the loss of our educational software licences and the increase that that will mean. Government software licences cost a lot more. We need to pin down what the cost is and ask ourselves are we getting enough benefit from that expenditure.

We're at the position at the moment where we have identified some unknowns that we need to address before we can make a clear decision. We have benefitted hugely from the process. We have got to know Cadw a great deal better. We're working more closely together already. We've consulted staff and stakeholders, and it's been really revealing to understand what the stakeholders value in the work of the two different organisations.

We've also helped Cadw to achieve a new status—not quite the non-ministerial status that the Inland Revenue or the planning functions have, which is where they are responsible to Ministers but Ministers are not supposed to interfere with their decision making, but it is a status that delegates a great deal more decision-making power to Cadw. And that status has come about as a direct result of us investigating other models for merger, and so on.

The position is that we haven't made a decision yet. That's what the report that we've sent to the Minister says. It's finely balanced. He is now seeking advice from his officials. Hayley, the commissioners have—

If I may, though—

Please do.

You're best placed—. If you've failed to come to a conclusion as both organisations—. And also, if you forgive me, it's not the first time you've been through this either—

No, it comes around every 10 years.

Yes. I was reminded of Huw Lewis's statement around this, about careful consideration and balance and so on. It didn't happen then. Now there's uncertainty, and, obviously, in a response to us last week in writing, the Minister had said that there would need to be legislation, they're running out of time, it won't happen. It must be quite difficult for you as an organisation to have this uncertainty and so much focus on governance and structures when you're such a small team.

We've learnt to live with uncertainty. It's a fact of life for the royal commission, and it's partly where this discussion began. The gradual erosion of our income year on year means that we're constantly having to flex. It is disturbing for staff. They would like a degree of certainty. We work very closely with the unions, our own union officials but also full-time officers of Prospect, and what comes up again and again is job security, knowing what I'm employed to do. So, it is wearing. Hayley, do you want to just say something from a commissioner point of view?

Yes, absolutely. I can give an overview of what the commissioners' position is. We are open, in principle, to a merger between the royal commission and Cadw. I think we recognise that it seems to be a long-term ambition, as Heledd just pointed out, but also to have a unified national historic environment service for Wales, the potential contribution we could make to that and the benefits that that could generate. But, on the other hand, having support for that in principle, I think we do agree that any progression towards merger has to be underpinned by a really robust outline business case. So, we need to be absolutely certain that there are benefits to be reaped from this, and what those benefits are, but also responsibilities for the costs of transition, what are those costs, and who will cover those costs.

And more importantly—and I think this is where the legislation question comes in—what is the mechanism for safeguarding the national monuments record. I think there have been question marks around legislation for that. As we understand it, technically there doesn't need to be legislation for merger as such. That can be done administratively with legislation to follow, as was done in England. But where the legislation comes in is that legislation is the best mechanism to protect the NMR. We lack confidence that a memorandum of understanding would protect the NMR to the standard it needs, for example. So, although I suppose merger is theoretically possible, without legislation, the complication of the NMR needing that security means that in practice legislation is needed.

In terms of where we are now—and of course time is running out on the Senedd timetable—we would support an agreed period of formal strategic collaboration between the two organisations. That could provide the necessary evidence that we need in terms of capturing benefits and understanding how we can better work together to get those assurances that we need for a successful and sustainable outcome. So that's the position that we're at at the moment.

Thank you. Obviously, if you were to merge as well, the impact wasn't really considered when the review of Cadw’s governance arrangements was undertaken. Obviously, there was a reference to you there, but I presume it's not just the implications for Cadw and yourselves, but the wider historic environment sector as well.

That's absolutely right. I'm glad you reminded me of that phrase, Hayley, ‘the unified historic environment service for Wales’. That, at the end of the day, is the aim. We're not really asking about merger between Cadw and the commission just for tidyness’ sake or for administration purposes. We're asking how we can improve the historic environment service for Wales. And it goes beyond our own activity. It embraces Heneb, the Welsh archaeological trust, as well. So I think the next phase of our work is to try and create a vision. If we're travelling towards merger, if merger is the likely outcome of this, what are the benefits? What's going to be done better as a consequence? What's the vision for this new merged organisation?

