Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru

Diolch yn fawr iawn. You're very welcome. We'll go straight into questions, if that's all right. Evidently, it's been quite a week. Something very shocking has happened. What is the latest that you are able to tell us, please, about what's happened this week?

Thank you, and can I just start by thanking committee for their support over what has been a very difficult week? So, as you know, there was a break-in in the early hours of Monday morning. Significant items were taken from the collection in what we understand was a very targeted attack. Police were able to gather a lot of evidence at the scene. They acted incredibly speedily, and I would like to put on record our heartfelt thanks and admiration for the work of the police, who have been superb.

As a result of the evidence they were able to collect, two arrests were made yesterday. They worked in close collaboration with the police force in Northamptonshire, which is where the two individuals were apprehended. And investigations are very much ongoing, so we're still very much in the live stage of the investigation.

Thank you so much, and obviously we appreciate that there will be things that you will not be able to answer as a result of that. Something that has been a concern that the committee has raised a number of times with the Government, and we've asked you about, is the safety of the national collections. What would your assessment be about that at the moment, please?

Did you want to take that one? 

Kate. 

Yes, I think it's important to distinguish between the concerns that we've been raising and the committee's been raising about the funding for the maintenance of the physical fabric of the building and what happened on Sunday night, which was not as a result of any of the issues that we've been raising for a number of years now. So, I think the two issues are quite separate and distinct.

Okay, thank you. But in terms of the issues that you have been raising, then, are there any urgent remedial works that you would like to draw attention to before—? I know that some Members will have supplementaries, but are there any concerns about that, rather than what's happened this week, that you would like to—?

No, we are in a very different place from when we last appeared in front of you. We have had a substantial increase in capital funding made available to us to address some of the most urgent concerns. A number of priority works are being undertaken at the moment and through the winter to key systems within the building. There is always and there remains a risk of things failing within that building because the works are so extensive, but we feel more positive at the moment and we are in the middle of developing a very exciting proposal for a transformation of that building in its entirety, which we hope to be able to tell you more about later on.

Looking forward to that. Thank you so much.

Diolch, Gadeirydd. Thank you for the clarification in terms of what you've been highlighting as risks to the national collections, as opposed to what's happened. I think one of the things that I heard from the statements that you made, Jane, was that this isn't an isolated attack on museums, that we've seen an increase in terms of attacks on museums across the UK and also internationally. So, in terms of assessing that risk and increase in risk, what measures have now been taken at your sites to ensure that we don't see other attempts from professional people who will target the collections? Is there any support that you require in order to be able to increase security? Just trying to understand how you're responding to what's happened and what that might mean in terms of the resources you may require.

I think it's probably important to state that that increased risk to organisations like ours has probably been the case certainly for 18 months, if not the two years that I've been in post. And so we've actually increased security and security measures over the past two years. We work very, very closely with the police. They had been on site with us at St Fagans, helping us with inspections of security, in the week leading up to this attack. They are regularly with us, because we know we are a high-profile target.

So, I wouldn't say as such that we will be taking immediate actions as a result of this particular incident. We will of course review what we can learn from it when we've just got a little bit more time to look back and understand it, and anything that we can learn we will implement. But we were already at what you could call a high-alert level. The cuts that we made were very high profile, but we didn't make any cuts at all to any of our security arrangements. It was quite the opposite: we have been ramping those up because of the environment we operate in.

Thank you. Obviously, the risk in terms of digital attacks as well is something that's been flagged. Perhaps we could, once you've reviewed everything that's happened, and with time, be able to return to this matter as well, to really understand the challenges that you're facing, on multiple different levels currently.

We have a screen in our IT department that shows all the attacks that are coming at us at any one point. We're having multiple attacks, all the time. Some of them get further than others. Part of the challenge—. We get £5 million in capital funding each year from Welsh Government as part of our grant in aid, and we have to use approximately a third of that to maintain our digital security and digital systems. We had an attack about six weeks or more ago that was almost very serious, but our team have been exceptional so far in withholding those. We keep upgrading our technology. But we are told as a sector, and by our own experts, that an organisation like ours, it will be a question of when not if, someday, someone will get through. It's just one of those facts that we have to live with.

Thank you.

So, in light of that, to turn to the budget specifically, obviously, one of the things that we are looking at is the effect that could be had on organisations like yours if there were simply a budget increase in line with inflation. What effect would that have, would you say, for the amgueddfa?

So, if we were just in line with inflation, that would leave us just under £3 million short of what we need for our steady-state strong revenue performance. So, we would need to find ways of reducing programming and activities to address that shortfall. Clearly, there are always the two completely distinct but linked matters for us of the revenue and the capital. If we were only to get an inflationary rise on capital, then that would be very problematic for us in terms of the significant works we need to do, both on that digital, as I described, and on the buildings. What has been happening recently, and particularly in the last year, is that we get our grant in aid capital of the £5 million, which I talked about, and then Welsh Government make additional available to us. They've made a very generous allocation this year. So, we've had £9 million in addition to our £5 million, which is fabulous, and is why we've been able to fast-track those works. What we would really love to see is that our grant in aid capital could be increased, so that we could plan for that additional amount and build it into our way of working, rather than seeing it as individual projects.

Thank you for that. I think Lee wants to come in.

Yes. I just wanted to ask about how you manage that additional unplanned expenditure, because it's a very—. Although the money is clearly welcomed, it's a very messy way of being able to take a strategic view of how you take your work forward. We've heard previously about additional assurances not being given to the Welsh Government—business cases, and so on—for that additional money, which takes time to go through the process, but then gives you a very short window to be able to spend it within the financial year. Can you tell us how that relationship works and how satisfied you are with it?

I would say on how it is working that it is better as I sit here today than it was as I sat here last year. We are working more effectively with Welsh Government to shorten the time that it takes for the money to come to us.

The problem that we've got is, if the money doesn't come to us as our grant in aid, it has to be classed as a project, and Welsh Government have to work within the Treasury's Green Book approach. If the money is under £2 million, we have to produce a business justification case, and if it's over £2 million, we have to do a full five-case business model; the latter can take up to two years to produce. So, what we do is we have an estate strategy, we know all the work we need to do, and we're able to identify a pipeline of projects, and they're prioritised. So, Welsh Government give us our grant in aid, that goes on the most urgent, we know we have to do that, and then, as they have more money available that they will release to us a project, we say, 'Well, the next project will be this piece of work at St Fagans or in Swansea', or what have you, and then we work to produce the business justification case.

Now, last year, the time between that announcement that we could have extra funding and us drawing down the funding took us to December. This year, we were able to get it by late September. So, we have more of the year to deliver it, but it would be so much better for us if it could come as grant in aid.

And how much resource does it take you in order to go through that process, which is then taking away from the money you're getting?

That is significant. It is significant, and at multiple levels. Because it needs to involve our director, who's responsible for all our major projects; it involves the buildings team and finance officers to produce the case; and we need to do the liaison with Welsh Government colleagues. It takes a lot from their side as well, because they need their capital expert to look at it, they need the sponsor team to look at it, et cetera. So, it's quite a heavy process. 

