Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru

I would like to welcome Members to today's meeting of the Children, Young People and Education Committee. As of yesterday, Hefin David MS left the committee and has been replaced by Carolyn Thomas MS. I would like to thank Hefin for his time and contributions to the committee. We look forward to welcoming Carolyn to the committee. Carolyn has sent her apologies for today. Tom Gifford will need to leave the meeting at 11.30 a.m. The public items of this meeting are being broadcast live on Senedd.tv and a Record of Proceedings will be published as usual. The meeting is bilingual and simultaneous translation from Welsh to English is available. Are there any declarations of interest from Members?

We move on now to agenda item 2. I'm very pleased to welcome Rocio Cifuentes, Children's Commissioner for Wales, and Rachel Thomas, head of policy and public affairs. Members will have a series of questions and I'd like to start.

Starting with your casework, your annual report describes a pilot project to increase the visibility and accessibility of your advice service and says it has been renamed as the children's rights advice and assistance service. What impact has the pilot and rebranding had so far? And are you seeing more children and young people themselves being empowered to ask for your help?

Diolch yn fawr iawn. Thank you for the question. This pilot was carried out at the end of the financial year in question, the 2023-2024 financial year, and as you said, it was all about trying to increase the visibility and accessibility of the service. It's early days in terms of seeing the impact of the new name, because the name actually changed just at the very end of March 2024, and we are monitoring, keeping a really close eye on numbers and where referrals come from.

We have seen that the name change and the change of the branding and the look and feel of the service has been having a positive impact from the conversations and stakeholder engagement that we've carried out. The stakeholders did tell us that they felt that the new name and look was much more accessible, less intimidating and more child-friendly, and particularly because we had children's rights in the name, it more closely reflected what the service was all about and what it actually offered.

In terms of numbers we have this year, the numbers are very similar and consistent with previous years. For a number of years now, our annual casework figures have been in the 600s, and this year is looking to be on a very similar trajectory, so that's good. But what we have seen is an increase in the complexity of the cases that we have had, both in this current year, but also during the last year. We have had significantly increased complexity of cases. We've had four whistleblowing cases come to us in the year in question compared to the previous year, when we only had one. And these cases can be very complex and long-lasting. We carry them and they take about 10 months on average to deal with, so they're not one-off advice cases, they're not simple cases.

In terms of children actually contacting us directly, we haven't seen a specific increase in that number compared to previous years, but we have reflected that we wouldn't really expect children and young people to come to us directly, usually, although we do in some cases, because of the complexity of the cases. We're not usually a first port of call, we are usually—. Our expertise and the power of our office is better placed and used where there are more complex cases that haven't progressed as they should have. It's usally when children or families have already been to a school, already been to a local authority and aren't getting anywhere that they come to us, and where our intervention is best placed to have a positive impact. And we've got many case studies that show how that does really, really result in access to services and access to the rights that children are entitled to.

So, this year we are placing a greater focus on setting up a really robust monitoring framework to measure the actual impacts of our intervention. That work is under way and we hope to be able to report that back to you this time next year. But, overall, the conclusion that we've drawn so far from the pilot is that it is more accessible and engaging as a service to children and young people. We are also increasing awareness of the service; we have recently had a survey back from Beaufort Research to show that awareness of the office has actually increased to 35 per cent amongst children and young people, compared to previous surveys that were carried out a number of years ago, where that figure was 17 per cent. So, it's a significant increase, but we want to continue to increase that awareness. But in terms of people who actually contact us, it's usually adults on behalf of children and young people. 

Thank you. Twenty years on from the Wales-wide children’s commissioner role being established, we can see that there is a very significant geographical difference in which local authorities your casework comes from. For example, only 77 of the 658 cases came from the six north Wales local authorities. This time last year, you told us that you were monitoring this geographical variation very closely. Would you concede that these figures suggest children in some local authorities are missing out on support from your role?