Do you think it's too narrow, the approach currently taken, which is just looking really at how you as a small organisation can be part of Cadw, rather than actually looking more broadly? Because the unified historic environment—

It is step 1 along a path that could lead to other reviews at a later stage—the relationship that we would have with Heneb, for example, and whether ultimately Cadw might become a charity outside of Government like the museum and the library. These are all things to be thought about in the future.

Certainly, because obviously if you were to merge at this point now, we wouldn't have these scrutiny sessions with you in the same way, because we'd be asking the Minister then, because we don't scrutinise Cadw currently. So, in terms of some of the things that you've been able to bring to our attention, I presume that may be quite difficult in terms of scrutinising—

We would become civil servants, and under the civil service code of impartiality, there's a lot that I'm saying here now that I might not be able to say if I were—

Well, you wouldn't be in the room. 

I wouldn't be in the room, no. This is true. So, I think you what you've highlighted there, Heledd, is the importance of an independent voice for heritage in Wales. And indeed, if there is one area that is yet to be resolved it is that most of my colleagues do public service work as trustees and committee members of heritage bodies that are advocates for heritage. It's a question of whether we'd be able to continue to be advocates in quite such an active and visible public way.

Thank you. If I may ask one final question, Chair, just on this point. As part of the work, was any work done to compare the situation in Scotland and England, where some mergers have taken place, to understand them?

Yes, absolutely. We talked to the chief executives of Historic England and Historic Environment Scotland to learn the lessons from their merger, and both said the same thing: get it right before you merge. If you don't get it right at that stage, you've lost the opportunity, which is why Hayley and the commissioners have placed such an emphasis on ensuring the continuity and sustainability of the National Monuments Record of Wales.

I would encourage you to move forward with a merger, quite honestly. My experience of being a Member here for many years is that the Welsh public sector is far too complex for a country of 3 million people, and politicians are quite often too afraid to upset people. We need to streamline and make more effective the front line of Welsh public services. But I could speak for an hour on that.

In terms of where you are at the moment, I'm interested in the relationship between yourselves and Government. To what extent do the Welsh Government's priorities actually shape what you do, because I recognise what you've just said in terms of independence? And I think if we do need reform of the Welsh public sector, we also need to empower professionals like yourself to be absolutely clear when Government is getting it wrong. Because I've sat here too often where people—and it's not just a political and statutory thing, it's a cultural thing as well—where too often people who rely on Welsh Government funding are afraid to criticise the Welsh Government, and we see that in committees all too often. So, how do the Welsh Government's priorities shape what you do? And how would you like to shape the Welsh Government's priorities?

It is true that we have a burden of compliance that adds quite considerably to our workload. I think there are 14 pieces of compliance that we have to report on on a very regular basis, and when I say report, we're actually reporting on how we are delivering these: cyber security, 'Anti-racist Wales Action Plan', access diversity, Welsh language, future generations, carbon reduction, and so on. There's a whole raft of compliance. Within our key performance indicators, there are a number of—. We try to align the work that we're required to do under the royal warrant with the objectives under the Welsh programme for government. We don't let the programme for government lead us too much, but what we do is we try to show that, through the work that we are doing here, we are achieving that.

So, the warrant comes first.

It has to. 

Yes, I see that it does. 

It has to, yes. That's our foundation document. That's what we're on the planet to do. Otherwise, we would be spending all our time as social workers.

So, let me ask you this question, then: in answer to Heledd, you spoke about the independence of the royal commission and the importance of the independence, but what you said in answer to the Chair and in answer to Heledd in previous questions is the way in which you comply with the requirements and the budgets of Government. So, really, my question to you is: your independence is fake, isn't it, in real terms?