And perhaps a question to the chair: from a governance point of view, do you think that is proportionate to the benefit that the museum is getting?

I think we're very conscious of the amount of time that executives spend putting in business cases and making the justification. Whilst the board is absolutely conscious of the fact that due accountability needs to be given for the vast amounts of public money that comes our way, if it were baselined in GIA, and it was scrutinised and accounted for in the regular quarterly monitoring meetings that the execs have, and the biennials that we have with the Minister, that would seem to us a more proportionate form of governance in respect to—. It's £9 million this year, but set against the total pot of £27 million GIA, which is scrutinised through the usual channels.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you.

Diolch, Gadeirydd. Notwithstanding what's happened this week, the last time you were before us, we asked about staff morale, given the significant level of redundancies that you've had to make. Has there been a staff survey since you've been before us, and how were the results? 

Yes. I'm absolutely delighted. We have made significant changes and progress this year. I think the organisation feels like it's in quite a different place. Staff survey results in the majority of departments across the organisation are significantly improved, and staff feed back that they are feeling very excited about the work that we're doing, the way that we're working. So, overall, I think there's been quite a change.

Yes. In terms of governance, Heledd, as well, one of the things that we've introduced this year is a new people, resource and culture committee, so that trustees and the board can keep a much closer eye on the health and well-being of our staff, and the general tone, mood and culture of the organisation, and that's working really well.

Thank you. You did mention—well, in your response—the majority. Are there areas of concern that remain?

Yes. Not all areas of the organisation are at exactly—. You know, in any survey, in any organisation, you'll always have a fluctuation of results. So, there are certain teams where they would like additional support and resource, so we're working intensively with those to look at what further changes we can make and how to improve in those areas.

Thank you. And in terms of the last time you were before us, you also stated that you were going to review the impact of the cuts and see if the changes that had been made had left gaps in certain parts of the organisation. How has that work progressed, and at what point are you? Have you identified a shortfall?

So, we set up a review group that was made up entirely of members of the staff body and didn't include any senior leaders or any leaders who were involved in making the changes. They have been gathering evidence, undertaking qualitative and quantitative feedback with staff. They've produced a report; we haven't yet had that report. So, we're still in the process of that review at the moment and we'll be looking to see what we can learn from it.

And are there any timescales? Because I think you initially said that, within six months, you were hoping to review and, obviously, it's been quite a while. Are there timescales that you're working to on that work?

Yes, it's imminent. So, we started it within six months of all the changes having been made. We staggered the changes. So, we did maybe 90 per cent or so of the organisation all in one tranche, but we kept front of house as a separate process through the restructure and we did that in the latter part of last year. So, we need to be mindful that this has been a kind of two-stage process, the restructuring. But, yes, I'm expecting to review the report imminently.

Thank you. And in terms of impact on services, I noted that you didn't have a presence at Eisteddfod yr Urdd or the National Eisteddfod this year. Was that as a result of cuts? Have there been other areas where you've had to cut back on things that you would normally deliver for the people of Wales?

Yes, so one of the exercises we did—. There was the combination of what did we have the funding for and what did we have the capacity for? So, we had to assess both: where could we make savings financially, through cutting activity, and where could we cut back to reduce the strain on what was a smaller workforce. And I've been very concerned that staff shouldn't feel like they had to continue delivering exactly the same work, but just with fewer people around them.

So, one of the most notable was that we decided we wouldn't take stands at external events. Each event that we go to costs tens of thousands—both in the stand fee and in the cost of the travel and subsistence et cetera of staff being away for that period. We did still attend the events and held various round-table discussions, talks et cetera at them, but we didn't take the stands.

Some of the other things that we stopped because of capacity include—. We've paused, for a temporary period, loans from the national collection internationally. We've continued them within Wales. International loans are a very important part of what we do, they're also very labour intensive. And we are seeking to return to those, hopefully, at some point next year. Another one is that we've had to reduce our enquiries service. So, where individuals may want to have quite intense information about specific items in the collection, we've had to cut back on that, again because of capacity.

But we've also looked to change the way that we work. So, we set up a programme called Ways of Working, consulted with staff about how they felt we could be more efficient or cut out processes with bureaucracy that would free up capacity. That's been really positive and we're in the middle of implementing the recommendations that came back from staff on that. And also we have tried to minimise what we've had to cut, from a financial perspective, by really focusing on growing our income, and it's been a record-breaking year for us in that respect. Not only have we increased income from existing channels—. So, we made a record-breaking £1 million operating profit from our catering and our retail operations et cetera, but we've also introduced new income streams. We've taken online the mill that's next to—. Not the mill, I beg your pardon—the weaving shed that's next to us at the wool museum, and we've gone into commercial production of flannel. We're the only place in Wales producing flannel. We've also started to produce double cloth there. We've also got into the very exciting world of brand licensing, where we will work with high-street names and others to bring the national collection into products that can be sold at no risk to the organisation, which not only raises money, but raises the profile and awareness of the museum.

Thank you. If I may—? I've noted from the minutes of board of trustees meetings online that you are currently looking at the five-year business plan ahead. As part of that, it states that you're considering options to review the museum's current activities, which you've obviously outlined there, but also it states the portfolio of sites. Could you explain what is meant by that, please?

Yes. So, the business planning process started earlier this year to bring into effect a new five-year business plan from March next year, and the board has held a number of workshops together with the executive team to look at the range of options that are there before us, given the financial settlement that we are looking to have, certainly in the first financial year of the next business plan. I think we're very aware that if we get a flatline budget, as Jane has said, it probably leaves us about £3 million short of a steady state of covering our revenue requirements. Therefore, we need to have the option, or allow the execs to have the option, to review programmes, projects et cetera right across the board of the organisation.

But the portfolio of sites—. There's no risk of not having seven national museums and a collection centre, or are those under review currently?

They're not currently under review, no, but as you're aware, we do always have to keep under consideration the span of activities that we undertake as Amgueddfa Cymru, but currently there's no plan to actively review those.

Right, okay. So, the portfolio of sites didn't—. Just to clarify, because I read that as being the portfolio of sites, meaning that there may be a need to rationalise the number of national museums under Amgueddfa Cymru—I'm not correct in that assessment, then.

Not under the current financial arrangements. Were we to have a drastic slashing of our budget, that is, of course, what we'd have to do. But what we look at with our portfolio of sites is: how are we working across the seven museums? Are there ways in which the museums can collaborate differently, support one another in a different way? Can we be telling stories across sites? Are there parts of Wales where we're not currently having a presence where we'd like to engage more closely with communities? We're very committed to being a national museum with national reach. We don't want to be a museum of Cardiff plus a few others. So, we're really clear that we need to be constantly looking at where we are working across Wales, and how we can do that to best effect.

Yes, and how we can work in different ways to best deliver the most exciting visitor experience to the people of Wales. So, the board has been really heartened to hear of the partnership between Cadw, ourselves and Newport City Council at Caerleon, at the National Roman Legion Museum there. That's an example of how we're trying to deliver differently through the current financial envelope. So, I think that's what that refers to, Heledd.