Thank you. I feel that those figures broadly reflect the population, and we have carried out engagement and have actively had referrals from every single local authority across Wales. I myself have been to north Wales, right across north Wales, including Ynys Môn, many times during the year. And it is a target and a focus for our office. We carry out many engagement events in that area. So, I wouldn't agree with the phrase you used that these children are missing out. It's definitely something that we want to continue to build on and do more of, as we do with children from all parts of Wales. So, I would say that it's something that we want to do more of, but we feel that we are making strong efforts, and are doing a lot already. We have a member of staff based in the north, and just a few months ago—well, just last month—delivered a very successful conference in St Asaph attended by over 90 people. So, it's ongoing work.

Just to supplement that, if I may, we look at the different functions of our office in conjunction. So, where we might see a local authority where we haven't had many cases come through, we do targeted engagement work in schools and community groups there. For example, some Valleys local authorities, we were finding we hadn't had as many cases compared to the expected population share, so we did specific engagement work. And whilst we can't directly correlate in relation to that, we have seen an increase in the casework that has come from those particular areas. So, it's something that we're continuing to do and it's part of our engagement strategy for the office; we see the two as being related.

Thank you. So, does the research about awareness you spoke about consider regional differences? 

It does, yes. There are, obviously, fluctuations, and, in fact, awareness of our offices from that research, which was carried out by Beaufort Research, as I said, showed it was significantly higher amongst Welsh-speaking young people; it was actually around 61 per cent amongst Welsh-speaking young people, and much lower for English-speaking young people. So, that does suggest, in fact, a higher awareness level in north Wales, but we will continue to drill down on what those findings tell us—we've only just had them in the last week or two—and we will target our engagement efforts appropriately.

So, has the impact of closing the north Wales office in 2015 been monitored over time with regard to casework?

Yes, absolutely. And this is where we have such a close focus on really scrutinising where our casework comes from, but also where my team focuses its efforts as an engagement team, so in terms of physical, on-the-ground visits, as well as online responses to our various surveys, including our Monthly Matters initiative.

And what did your casework pilot project do to increase the visibility of your office across all Welsh local authorities?

Again, this is something that we are hoping the Beaufort survey will inform, but the top-line finding from that, at a 35 per cent awareness level, is promising. We obviously want to drill down and look at where the pockets of lower awareness are—and 35 per cent is still far from where I would like it to be. So, we'll continue to push that. We've developed all sorts of new social media engagement tools, we're on new platforms, so it's a real focus for my term.

And just to give an indication of how closely we look at that, that's something that we report on at a granular level at every monthly management team meeting that we have. So, it's something that we keep actively in our minds.

Okay. Thank you. We now have some questions from Vaughan, please.

Thank you, Chair. Sorry, Chair, I didn't realise I was muted. Sorry. I think I'm going to ask questions about funding, which is always a challenge. In the last couple of years, you've had an increase in funding, in cash terms, and, obviously, it's been a time of real difficulty, and lots of other bodies, including other commissioners, have had flat budgets. Can you set out for us what that funding actually was for, what you agreed with the Government it was for, and what you think you've been able to deliver as a result of that funding increase in cash terms?

Thank you. We did have more funding in 2023-24 compared to the previous year, but actually, in the current year, we have had a cut. So, the increase in 2023-24 compared to previous years was purely to keep up with increasing staff costs, and nothing more than that. However, in the current year, we have—. Well, in the year in question, we already had to hold and not fill two vacancies once we had the information about the budget that we would have this year, 2024-25. So, we are already very much as lean as we can be, and, in fact, we're not able to continue to hold the two vacancies going forward, and deliver the work that we need to do to deliver our statutory remit and respond to the needs of children and young people as they have been reported to us, from the 9,000 children that responded to my national survey.