It doesn't stop us doing what the royal warrant requires us to do. We're still going out there and recording buildings that we're going to lose. And we're enhancing the national monuments record. We're providing a service to the people who need to use that data. It adds a full-time post and a lot of compliance time with the corporate governance committee; the commissioners and so on spend an awful lot of time on that. But it's shifting because we now have a new framework that has entered the picture, which is the 'Priorities for Culture'. And bit by bit, we're coming—. The KPIs were framed four years ago, and I think we've moved on from them to priorities that are much more focused on cultural objectives, rather than—.

I assume the Government's priorities are an iterative process, in that you will talk to Government, they'll talk to you and you'll reach an agreement on it. 

Yes.

But in terms of how you work, the budget you have to work within, that's all determined by Government.

Yes. 

And so you're not independent in many ways. You're independent in that you can come here and we can question you, and ask you all sorts of terrible questions—

Well, they don't look over our shoulder. They're not micromanaging us.

No, I don't believe they are, but they don't micromanage any of the public bodies either. That's what the executive team is there to do. But essentially, you are an arm of Government, or governance at least, which delivers a specific purpose, which in your case is established through a royal warrant rather than a remit letter.

Yes, well, we have a remit letter as well, and it's getting the two to read across that's the challenge.

So, I'm just interested, therefore, in where the independence actually takes you.

We can raise awareness of the threats to aspects of the heritage. We are working on—

But Cadw does that. Cadw does that.

Not to the same degree. We have been far, far more active, for example, in raising the plight of places of worship in Wales.

That's true.

We have also done a lot of work on upland archaeology that is threatened by tree planting as carbon offsetting for windfarms and so on. We work very closely with Natural Resources Wales to avoid doing damage to the historic environment. We set our own research priorities. We decide, in consultation with Cadw—. Mostly, the Government influence is towards the social objectives, so making sure that we work with young people, with older people, helping with social prescribing, education, those sorts of issues.

We might have to move on in a moment, but I think Hayley wanted to come in, or I might have imagined—. No. Forgive me.

No. Sorry.

I again misread your expression, I'm so sorry. Forgive me. Alun, did you have a final question you wanted to ask?

I'm just interested as to where we're going here, because we've had significant reductions in funding from Government, and I think the committee probably regrets that. The committee would want to see your organisation succeed and enjoys the work that you do—I think that's fair to say. Therefore, we're looking at how do we empower and strengthen the historic environment service, if you like. I'm interested both in terms of your governance—. Because I like the independence of mind, the independence of thought, but independence is cultural as well as structural, of course. So, how do we further empower you to speak truth to power, and to say to Government, 'Actually, yes, you can make this cut, and you can do this and that, but there are consequences to it'?

Well, we're part of an ecology. We're not just ourselves and Cadw. One of the areas I mentioned earlier we have lost and that I would like to see restored—and this is about empowerment—is the support that we give to local authority conservation officers. Because they are operating the protection of the heritage, at the end of the day, through the planning system and through listed building consent and scheduled monument consent. We've lost our ability to support and help them because of the loss of staff. So, if you want to empower us, we need the staff to work more closely with local authorities.

Okay. Has the historic environment Act made a fundamental difference?

No, because it didn't make any changes. It's a consolidation Act. It simply took half a dozen different pieces—

No, I meant the one from 2016.

Ah, well, creating statutory historic environment records definitely has. They are planning services delivered by Heneb, based on those. But it's an imperfect system, and we know that there's a lot that we could do to make it more efficient—

So, tell me what those things could be.

There are too many—. The pre-planning liaison with owners and developers and helping them to frame their developments is what we have done in the past. We've helped to make them aware of the heritage value of their properties and work with them to develop proposals that will pass. We call it constructive conservation: helping the developers, helping the planners, helping everybody to achieve their objectives, but, at the same time, to protect the heritage.