Okay. Thank you for that assurance. Obviously, the fact that you're not attending any national events now limits your ability to perhaps reach other communities. Is that something you've flagged as a concern to the Government, that you've not been able to attend things like Eisteddfod yr Urdd and the Eisteddfod Genedlaethol?

Well, we obviously had to make it very clear to Government that when we made cuts, we couldn't just keep doing the same things that we had done before, and anything that we cut would be a loss and everything that we do is missed by somebody. We have ongoing conversations with Government, and they know we're constantly looking at the different activities we've got and weighing up what we can continue to deliver within our resources. 

Thank you. If I may just ask in terms of another issue, one thing that I also came across from the minutes of the board of trustees meeting that took place in July where it states:

'At present, Amgueddfa Cymru sites had been granted provisional accreditation status.'

Could you provide an update in terms of what the current situation is?

Yes. The application for full accreditation has now gone into the Arts Council England, and we are assured that that will be coming through any day. 

That you will receive full accreditation.

Yes.

Can you explain how it came to be that it was provisional, because I'm sure you can understand anyone reading that would be hugely concerned to see 'provisional accreditation status'? 

Yes, and absolutely I have to make clear it was nothing to do with the delivery of services, or collections, care or anything like that. It was an administrative error several years ago where it transpired that the board of trustees had non-officially signed off the current five-year business plan. We knew that they had, but we couldn't find the actual minutes to refer to, and therefore we had to do a retrospective approval of that business plan earlier this summer. That was done without any issue at all, and sent in to Arts Council England on receipt of the approval of those minutes. 

Thank you. I note, though, in the minutes, it does say that the evidence of how it was monitored wasn't sufficient either. And also, if I may, it does state that as part of going for accreditation, it's mentioned that all policies are to be reviewed to ensure they are fit for purpose. So, therefore, can I ask, in terms of policies, what work is being done to ensure all policies are up to date? Are there any that are out of date currently?

So, we currently have a major review process to collate all of our policies, procedures and processes, and that's going through our audit and risk committee at the moment, and so we will have a much clearer sense of where we stand around our compliance there. Currently, I've not been alerted to any high-risk areas of non-compliance. But just in relation to the piece around the evidence around monitoring the plan, we had asked Arts Council England whether it was sufficient that we provided all of the evidence over the past four years of the way in which our board and our board sub-committees have scrutinised and monitored the current five-year plan, to show that, in effect, it has been signed off. And although we can evidence all of that, the arts council just required that formal minute of the board approving the five-year business plan from four years ago. And because that was missing from the minutes, that's what we needed to fill that gap.

Thank you for the clarification. If I may, Chair, once you have gone through the policy review, it would be helpful, I think, for our scrutiny work, to understand where you are in terms of the policies and what that work comes up with, and also to understand if there's been any impact of cuts on your ability to keep policies up to date.

Absolutely, we can do that.

Thank you. Diolch.

Just a couple of questions with regard to the budgeting and funding in respect of charging for exhibitions and so on now. It's obviously been a controversial area, hasn't it? It's an area we've been looking at and so on. What is the current situation that you've reached?

So, we believe that charging for added value experiences is an important contribution to increasing the income we receive as a museum. We are fortunate in Wales in that, as a national museum, we get a very high proportion of our funding from Government, but we don't want to be limited in the activities we're able to do on behalf of the people of Wales purely by what Government are able to afford to give us. So, we are continuing to pursue charging for all those activities that museums traditionally look to charge for, like particular exhibitions. And the way in which you charge for those will differ depending on the audience for an exhibition. So, if it's a really high-profile blockbuster, if you like, exhibition, then there will probably be a full charge for it, but where it's a community-focused exhibition, like we did with 'Streic! 84-85 Strike!'—was that late last year, I've lost track? That was a pay-what-you-can model.

And we're also interested to see if we can even explore models like 'pay it forward', where other people could pay for others who can't afford to go into the exhibition to go in. So, we're exploring a whole spectrum of activities, of ways in which we can charge for exhibitions. There's also the opportunity of talks, tours, other activities like workshops, family events, and that sort of thing. The one that is under review and will be until June 2026 is the extended charging trial for the underground tour at Big Pit. It became really clear to us why it's important to have a long trial for that. In September, we had our free community open weekend. All the tickets, the pre-available tickets, were booked up in advance, and we had lots of interest around it. But then, on the day, it was one of those terrible storm days—I don't recall which one—and so the numbers on the day were really low. And so if we just based our evidence on that weekend, it wouldn't have given us enough information. So, we feel we've taken the right decision and hopefully, when we come before you next year, we'll have the full evidence from that year-long trial.

And what are your indications on it? Because this is really a question of commercial viability—

Yes.

—doing things that, otherwise, you wouldn't be able to afford, unless Government were prepared to step in with the funding to basically say, 'We will make provision for that.' So, that's really what's brought it about, isn't it?

Yes, so two examples. One is that there has been no drop-off in the number of people, or the percentage of visitors, doing the underground tour at Big Pit since the charge was introduced. So, to date, recognising the trial is ongoing, the feedback is clear that the overwhelming percentage of visitors understand and support the need for a charge, and that also we are able to introduce other means to be able to make access available for those who aren't able to afford that charge.

A very specific example is when we did the Van Gogh 'Art of the Selfie' exhibition. The loan of that one Van Gogh painting was not covered by the insurance arrangements in Wales. So, Wales has a cap on the level of insurance that we can have for loans—that doesn't apply in other parts of the UK—and that work was too valuable to be covered by the Welsh Government insurance, so we had to take out a private policy, which was £40,000 just for that one painting. And because we were able to do the 'pay what you can', and people paying a minimum of £1, then we were able to more than cover the costs of that, which meant that we could then consider doing it again in the future. Had it run at a loss, we would then have to think, 'Well, can we afford to bring in such high value and important works to make available to the people of Wales?'

What discussions have you had, then, with Welsh Government over this? Because, for you, it's a practical, commercial decision—the things that you want to do, you should do, but you're not going to be able to do within the current funding unless you have some income that is raised from that. And, of course, it does happen around a lot of Europe, where many exhibitions already do have some sort of charging policy. But, obviously, I suppose what you'd call the political decision, with a small 'p' on it, is the engagement you have with Welsh Government over this. What sort of feedback have you had from Welsh Government on this approach and the direction that you're taking now?

I think the Minister's been very clear with us. We share a commitment to free entry at the point of access. The national collection belongs to the people of Wales, and they should be able to come and view it without cost. The Minister also recognises, just as you've described, that there need to be opportunities for us to be able to generate extra income that takes a bit of pressure off the public purse and allows us to do more through our museums. And he has been quite clear that he feels that that's in line with the arm's-length principle, and that there are certain decisions that are for us to take. But we always do that keeping him and his team informed, so that he's aware of any possible ramifications.

Okay, that's fine. Thank you. 