So, directly to answer the question: what we did with that extra money was, basically, keep 22 staff in their posts, which meant that they could deliver the really important projects and pieces of work that we delivered in 2023-24, which are detailed in the annual report. All of that work was delivered by those 22 individuals. They're very experienced, long-serving members of staff, with high levels of expertise. And it is very concerning now to look ahead, in the financial climate that we are in, and to hear the very worrying messages that we are hearing about potential further cuts, which would really be unsustainable and unmanageable for us as an organisation. So, we're already, from a staff team that should be 24, down to 22, and that is having a significant impact on our ability to deliver work and to plan effectively for work that we feel really needs to be done, as I said, to really respond to those needs that children and young people are telling me about.

Can I ask, when you look at other organisations, because of the reality of—? Whatever your view on the politics of any party of Government, the reality is that there has been less money, progressively, in real terms, available over a significant period of time, so does that affect the view that you take of policy and casework in organisations that have had similar challenges? I think any local authority, regardless of its leadership, would talk about the financial realities of the last few years. How does that factor into your own work, and how does that factor into your assessment of how far and how well organisations are meeting and responding to the needs of children and young people?

I work very closely with other commissioners and am very aware of what budgets and budget settlements they are seeking and having, and, obviously, from the alignment exercise, we are treated as far as possible, I believe, by Government, in similar ways in terms of—. It's only us and the Older People's Commissioner for Wales who actually deliver a casework service. Our casework service is unique in terms of its powers and what it can offer to children and families, and I feel that we have a very small team already delivering that crucial service, compared to other organisations in the wider public service. I feel that we really punch far above our weight and deliver a lot with a very small team of only 22 people. In the actual casework service, that's only three people plus a manager of that service, supporting over 600 families.

I want to come back to casework. That's really helpful, actually, but I just—. Is there more—? Because the challenge of value for money is there for every part of Welsh public life that is funded through the Welsh Government settlement, whether it's the commissioners, whether it's local authorities, the health service, voluntary service, so I'm interested in, from your point of view, when we're talking about value for money, whether there's more you can do with other commissioners to deliver greater value for money or lean services. Then I want to ask something about the split in the use of staff as well.

Well, that question has actually been asked and answered quite comprehensively through the work of the Public Accounts and Public Administration Committee, which did conclude that the commissioners were already working collaboratively as much as they legitimately could with their different areas, with their different remits, and that there wasn't more that we could do. I think that we deliver huge value for money, actually. We're a small organisation compared to many others in the public space, and we already work very closely with commissioners to really share expertise and share services where we can. We jointly procure internal audit services, for example, and we share expertise, and that is really invaluable. So, I feel that we, in the scheme of things, in the scheme of public funding and public services, we're actually a very small and very lean organisation, doing a huge amount to support and meet the needs of children and young people, and to champion their causes.

So, my final question. You referred earlier to having 22 staff, and I think, in your report, it's about £1.3 million of your £1.7 million budget that goes on staff, and it's not uncommon for most organisations to have their costs in their staff. Of those 22 staff, I can't recall whether you said you have three caseworkers or three caseworkers and a manager, and I understand from your report that you've been through a restructure process. So, I'm interested in, for the remainder of your term, given the priorities that you've set, that split between casework that the Chair was asking you about, where you’ve got less than a quarter of your staff, and the policy work, and whether the restructure is properly aligning, both with the priorities you set out that you want to achieve in the remainder of your term, but also how you set out and meet the needs of children and young people when they are presented to you. Your earlier answers were about the complexity of some of the casework you have. So, it's really about whether you've got the right balance in the way that your staff are structured to carry out your priorities and the needs of children and young people in Wales.

Yes, that's a really good question, and I've focused many of the changes so far in my team to the advice service, which is perhaps why I've spoken more about that part of the team than other parts. But we very much, I'll just briefly explain, have a three sub-team structure to the organisation, where the advice service is one part, the policy team is another part, and the engagement team is the third. And they all work, they're all really crucial, they're part of an organism that really works together.