And has it—

We will have to move on in a moment, but, okay, final question, Alun.

Okay. Has it enabled public authorities to hold owners to account? I'm thinking of the truck shop in Tredegar, which you may be familiar with, which has gone from owner to owner, in the same family, for many years, to avoid their obligations under legislation.

Yes, again, that's a local authority competence. They are responsible for heritage at risk within their area—

But your view.

—and we work with them on heritage at risk.

But is your view that that Act—? Has it strengthened your hand in holding owners to account?

It does if you choose to enforce it, and enforcement is an entirely separate question.

And is the Act being enforced?

To a degree it is, but Cadw and the local authorities prefer not to shame owners, they prefer to work with them constructively.

And going back to your independence, if you're independent, then you will tell us the truth, but it might be better to conclude this by correspondence.

Thank you very much. Okay, we have 15 minutes left. I'm keen to get in our other two Members, so I'll go to Gareth, firstly.

Thank you very much, Chair. Good morning, everybody. I want to dip back into a little bit of questioning over historic place names, and to Hayley specifically. What impact has the list of historic place names had on the historic environment generally in Wales?

I think it has to be massive, speaking as a first-language Welsh speaker as well. I think it does two things, really: it not only records the past place names, but allows them to be brought into the future, in much of the way that Christopher was mentioning earlier. Our place names officer works quite closely with local authorities and developers to try and bring those forward into house names, place names, street names. I think that the oral traditions are hugely important. It keeps the language alive, but also it works towards those 'Cymraeg 2050' strategies and so forth. I don't know whether Christopher can add some colour into that answer.

Christopher, is there anything you'd like to add?

Chris, any comments?

I don't think I can add to what you've said, Hayley.

Back to you, Gareth.

Just as an addition to that, there's been progress in that regard within my own constituency. It's sort of reignited historical place names, particularly in new housing developments as well—in the Aberkinsey estate in Rhyl, and Denbighshire County Council have been quite active in that regard. So, it's certainly being felt on a local level. I'm not sure about many other specific localities, as a constituency Member, but, yes, I thought that was just worth noting. But how often do they meet with the Minister and his officials from the Welsh Government? Is it regular or could that be improved? Do you feel that you have a good, healthy, regular contact with the Minister and officials to speak about some of the issues and see what can be improved?

We meet—. We don't meet specifically to discuss place names, we meet to discuss all aspects of the historic environment. We meet with the Minister at least every six months, but actually more frequently than that in practice, and we've had visits to the—. The Minister has visited our premises recently and learned more about our work. I think one of the effects of the place names officer's work has been catalytic in that other organisations are now aware of the importance of Welsh place names, and when I say 'other organisations', I'm talking about the national parks, for example. The Ordnance Survey has a much stronger interest and a stronger momentum towards recovering historic Welsh names and replacing English names with older Welsh names. So, I think it's building a snowball effect.

And are you happy with that level of contact with the Welsh Government? Is that deemed to be sufficient, or do you think that can be improved somewhat?

I think they are always open for us to go and talk, if there are issues. But we know what the task is, they're supporting us, they're funding the work. We have to report to them monthly on what we've achieved. They're happy, we're happy.

I suppose that strays slightly into, in addition, the questions that Alun Davies was asking around the level of management, whether that be structural or just in words or meetings—the level of Welsh Government involvement with that, and whether you do see it as right. Because, you know, with, obviously, the challenges that multiple sectors face around here, do you feel that's been adequately addressed by the Minister, or do you think that improvements can be made? We talk about funding, we talk about resources, et cetera, could an improvement in relationships or perhaps how that structure works in governance be seen as something to be improved, so that your voices are better heard, and the needs and wants of bodies such as historic place names can indeed ensure their efficacy going into the future?