Heledd wants to come in. 

Thank you. Just in terms of the Government indemnity scheme, is there a way forward on this?

We're trying to explore one, yes. We're in very active discussions with officials at the moment. It's a really complex issue, but it is really frustrating. And I understand—. I understand why Treasury would be nervous about exposure for some major works. However, Wales should be a global cultural destination, and, in that context, we should be able, within our national museum, to put on works that feature multiple Van Goghs. That's what other national institutions should be able to do. So, we need to be able to find a way to do that, because we owe it to the people of Wales that we perform at the same level as other national museums, both in the UK and more widely in Europe.

Thank you. I think, if there's any further information you can provide on a way that we could support or make representations, I'm sure we'd be keen to do so.

And if I just may ask one other question: in terms of that need to balance the need for income generation versus free entry to the national collections, you mentioned that people who are going to Big Pit are happy to pay, but how are you assessing who aren't maybe coming because they know that there's a fee involved with going underground now? And how are you monitoring in terms of the socioeconomic profile of visitors and so on?

So, that's part of this evaluation. It's why it's such a big evidence-gathering exercise. So, part of that is that we use those free events for community et cetera to undertake deep-dives about, 'Has the charge prevented you from coming in the past?' et cetera, et cetera, and we are also modelling new concessions, and a new approach to concessions. So, again, we're evaluating that. We're really determined to become a data-driven organisation. And we're using this project as one of the ways in which we make that switch. We're being very serious about gathering that evidence.

Thank you. 

Thank you. Just before we come to Janet, could I ask—? One of the things that we've been scrutinising the Government on is the fact that the long-awaited priorities for culture have been published, but there doesn't seem to be anything particularly tangible that we can pinpoint in terms of what the Welsh Government will be doing as a result of what's been introduced or, indeed, what that would mean for funded bodies. Are there any examples of how your activities will change, that you assess, as a result of those priorities, and do you think that this is an issue for you? Would you have liked to have seen more direction or anything more tangible from that?

Thank you for the question, because we were really pleased to host the launch of the cultural priorities at Caerleon earlier this year, and we have been involved in the development of the priorities over the past couple of years. Heledd mentioned the planning that we are doing for the next five-year business plan at the moment, and the cultural priorities will obviously be at the heart of that. So, that is what the team are working on at the moment, to look and see how we model our work around those three priorities and the additional commitments that are in the document.

I think, in answer to the question about what might change, what we would like to see as a result of the priorities, given that they are cross-governmental, is a real commitment to a greater porosity in budgets and finances across Welsh Government. So, for example, outside the school system, we are the largest provision of education and learning in Wales, and last year we touched 230,000 children and young people through our education provision. Now, all of that, at the moment, comes out of the culture budget, and we don't have anything from education. So, we would really like to see a more cross- or whole-of-Government approach to the way in which the cultural sector is funded. I think that could be a really tangible outcome to the priorities.

Thank you.

Could I add—? One addition to that is that the second priority of celebrating Wales as a nation of culture—we would really love to amplify, to go much further on that, and, if there were to be a big change that we could deliver, because I think a lot of the priorities capture what we stand for and what we do day to day, we have a vision for the national museum in Cardiff, which is to make it a global beacon for the culture of Wales. So, we think we've got a very exciting proposal that could really bring that priority to life, and we hope that that connection is seen and understood by Government.

Thank you.

Can I just ask, just on that point, given that you were involved in shaping the document and had input, has it been a shame, therefore, that those kinds of ambitions aren't reflected there, so big projects and so on? Because obviously one of the criticisms there has been is that it's really difficult to disagree with the priorities for culture, but there's not a delivery plan underpinning them or specific projects and so on. Is that something that you'd like to see being taken forward, so that it was very clear how those priorities are going to be delivered and the role that you can and will be able to play? Because aspiration is one thing, but if you don't have the funding and the support it's going to limit how you're able to deliver.

Yes, I think so. I would love to see—. We're going to be very clear in our five-year business plan about what we want to deliver, and we would love to be able to see those lifted and incorporated into a plan that shows how these priorities are delivered. It is up to organisations like ours to be the delivery mechanisms, and we think we have got the proposals that would achieve the ambitions of this set of principles.

Diolch. Good morning. What is your ongoing contribution to the Welsh Government's national contemporary art gallery project?

Well—. So, the project was run as a partnership with its own board for the past two years, or—. Yes, I think it's that—maybe longer. We've just come to the end now of the transition between that arrangement and the ongoing one. So, the model is being incorporated into Amgueddfa Cymru. It will have an advisory group supporting it, and its formal governance will report through our committee structure up into our board. So, it is now incorporated into the work of our art department as a part of our core business, rather than as a separate project. There is funding available for a defined period to be able to do that. The longer term arrangements beyond that period have not yet been clarified.

Thanks. And what would be the impact on the amgueddfa and its partners if they have to provide the ongoing revenue funding for the national contemporary art gallery, as the Minister has suggested?

Well, we've been very clear, as the other partners have, since before the project even started, that the costs of CELF cannot be covered within the existing revenue budgets of either the amgueddfa or the other partners. There have been two independent assessments of whether the model could ever be self-sustaining, and both of those have said that it cannot be. So, either there needs to be additional money identified once we get to the end of the current funded period, or we as the amgueddfa are left in the very difficult position of either having to reduce that programme or reduce other things that we do in order to fund that programme.

It's all about balance, isn't it? 

Yes.

Yes. And has the Welsh Government amended the amgueddfa's remit letter in light of the changing level of funding?

No. We operate to the remit letter that we were given at the start of the administration. 

Okay. Could you outline your plans for the Llanberis site, including the latest funding situation?

We're very happy to.

Oh, yes. Oh, it's so nice to talk about something positive. Sorry. [Laughter.] We are just so excited about the Llanberis site. The site is now in the control of the contractors. We secured the National Lottery heritage funding, and actually a bigger amount, which they generously gave us, compared to what we were originally going to ask for. About three weeks ago we received another £0.25 million grant, which I believe was from the Wolfson Foundation—I’ll double check that.

The Garfield Weston Foundation.

Garfield Weston; I beg your pardon. So, the work is under way. The site has more or less been cleared of its newer buildings. Everything has been relocated in the most extraordinary effort around collections to a new site in Llandegai, outside Bangor, and that has been set up in a way where we can take tours and invite the public to come in and see it. It’s all been curated so you can see the collection in a way that you've not been able to see before, because there is stuff that's been hidden away. Items that couldn't be removed have been boxed in for their protection—things like the blacksmith's forge et cetera—and now the amazing MPH Construction team are cracking on with the two big elements of conserving the historic buildings and then creating—building—the new facilities, including the cafe and learning space and the shop. It'll be the first time we've had a dedicated, proper learning space up in north Wales in Llanberis. It's going to be above the cafe, with beautiful views across the mountains. It's going to be stunning. And at the same time as that physical construction work is under way, the team that are working on the interpretation are developing the techniques through which we're going to tell the stories. And it just looks fabulous; I saw it last week.