So, the engagement team are the team that go out to schools, go out to youth groups, who have people on the ground to have that engagement and to hear from children first-hand and directly, alongside myself on visits. And that intelligence that we gather from those visits is crucial. The policy team, obviously, have to analyse all of that evidence that comes from that on-the-ground engagement, as well as the analysis of the casework. So, all of those parts are equally important. I wouldn't prioritise one over another.

Perhaps I've given you more detail about one part of the service because that is the service that I definitely wanted to rebrand and change the way that it presented itself, and also increase awareness of that part of the service. Because I felt, coming into the role, that many people may have been aware of the children's commissioner's office, and kind of aware of the policy work and aware that we went into schools and so on, but from my conversations, fewer people were aware that we delivered that casework service, hence my focus. But they all work in complete synergy, and making the connections between the teams is another part of my focus.

So, going forward, I think the challenge for me is just maintaining the staff that we have, the structure that has been put in place, and making sure that we can keep and maintain those really experienced staff members that we have.

If I may, sorry—

Okay, thank you. Back to you, Chair.

Sorry.

No, go on.

I was just going to add some practical examples to conceptualise some of that. So, for our casework, the team will work very hard to create positive outcomes for individual children and families, but we than analyse the trends that we see coming through those cases. And then that's where the team will say—. Just yesterday, we were talking about some trends in how local authorities are applying the definitions around additional learning needs, for example, and so that will be then where it transfers from individual casework to the policy team taking up the mantle and looking at how we can also effect systemic change in that regard. Our legal powers involve advice and assistance to individual children plus reviewing how public bodies, local authorities, Welsh Government are exercising all of their functions, so we are able to discharge those legal powers by the work of those individual teams informing each other, passing on the baton to deal with not only those individual outcomes, but then that wider systemic change as well.  

Okay, thank you. Thank you, Vaughan. Next we have questions from Tom Giffard, please.

Diolch yn fawr. Bore da. Thank you for coming in today. I wanted to first ask you about your Monthly Matters, which you mentioned in your annual report. It's a kind of new way of hearing from children and young people, and that, since January this year, around 1,500 children a month take part. So, why have you decided to order your work, if you like, in that way, and what impact do you feel it's had to this point?

Thank you for the question. So, prior to the Monthly Matters being in existence, one of the main ways in which we engaged with children and young people was through what was called our school ambassadors scheme, which had been in place for 18 years, and offered termly activities to schools in order to find out the views of children and young people on different topics. And over the years, engagement in that approach had lessened. So, we reviewed and refreshed it and came up with this Monthly Matters initiative, which, as the name suggests, is a monthly engagement exercise with children and young people. It has enabled us to be much more agile and much more responsive to issues as they come up during the year—very topical issues—and has, so far, had a really good response in terms of numbers.

So, in the year that we’ve reported on, they were averaging 1,500 per month, but, actually, since then, we’re going up to 2,500, 3,000. So, it’s very much an upward trajectory in terms of engagement numbers, and we’ve been able to cover really important and topical issues, such as we had some priorities for the new First Minister, and we’ve covered school dinners, journeys to school, and most recently climate action. We analyse and report on the findings and share those back to local authorities or to Senedd Members. We’re actually focusing on how we can get the findings out in a more efficient way so that others can make use of our findings as well. But, so far, it’s proved very successful, and we’ve also had responses from all local authorities to those Monthly Matters as well.

Thank you, and that leads on quite nicely to my next question. It’s good to see the number of young people taking part, but how are you making sure that, actually, the work you do, then, has an impact and has that influence in the long run? What are you doing to make sure that these Monthly Matters change policy outcomes, frankly, which is what people want to see?