We've not experienced any kind of negativity, no kind of resistance. There is a political support for all the work that we're doing in place names. I think the really important work is being done down at local level. Yes, the ministerial support is there; we have no quarrel with that at all. Our job is to get out there in the community and gather the place names and then promote them and work with developers, work with naming officers; that's where the achievements are. And with individual owners as well, who—. I mean, different local authorities have different regimes; some are stricter than others in terms of allowing people to change place names. You may have read some cases in the media where people have tried to change Welsh property names into English ones and the local authority has written to them and said, 'Would you like to think again?' And 99 per cent of the time, they do think again. They don't understand the importance of the Welsh name. So, it's down at that level that the work is being done. No quarrels at all about a lack of—. You know, the political will and support is definitely there.

Do you think that that's currently the right model, that all the local authorities are different, and that's fine in that regard? Wrexham council, for example, all of their street names are bilingual. There are some in Denbighshire now that are becoming more that way. I think that's important, obviously, to—. Personally, I think that's important to have both, so that everybody can understand it within that sort of bilingual context, which we're all on board with through the Welsh language Act, but do you think that's the right model? Do you think those differences between local authorities is the right way, or do you think there should be more national structures to support that, given our commitment to 'Cymraeg 2050'?

We do everything we possibly can to encourage other local authorities to adopt best practice, and we share best practice. We can only work by persuasion. And, as I said to you earlier, I'd like awareness of the importance of place names to be shared through publication websites and lectures and talks and so on, so that people understand what a joy it is to learn Welsh and how place names is a good way in. But it's a persuasion thing. We don't go along with a big stick.

Just a couple of questions. You've answered very much some of the governance issues I wanted to raise. I'll just pick up on one thing first of all. In terms of place names, do you get equally frustrated by the loss of pub names? Changes from names that have been historic and been around a long time, but are then commercially changed to some sort of fad. I've seen good, historic names changed to 'Slug and Lettuce' and things like that. How do you feel about that? Do you think more could be done about that?

That's a very personal question. I don't think the royal commission has a position on that, but I share your distress, basically.

Okay. We'll leave it there; we're mutually distressed over that.

Just as an organisation, in terms of your own governance—because you really answered most of the points I wanted to ask—just in terms of the way you operate, how do you evaluate what you do? How do you challenge the way you operate and measure the success of what you do? Because that's a vital part of any organisation, isn't it, in terms of being self-aware? I just wondered if you could perhaps comment a little bit about that.

Yes. Well, there are many, many ways in which we do it. I suppose one of the most important is that we ask for feedback from people who use the library and inquiries service. And we're proud of the fact that we get something like a 95 per cent to 99 per cent 'excellent' rating, often with supporting comments saying how helpful our staff have been in delivering the service that people are looking for.

Key performance indicators are another important measure. We have a mix of qualitative and quantitative data that we supply each quarter to our sponsor division and they cross-examine us at sponsorship review meetings every quarter. The commissioners keep us on our toes. We have corporate governance meetings every quarter, and they're pretty challenging over our performance.

With staff I try very, very hard. We have very good relationships with the union, but they are very challenging too, particularly on the questions of the health and mental well-being of their colleagues, and the stresses and strains of the work on them. We sit down and we work out together how to do that. We have an annual staff survey, and we pick two themes from the survey where there's need for improvement. I host monthly all-staff meetings, where staff can ask me any question they like and, every six months, we have a face-to-face gathering, and we review our progress as an organisation.

Thank you very much.

Yes.

Oh, I think the sound might have—

No, thank you very much. No further questions from me, Chair.

Right. Diolch yn fawr iawn. Diolch. Well, I think that we've got to the end of our questioning. Can I thank the two of you, please, for your evidence? We really appreciate the—. And can I say, on a personal level, I share the distress about the pub names. I had to get that off my chest. But that's on a personal level as well. A transcript of what's been said will be sent to you for you both to check its accuracy, and there might be one or two things that we'll follow up in writing as well. But thank you.

Thank you so much. So, while we thank our witnesses again as they leave us, we're moving straight on, but we really are very grateful to the witnesses.