I'm excited to see it.

Yes. So, it's going to be—. We're going to be telling the story in a way that is very immersive, very alive, dynamic, but which isn't intrusive in any way to the historic environment. We were really fortunate that both the national trustees and the Welsh committee of the National Lottery Heritage Fund came to visit last week. They absolutely loved it, and, when people come to site, they realise just how exciting this project is. So, the funding is progressing really well. We still have a small gap. Welsh Government have provided an additional £3 million in-year to support us with that, and we have live applications to close that gap. We're really confident we're going to do it, because it is just such a brilliant project.

Thanks, Jane. And then, finally from me, the future generations commissioner has called for a culture Bill. Have you been involved in any discussions around this and do you have a view?

I have been. I've worked very closely with the commissioner's team on this, and they are very much in listening mode and talking to the sector about it. I fully support it, as do the Federation of Museums and Art Galleries of Wales. As Janet knows, I spent many years in local government, and I had to sit and hear the deliberations and be part of deliberations linked to major cuts to local services and, every time, culture would be one of the first to be cut, because it's difficult for people to make those impossible decisions and therefore they need something to go at. And if there's a statutory protection for something, it makes for an easier decision. But what I want to be really clear about is that a culture Act isn't about protecting the institutions of Wales. That's not what it's for; it's about safeguarding the cultural access and enjoyment of Wales within the context of future generations.

This is as much about local choirs meeting in village halls. It's about people enjoying workshops in their local area. It's about local institutions, national institutions. So, it's not about funding for institutions simply in some sort of protectionist way; it's about the fact that Wales should lead the world on culture. We are the country that captured culture as a sustainable development principle. We led the way with future generations. We can do this with culture. It is our best and greatest export, and so we should be proudly defending it and describing what we want it to look like for our grandchildren and their grandchildren, and making sure that just because of short-term financial pressures, we don't cut off the lifeblood of what makes this country what it is. So, I feel very strongly about it.

Yes, you speak with much passion, and that's what we want to hear, though. 

Thank you. I have Heledd and Lee who want to come in. I'll go to Heledd.

Thank you. I'm afraid that I'm going to bring down the level of hope and optimism here. I'm very much aligned with what the comments were now. I just want to take us back to the remit letter, which was a 12-page document at the time. Reading through it, what was being asked of you was extraordinary. Obviously, when you look at it now, some of the things there would be to take forward the development and establishment of the national contemporary arts gallery, to develop the museum of north Wales. There are so many things here that, obviously, you have not been able to do with the funding that has been available to you. How closely do you have those conversations with Government around the remit letter and what's achievable or not? And do you think that having a whole-term-of-government remit letter actually works, if it's not also accompanied by the funding in order to be able to deliver it? What would be your ask for your next remit letter, I guess, is the question.

I think, as a board, we would be keen that the remit letters are live documents, and as Government priorities and financial outlooks change, so does the ask of us within the remit letter. Having said that, a lot of that still stands. We have delivered our elements of the national contemporary art gallery, or the CELF project, as it currently stands. And the museum of the north has morphed into something slightly different, as we're all aware. So, I think it is always an ongoing dialogue with Government that we have about the requirements of us to deliver and what we can do against the funding that's available to us, and it's just a mature and honest, open dialogue from both sides.

Thank you. And as part of your business planning now for the next period, will you be looking at the remit letter and looking to try and influence the next remit letter? I know it's that balance between Government priorities, but, obviously, with that arm's-length principle, it's not just Government directing you, 'Here's what you do; there you go'. How much of a dialogue is there and how will you be assessing progress against the current remit letter, compared to the resources you've received to deliver it?

We're very much in dialogue at the moment, because it's the framework agreement as well as the remit letter, and the two go hand in hand. The framework agreement describes how we work and the remit letter is more about what Government would like us to do with the money. I see the business plan as partially—. Largely, it's going to direct the work of the team, but it's also an offer to Wales and to Government, that, 'This is what this organisation can do.' So, I really hope it can influence the remit letter. My biggest ask is that remit letters, traditionally for all of us as arm's-length bodies, take the full programme for government and ask us to deliver against each bit. So, you've probably spotted a bit in there about working with Keep Wales Tidy on that sort of stuff and all sorts of economic objectives, et cetera. I would love to see targeted remit letters where people like us and the National Library of Wales are really tasked with elements around culture and how we can link wider to education and well-being, but that you don't ask every ALB to deliver against the whole programme for government. And I think that's where you can get true leadership, and the delivery in Wales is being targeted with what you ask the different bodies to do.

Diolch. Lee, you wanted to come in.

Can I explore the link between those two last sets of questions—the one of resources you have, and then the role of legislation in entrenching a world view, I suppose? You described very eloquently a vision for culture, but why does legislation need to play a part in that? You mentioned a choir singing in church halls and community halls. You don't need a law to be passed to do that. Is there a danger we're mixing up ends with means here? You can do a lot of activity in drawing up legislation that doesn't change the reality of your remit letter.

I'd give you the example of the Welsh language. Every organisation, length and breadth of Wales, including hard-strapped councils, have to take language seriously because it's protected under legislation in Wales. Whereas culture, it'll be death by a thousand cuts. It's having sight of what the obligations of bodies of all kinds across Wales are to ensure that our culture is safeguarded, because we won't notice that those opportunities have gone, because the village halls have closed or the groups no longer have anywhere to meet. It comes from all sides for culture. It's the frog in boiling water, isn't it?

[Inaudible.]—an argument about resources, isn't it? You're trying to use legislation to drive an argument about resources.

No.

We already have legislative commitments to improve well-being. What difference does that make in practicalities?

Some people say we've got legislative protection for culture under the well-being of future generations Act, but because it's secondary to the primary focus, it's not making any difference. Legislation demonstrates what this country takes seriously and what it wants to protect, and I would say that without a concerted and intentional effort to define what we want from the culture of this country and what we need in place to support it infrastructurally, not just through money, but what it needs to look like for Wales, it will be gone before we've realised it.

Okay. I don't agree, but we won't dwell on that. Shall I move on to the next area of questioning, Chair?

Yes. Just before you do, I know that—. In fact, no; if we do that firstly and then, at the end, I would like to ask you about the Cardiff 100 project. But, Lee, yes, it makes sense.

Okay, I'm disciplining myself. [Laughter.] I wanted to talk about governance. You told us last time about how the mechanics of the approach to governance was taken since the—what's the most polite euphemistic word to describe what happened with governance at the museum—since the 'incidents' of recent years. Shall we put it that way? So, feel free to update us on your progress on the mechanics. I guess I'm more interested in the culture of governance and challenge, because there's always a danger, particularly when there has been such a traumatic experience, that people then walk on eggshells, and the board, in particular, pulls its punch because it doesn't want another falling out with the executive. How are you proactively making sure that doesn't happen?