Yes, and that is the challenge, and that is why—. So, the Monthly Matters sort of illustrates and is another example of how the teams work together. So, the Monthly Matters, in terms of social media, engagement, comms, pushing it out there to schools, is the main focus of the engagement team, but, obviously, using that information to influence and effect policy changes, led by Rachel and the team. And this is where it’s harder. So, on school dinners, the Monthly Matters we ran on school dinners is perhaps one of the examples of where we had much higher media interest in the story and in this monthly matter. And we deliberately timed it, as our intention was to influence the Welsh Government’s review of the guidance on nutritional standards of food in schools. So, all of our behind-the- scenes work is about making sure that we are sending the report to those teams, that we’re having meetings with those officials, to understand exactly where the timescales and opportunities are for informing various consultations. But then it’s over to Government to do what they do, and, sometimes, progress on specific pieces of work can be relatively slow, and, sometimes, it can go in different directions. And I think that’s where some of our frustrations come in, then. We can just hope and present the evidence to Government, and hope that they do take it into account, and challenge them to do so. But, actually, making sure that it does have that effect is not so much in our hands.

Thank you. What would you say is your big policy win in the last year?

That’s a hard question. I hope that my office has been a significant part of the really important conversations that we’ve been having around child poverty. I think, for me, the policy win has been that it hasn’t just been my voice, and the office’s voice, but it’s been a collaborative voice from the wider children and young people sector, and we have, I think, played our part in successfully convening and bringing that voice together. We organised, last November, a conference on child poverty in collaboration with key organisations, including Children in Wales and the Observatory on Children’s Rights. We produced a report from that conference, and we continue to collaborate with like-minded organisations to push these messages to the Government. And I would say that that has received a lot of attention, and I hope—. I feel that has influenced Government discussions in this space. I don’t know if I could completely call it a policy win yet, because, so far, we're still a little disappointed with the progress that the Government has made in terms of publishing—. The published monitoring framework doesn't respond to many of the concerns of the sector in the way that we'd hoped, and I think that has been disappointing, but I feel like my office has been part of being a collaborative and strong voice in that space.

Thank you. Are there big policy areas, then, where you'd say the role of the children's commissioner has very limited impact on the Welsh Government?

Well, I think part of the challenge that I have identified is that, even if they are very big and very obvious policy issues and very long-standing policy issues affecting children and young people, our actual power to influence and ability to influence can feel limited in some respects. But I don't think this is unique to the office. It feels as if—and this might be a timing issue in terms of where the Welsh Government is—given that the new First Minister has announced her specific priority areas, those priorities feel quite narrow, quite selective and not necessarily reflective of the priority areas that my office has highlighted, or the wider sector, indeed.

I'm aware that there have been disappointing responses from the Government to reports, even really important reports from you as a children and young people's committee, disappointing responses from the Government to reports from the Petitions Committee, disappointing responses, or even no response, sometimes, to Youth Parliament reports. So, I feel as if it's not just my office, perhaps, that is feeling quite limited in our ability to actually influence, because it feels like considered response from the Government to the considerable efforts from me, my organisation, but also many others in the sector, is lacking at the moment, maybe for a few years, perhaps.

I'm particularly disappointed to have been told in a letter that my office received yesterday, which was actually Universal Children's Day, that we would only be receiving a narrative response to my annual report recommendations, as opposed to a detailed response, which we have always received previously. What that means is that a narrative response really weakens the accountability of the recommendations and weakens the ability of my office to account back to children and young people about what the Government has said. So, if it's not clear if the Government is accepting or not accepting a specific recommendation and if, instead of that, there is just a lot of narrative where it's really not clear to see what their intention is, that just really weakens, as I said, our ability to respond and report back to children. Accounting back to children and young people is a crucial part of my office. It's one of the principles of a children's-rights-based approach, and it's also a crucial duty, actually, of the Government to have due regard to children's rights in all of their decision making. So, like I said, it was really disappointing to hear that we wouldn't have a detailed response to my annual report recommendations, and I'm worried and concerned about this being a wider trend from the Government currently.

It's really disappointing to hear that. So, I would like to say that, as a committee, we'd like to write on your behalf, asking for the reasons why it is a narrative response and not a more detailed response, if that is okay, and if that's okay with committee members.

Yes.

Definitely.

Thank you. Diolch.

Thank you. Tom.

I agree—[Inaudible.]