Shall I walk you through the mechanics first, because I think the mechanics and the processes that we've put in place have led and are leading to that step change in culture that is the outcome that we want to see from this? I'm really pleased that you've asked the question, because it has been one of my priorities since I was appointed two years ago. We have done an extraordinary amount of work on the process and the mechanics of governance—the hard piece, if you like, that leads to the softer pieces. As you're aware, we had the tailored review back in the summer of 2023, and that had 77 recommendations, and 26 of those related to governance alone. I'm really pleased to report that we have completed 69 of those recommendations and, of those, we were solely responsible for 62 of the recommendations, and there is just one of those outstanding, which we will complete this year, and that is the completion of a strategy for partnership and engagement, which will come to board later on this year. There are eight that are marked as ongoing, which are a joint responsibility between ourselves and the Welsh Government, or the sole responsibility of the Welsh Government, and the renewal of the framework agreement is an example of one of those.

So, I'm absolutely delighted that we have been able to demonstrate to the Charity Commission that we have, in effect, closed down the vast majority of the tailored review recommendations. You will remember that the commission had opened an investigation against us during that period of challenge. That was closed to their satisfaction in March of last year, but their single remaining request to the amgueddfa was that we provide them with an update against the tailored review by March of this year. So, I was able to do that, and they came back and they thanked us for what was a very comprehensive update against the recommendations. They had no further questions, and they were satisfied that the corporate governance elements of the tailored review had all been answered satisfactorily. So, I was extremely pleased with that and thankful to the team for putting in that work, particularly during a period of real financial challenge.

Alongside that, we have fundamentally overhauled the way in which the board works. We now have a much better balance between the closed sessions and the public sessions, which means we take much more in open session, so that we are much more clear about the way in which decisions are made and are accessible to the public. We've refreshed our schemes of delegation, our financial delegations, and we have also done a major exercise to review our compliance against the Charity Commission's code of conduct for larger charities. I'm pleased to say there were no areas of non-compliance in that, and a couple of areas of 'amber' that we are addressing this year or have already addressed this year. That will be reviewed on an ongoing basis annually from now on to ensure that trustees have that assurance that we are in absolute compliance with what the Charity Commission and the Charities Act 2022 to do.

We have also recruited nearly half new trustees as members of our board. Those new trustees have all been inducted and are doing really fantastic work around the board table now. One of the largest changes, which I have already alluded to, is that I've done a complete overhaul of our board sub-committee structures so that, for the first time, we are actually operating in a structure that allows proper scrutiny and proper oversight of the full breadth of the organisation's activities, learning, engagement, funding, collections care, finance, performance, et cetera. We have trustees leading on each of those committees, and we will be supplementing them where we feel we may have skills gaps with some additional external independent members over the next year.

So, we have the mechanisms now to do the hard piece of the governance, which has allowed us and freed us up to have the capacity to do the soft stuff, to do the better questioning, the constructive challenge that execs expect. That is now coming through, and I'm seeing that as chair in the way that trustees are exercising their duties, the way in which they're challenging execs. I think Jane will tell you that execs are now feeling that as well. So, I think we're in a fundamentally very different place to where we were two years ago. I'm absolutely determined that we will be a role model for a high-performing board in the public sector here in Wales, and we're well on that journey.

It struck me, observing it, that part of the issue was the executive effectively saying to the board, 'Stay in your lane.' I wonder how much the change in titles from director general to chief executive, and from president to chair has signified a shift in that relationship.

I think it's certainly helped, but I think, probably, that the overriding factor has been the very open relationship that Jane and I have had from the start. When we were both appointed, it helped that it was around the same time. We sat down, we discussed ways of working, how we wanted to discharge the roles of chief exec and accounting officer and me as the chair and leader of the board. We continue to have those on a weekly basis. So, we have a very open relationship, we nip any issues in the bud before they arise, and it's a really productive way of running the organisation and running the board.

Do you think gender has played a role in that?

Gender?

Yes.

It could well do. We're always very clear that we leave our egos at the back door. We're absolutely committed to public service and getting on with the job.

I think trust is a really big part. Kate and I have absolute trust in one another; there are no surprises in our relationship. I think between the executive and the board, that has been critical. As the two leaders of the organisation, we had to really focus on that trust for the first year, I think, to build that up. And because it is there now, that challenge can come in and everybody knows it's coming from the right place. One of my senior team colleagues texted me after the last board, which was a week or so ago, and there'd been some really strong challenge on a particular issue that he was responsible for and he came back and said, 'I'm really glad we had that conversation; it's making us better' and I thought, 'Well, that says quite a lot'.

Okay. I'll leave it there. Thank you.

Thank you. Diolch yn fawr iawn. Earlier there was a spoiler, because you wanted to tell us about the Cardiff 100 project, so for our listeners and watchers who will be eagerly awaiting that moment, over to you, we'd love to hear about it.

It's my personal view that what we have in the national museum in Cardiff is a fabulous museum and we all love it, but I feel that it, in a way, is a replica of a national museum that you might get in London; I don't feel that it is distinctive to Wales. So, at the heart of the NMC 100 project is transforming that museum offer in a way that creates a national museum that is distinctively of and for the people of Wales, and when you come through the door, you can be under no illusion, you've been immersed in Wales.

In doing that, we look outwards and we perhaps learn from other big recent projects in places like Liverpool. We take a wider view of what that museum should be and could be and we use it to anchor a cultural quarter in the heart of our nation's capital. We work with the team at Cardiff Council to consider the future of City Hall next to us and with our partners at the university and the Royal Welsh College of Music & Drama just around the corner, and we look to make that whole area, within the civic centre of Cardiff, a vibrant, animated cultural space, which helps to elevate the profile of Wales as a global cultural destination.

To do that, yes, we have to fix the building, but it's not a buildings project; buildings would be one element within a wider programme. There would be an entire shift in the way that we see and use the building. One part of that shift is that currently, you go right for art, go left for science, and it would be about saying that the power of the national collection for Wales is its breadth, the social history, the archaeology—you know, what we have is phenomenal, but the really amazing thing is if you could start showing those things together. So, you bring the science and the art together, and you create experiences that are around particular ideas, concepts, et cetera, with different parts of the collection showing that. You would keep the international items like the impressionist paintings, but you tell that story that they came to Wales as a result of Welsh industrialisation—there's an amazing story to tell of where that wealth came from and the choices that were made in Wales about how that wealth would be spent.

We would also look to really rethink the whole commercial offer. I'm not a big fan, as my team know, of our current cafe and shop. It just doesn't work and it's not as good as it should be for a national museum, so we will be really rethinking that. And we would also really address this challenge that we've spoken to you about before about the collection: where should items be stored and how do we give people access to the items that are stored.  Potentially, we could use part of that building still to store items, but in a way where people can visit the behind-the-scenes bits, as well as the front of house.

So, that's the ambition. It's a big one and it would need to be done in phases. Clearly, we need to work up all the detail around it. But it is absolutely about repositioning this amazing jewel in the heart of the capital into something that reflects—. It's our centenary in 2027 and Wales is a different nation, it needs to reflect a post-devolution, confident Wales. The museum that Wales needed in 1927 is different from the national museum we need in 2027, and that's what we'd like to do.

Thank you so much. Mick wants to come in.

Just a short personal thing. The Strike project, I thought, was really fascinating for those of us who were involved in those times. But the industrial and cultural history of Wales is something that is fragmented. There's obviously a certain amount in terms of what happens up at Blaenavon. Also, in Swansea, you have this incredible collection of these banners and so on, but none of them ever get seen. There's quite a lot of this sort of thing. Is that something that you have in mind as to how you might broaden out that broader social history of Wales, the sociopolitical history of Wales?

It's back to Heledd's question at the beginning about the portfolio of sites. It's about how is that story told in a connected and holistic way through the sites. We're currently recruiting for our new director of collections and research, because the current postholder is going to be retiring. That's going to be their job: to lead that thinking around how do we tell the stories, which stories, which items do we bring out.

The beauty of the Strike exhibition was it was clearly very distinctively Welsh, it was very rooted in community, but it did that thing of bringing out banners, artworks, badges, the little trolley things they used to use in the mines. It's that sense of bringing all of those items together and then you tell a more powerful story as a result. Strike is a bit of a flavour, if you like, of the kind of approach we could take. We'll continue to test that with the kind of exhibitions that we hold over the next couple of years, just pushing that sense of what exhibitions in Wales look like.

Exciting. Heledd wants to come in.

How do you balance that level of ambition with what you've outlined to us has been a rationalisation of services, a cut to services? And the fact that you've still not completed that work of looking at the skills gaps and so on within the organisation to be able to understand what's been lost through the cuts and so on. How are you balancing the need for both? Because, obviously, there are services that perhaps you've had to cut that you would still like to be able to deliver, from what you've suggested. Knowing both buildings, I don't think what you're outlining is cheap. It would probably take the whole of the Welsh Government's capital budget just on the Cardiff plans, let alone what's needed across the national museum estate. So, how are you balancing that level of ambition with pragmatism in terms of what you need to be able to do just to be able to maintain the sites as they are, let alone realise that ambition?

That's almost word for word what the board asked me as well, and it's a really important question. I think I might have not answered properly, Heledd, your question before. We have done the analysis of the skills gaps. I'm sorry, when we talked about the review, I was talking about the feedback from staff about how they found it, how we should do it in the future, if ever we have something similar. So, we have done the skills gap analysis, and we've identified posts that we need to put back into the structure or that need to be supplemented in the structure. We are actively recruiting into those with the headroom that we've got currently. I'm sorry I gave you that impression that we hadn't done it.

How many roles, therefore—? What did the skills gap show, and how many are you able to recruit?

It's been an ongoing process. Some of them have been done as we go through it, because we meet once a fortnight to review the HR requirements we've got. I haven't got the figures in front of me about what we've done to date, but I've recently signed off on 17 roles that I believe we need to function effectively, and we have identified how we will fund those, and we're doing a rolling programme of recruiting those from now.

Anyway, sorry, the main point of your question, which was really important, was the pragmatism and the project. What I'm proposing to do is, in effect, through this business plan, distinguish between the operation of the museum—within the constraints that you've talked about—and also creating a group who are responsible for bringing forward this vision. So, you don't ask the same people to try to do both, because that would be too difficult.

This has been a really difficult period for us as an organisation over recent years, coming back to what Lee alluded to, and for society. We all need hope. We can't just keep focusing on shrinking and cuts. We need hope for Wales. We need hope for our organisations. I believe that the project—I don't want to put a burden on the staff—gives us something to be excited about, to work towards. And if we can do a really brilliant job of delivering Llanberis, which I'm convinced we will, it'll demonstrate that we have the team and the ability to deliver transformation within a big capital project, and that will help us bring in the other funding partners that we would need.

I want to be pragmatic about how we structure it, so I wouldn't ask for the whole funding pot as one total. We know how much it's likely to be, but we'd probably phase it as four different projects and fundraise for each of them. And what we'd be asking the Welsh Government to do is to come in as the anchor funder, buy in to the vision and the proposal, and then once the Welsh Government are in, we can go to other funders to come alongside it, which is what happened at Llanberis. So, we're working through this process with Government officials at the moment. We've done the strategic outline case. We've been through a gateway review. They're very aware of what we're talking about, and so our programme team will continue to work that up while our heads of site and other leaders from the organisation continue to run the core of the museum. 

Thank you. I think we will probably want to return to those as this work progresses. Obviously, Llanberis is a major project, but what you're describing with City Hall as well is on another level in terms of finances required, I would guess, and the levering of funds externally to Wales would be important.

I'm not saying we would bring forward City Hall necessarily. What I'm saying is we're talking to partners about what their assets are, what they might like to contribute to this overall vision. 

In terms of the skills gap and so on, and the roles, would you be able to provide figures to us in terms of what that analysis showed in terms of how many roles you've had to look to reinstate? And also, for us to understand: you've mentioned that if you have a standstill budget, there will be a shortfall in your budget. How does that work in terms of the fact that you're having to recruit some business-essential roles, given the ongoing financial challenges?

We can certainly give you figures on the roles. I wouldn't say that we've necessarily got roles that we've reinstated. What we've done is said, 'Where is there a team under pressure, and what role do they need to support with that pressure?' So, I'm not sure that it's a reinstatement, but we can definitely give you the figures about the recruitment and the roles that have been brought in.

Thank you.

Just specifically on that, you said you're working with experts and partners on it. I'm just wondering: are you following the National Cyber Security Centre's cyber assessment framework?

Yes.

That's the framework you're working to.

Yes.

And how far advanced are you up that hierarchy?

Ok. Great. Diolch.

Thank you, Chair. Thanks ever so much for coming in this morning. It was just a quick question following on from one of the questions my colleague Heledd asked there about staff morale, and you mentioned there about how staff voices are important to you as an organisation. I just wanted to get an idea of—. So, we talk, especially when I was a school governor, about critical friendship, being a critical friend, and I just wanted to know a bit more about fostering that culture of challenge. Is that something that you do at the library, to allow staff maybe to challenge decisions, then, and just how do you go about doing that?

So, with that in mind, a staff member would feel comfortable saying in public that they think that's the wrong decision.

Thank you. Can I just first of all say how terrific I think Cyfrinachau'r Llyfrgell on S4C is? As well as being good telly, I think it is a huge credit to the library. One thing you get from it is that the treasures are not just the things that have been in the vaults for a very long time, but the team you have there—I think Maredudd ap Huw is a national treasure. So, I hope it's widely seen, because I think it really does paint a picture of what the library is about, and does it terrifically well. So, congratulations to you on that partnership. 

I just want to ask about the strategies that you have, because you've mentioned the financial picture and how you've had to do more with less. The strategy, as a consequence, is rather basic, isn't it? It covers all the bases, but it's not a terribly ambitious set of objectives. But I guess that's a reflection of the reality faced. Do you feel that you've had to stick to the knitting, as it were?