We've lost you, Tom. You’re back. We lost you then, Tom, sorry, for a second. We missed that.

Sorry. Let me start again. That is a very disappointing response there that we heard, not so much the response that you gave, but what you relayed about the Welsh Government engagement. I’m wondering what, as a committee, we can do to strengthen this relationship. You’ve spoken about the tensions that exist at the heart of the relationship and I think, frankly, a good relationship between a commissioner and a government should have tension in it. I don’t think that’s a bad thing or something we should shy away from, nor should a government always accept everything that a commissioner suggests, and I’m sure that you wouldn’t expect that, either. However, that lack of engagement is clearly disappointing. Is there something that could be changed in terms of the framework, or the agreement, or the rules of play, if you like, around the relationship between commissioners and the Government that could strengthen that relationship to make sure that your work is taken more seriously in Government?

Thank you. We already have a memorandum of understanding, which does set out—. And in our legislation, there is a requirement for a response to our recommendations, so, in one sense, the rules of play are already there, but I feel like it’s—. The suggestion from your Chair is really welcome, to write to Government to set out your disappointment in this response. I think the longer term solution may go one step further and it’s all about, ultimately—. We have, for many years, as an office, called for our funding as an organisation to come from the Senedd rather than from the Welsh Government, to allow for that greater independence, because, currently, our independence is very much constrained by having to—. The fact that our funding is from the Government and we have to negotiate each year for that really makes it difficult for us to challenge robustly, and it really calls into question the independence, I think, and issues like being able to challenge how they respond become much more difficult. So, to be funded ultimately by the Senedd rather than the Government is something that we have long called for and would, partly, respond to this challenge. But I think, in the shorter term—. I don’t know if you have any suggestions here.

Yes. I've got just two perhaps slightly bold points. The office has been in existence since the year 2000, but we’ve never had a formal review of our legislation. It’s something that we have called for before. It’s brilliant that Wales was the first country to have a children’s commissioner, and it’s something that you’ll hear in almost every Welsh Government statement talking about children’s rights. But, because we were the first ones to be set up, our legislation is quite clunky and cumbersome and probably reflected the devolution settlement at the time, in the very early stages. Commissioner offices that have been set up since—most notably, the most recent one in this context being Jersey—have looked at each other’s legislation and taken the best parts and the strengths from each individual commissioner. The English commissioner’s office, for example, has a specific data gathering power that is used to great effect to pull statistics and data from local authorities on school attendance and things like that, and it’s a very strong and persuasive power, and it’s something that we don’t directly have. So, the opportunity being taken to review our legislation and see whether there are more things that could be done, including Rocio’s point about our appointment, but the wider considerations, would be very welcome.

And then, related to that would be the incorporation of the UNCRC. We’ve got partial incorporation here, and, again, we were the first in the UK to have that and that’s brilliant. Again, that was reflective of—it’s a Measure, rather than an Act—where we were at at the time in terms of the Senedd. Scotland have now one-upped us and got full direct incorporation of the UNCRC in their legislation as of earlier this year, and that is something that would really then help with things like our casework in terms of local authorities and health boards having to act compatibly with children’s human rights when they’re exercising their functions, as well as the Government. That's something that has to be a strong aim and anything, that the committee can do to support those kinds of calls would also be very welcome.

Could I bring Vaughan in here, please, quickly? Vaughan.

Yes. Look, I've been following the discussion before I need to leave, and I just need to make it clear that I'm not comfortable with writing to the Government to complain about a response to a report that we haven't seen. We had questions about some of the challenges in casework, some of the realities of the budget reducing for the commissioner, and that is true for every single public service, including the Welsh Government, and it is not the case there is an ocean of untapped resources within the Government, which we all know. So, I'd want to understand what the purpose is of not just the report, but the Government's response to it and what difference that will make, before we agree to write and complain about a response that we have not seen. I just don't think that's good practice for us.