I'm trying to look at what you might regard as stretch targets in your objectives, and you've got one that strikes me as very ambitious: within five years from now, you aim to become net zero as an organisation. Is that remotely realistic?

It depends how you're counting it, I suppose.

And how are you auditing that, that it's to a standard that is worthy of net zero?

By whom?

Okay, thank you. What else would you describe as a stretch target as part of your objectives?

On some levels, that's the stretch. The stretch is that we've got these assets. We talked about Cyfrinachau'r Llyfrgell. It's basically relooking at what we've got and seeing how we get to those communities who actually provided that content in the first place, and that's a big ask for the team for the next five years. 

The Government have published their own priorities for culture. To what extent do they require you to bend your own? 

Just a few short questions, if that's okay. The Welsh Government's national contemporary art gallery project—what's the level of your engagement with that at the moment?

There have been suggestions in terms of how the art gallery is going to be funded in terms of revenue funding. Of course, the Minister made some comments in terms of, I suppose, collaboration or contribution towards that. Has that developed at all? Have there been any further discussions on that? Is that just really a throwaway remark, or is there any substance to it?

Is that a discussion that is continuing? Are there any potential changes to the Welsh Government's remit letter to yourselves in any way, or is this something that is still very much ethereal at the moment?

Just one other point. The future generations commissioner has suggested there should be a culture Bill. There seems to be a certain amount of support for it. I'm not sure what the clarity is as to what the legislation would actually be, what it would actually achieve, but that obviously would be matters potentially for a future Senedd. What are your thoughts around that? Have there been any discussions or considerations of that? Are you in favour of it? And what do you think it would actually do, for or against, in terms of your objectives?

We waited quite a while for the priorities for culture. So, in a sense, the idea is there. Obviously, we're monitoring the discussions around it. I think our focus for the next five years is quite clear in terms of our strategy. I know some of the committee members have shown an interest and asked us questions around that. But I think from our perspective, we will wait to see what the next programme for government is, and if part of that is a move towards a Bill and an Act, we will then feed in accordingly.

Okay. Can I just take you back to one thing that you were commenting on a bit earlier in some of the questions, in terms of your international engagement? Can you just say a little bit more about that? Because this is something that is, I think, just incredibly undervalued. What is the current state of it? It came through a bit when I attended the national library in Kyiv. I think I've still got some books out there that they gave me to bring to you, but they were too heavy to take on the plane, so one day they may actually arrive. But it just brought home to me that that international engagement is something that is very good in terms of the identity of Wales, the focus on Wales and the mutual engagement, I think, internationally. Of course, you have some quite important international archives, like the Gareth Jones archives and so on, that are being digitised, and so on. So, I'm just wondering whether you could say a little bit more about that, please.

Thank you very much.

Perfect. Thank you, Chair. It was just a couple of quick questions, really. I understand, back in February, a couple of years ago, in 2023, there was an effectiveness review of the board's performance. I just wanted to get an idea of the outcome of that review and what sort of changes have been implemented since.

The board has updated its membership since February 2023. We're up to full membership. Obviously, the board is a balance between appointees from the library and appointees from the Welsh Government. In terms of learnings from that effectiveness review, one of the key things was about the balance of skills. So, we've been making sure that all of our recruitment has been focused on improving the balance of skills. I certainly think, at the moment, with us at full capacity, we have a much better balance of skills, particularly in terms of having, strangely, more expertise in terms of librarianship and people who understand the digital element of research, which I don't think we had before. We were being challenged quite a lot about getting official independent research organisation status, and I think that was, maybe, a bit of a distraction from the fact that, actually, what we needed was to make sure that there was greater partnership working with the universities right across Wales, and that has significantly changed and that's part of our planning for the strategy.

In terms of other elements within the effectiveness review that you mentioned, financial scrutiny was a big part of that. We are certainly, I feel, much more on top not just of the monthly expenditure, the quarterly expenditure, but the mid-term and the longer term financial planning. We have a mid-term financial plan in place, which is looked at on a regular basis and that wasn't there previously.

And then, just in terms of balance of diversity—and I'm not just talking about diversity of ethnicity, but age and geographical diversity—I think it's much better now than it was in February 2023.

With that in mind, then, how do you look to get best practice in the governance? You mentioned diversity and the skill set and everything, but how do you go out and seek what's best practice, then, for the governance role?

Well, in terms of making sure that we are learning from effective practice, at the last board meeting, last month, we actually had a two-day session—well, I say a two-day session; we had a full-day session, of which the full morning was healthy board training, with Academi Wales. I think we're one of the first public boards to have the healthy board training in that way; we were a little bit of a guinea pig. I think it was a really constructive, positive session. We had all of the board members taking part and the majority were with us in Aberystwyth, and that was facilitated in a really open and honest way, and I think we looked at all aspects of the role of a public board, particularly in terms of our interactions with each other, making sure that we understand our structures, making sure that we know our roles, but also, then, that little bit of balance between the role of a board and the role of an executive. I think the phrase, 'noses in, fingers out' came up a couple of times, which I think is quite an important one for people to understand, particularly given the fact that we have a few people on the board who haven't been on a national board before. That's only one element.

We make sure that we come together as a board, away from the library, once a year for a two-day session, and training and improved effectiveness is part of that. I think I'm three quarters of the way through appraisals for each of the board members, and when I finish those, I'll write a thematic report for our board meeting in the new year, and part of that will be anything that we need to take forward, just to keep on improving our effectiveness.

Perfect. Thank you. The other question I have, then, is that, if I remember rightly, in the same year, there was a risk management audit, in 2023. Obviously, some of the concerns raised there were that it wasn't robust enough, there was a lack of leadership and a lack of clarity. I just wanted to get an idea about how you've addressed those concerns, going forward.

I think one of the things was about—. We were also going through that period when we were facing the cuts; we knew that there were cuts on the way. We were also having to look at not just restructuring the departments, but restructuring the executive team. Obviously, since then, we've had a number of significant senior appointments—not just the chief executive, but other roles on the executive. I think those executive members have come in knowing the job that was expected of them, and I'm happy to say, from a board perspective, we really believe that they're delivering against our expectations.

With that in mind, then, I know you brought in a director of finance and corporate services, but can I just get an idea of the impact that they've had? I understand that one of their primary roles was to look at this risk management.

Yes, the risk manager also came with us, moving over to a new system—RiskMate?

Yes.

That meant that the audit and risk committee, but also the finance and resources committee, made sure, and the full board fed into what we wanted RiskMate to show us. I think, in some organisations, you can get into a situation where you put far too much onto your risk register, and I think that ends up a little bit 'fingers in' rather than 'noses in'. I think, overall, the reporting that now comes to both ARAC and comes to full board is a lot clearer. There has been feedback from board members about not just the papers that come, but the details that come in the papers and how that is clearer compared to before. So, I think that gives a degree of assurance to full board, and it certainly gives assurance to ARAC, since the appointments and since the creation of the roles and the people coming in, that things are—I'm not saying they weren't robust before—more robust than they were previously.

Okay. Perfect. Thank you, Chair.