And the second point is that I just need to make clear that I don't accept the current funding arrangements affect the independence of the office of the children's commissioner, given that we've already heard in evidence this morning the children's commissioner does not feel constrained in having a view about the Government in public or in private that is either positive or critical. I agree with what Tom said: there is always going to be tension between a commissioner, whether it's the children's commissioner, the older persons or any of the others, and the Government, and that's a deliberate design in the way the commissioners have been set up. So, I'd like to see what the Government response is first, and then to understand what the unhappiness is about the actual response before then agreeing to say 'This isn't good enough.'

And finally, on the First Minister's priorities, well, they don't encompass every single thing the Government does, and how can they? I think it's much more about what the whole Government does and a shift in what the Welsh Government does, what local authorities and other public bodies do, and, indeed, change on a UK level, which has a direct impact on outcomes for children and young people here in Wales as well. So, I think it's more than just not having the four priority areas in a way that different people may want to see them rewritten, and that's entirely legitimate, but I don't think that the committee should say, 'We are prepared to intervene on that basis'. I'm interested in seeing what the Government have to say in response to the report and the recommendations that are provided, before we choose to act as a committee. Of course, if the majority want to act regardless, then, that's a point for the committee, but I wanted to be clear about my view so it's on the record.

I think it was more a case of the style of the response, rather than what was in the response, but this is something that—

But it's form and substance, and what doesn't make a difference about the substance doesn't make a difference about what the Government will do with the resources the Government has. And that's what I'm interested in, not about the particular form of the response, because I don't think that in itself is a really big issue, and I'd want to see what practical difference that makes before agreeing to complain about it. 

This is something we can definitely discuss in private session and we can come back to you then, if that's okay. Is that okay with Members? Yes. Back to you, Tom. 

Commissioner, you mentioned in your annual report that you've listed your four strategic priorities, as has been referred to, for the next three years, and they are child poverty, mental health, equalities in education, and, of course, additional learning needs. Can you tell me, in each of those four areas, what is main tangible change you want to have delivered upon in each of those by the end of the three years?

Thank you. I've already spoken about poverty, and it would be a really robust detailed plan to deliver on that child poverty strategy with clear targets and actions. That would be the aim for child poverty, and that is sector-wide. There are many organisations who have been calling for that in very detailed ways. And we continue to work with Government to advise and suggest on how the monitoring framework could be strengthened, but, as I've mentioned already, we are disappointed so far that many of the suggestions from the expert reference group haven't been taken on board, as yet, for that specific monitoring framework. And, more than that, I think it's the sense of urgency and priority given to child poverty as an issue, which, so far, appears to be lacking, and we would hope that the new UK Government offers an opportunity for far greater progress in this area—

Sorry to cut across. Before we move off child poverty—I appreciate there are four to get through—with child poverty specifically you mention you wanted robust targets in the plan from the Welsh Government, and I would agree with that. Are you being sufficiently clear about what you want those targets to be? If so, could you share them?

We’re part of the expert reference group and we have specifically suggested, for example, that one of the indicators should relate to housing and homelessness, and that suggestion hasn’t been taken up. There are many specific suggestions that we’ve made as part of that expert group. We’ve also suggested that there should be a measure that relates to families’ experience of fuel poverty, for example, which also isn’t one of the final chosen indicators. So, these are quite detailed discussions, but we are actively having them as part of that expert reference group.

Can I just quickly come in on that? One of the things, perhaps looking back to an earlier conversation we had about seeing value for money in these really stretched financial times for services, is quite often we see a lot of Government reports that say, ‘We’ve invested £2 million here, we’ve invested this much there’, but there doesn’t seem to be strong enough monitoring of how many families does that reach and what practical difference does that make to them, except that the Government’s stated aim through the strategy and the framework is to improve the lives of those families and to put money back into people’s pockets, if you like. But the monitoring that goes with the strategy and framework doesn’t track that closely enough to be able to say, ‘Okay, we spent a heck of a lot of money here, has it had the desired impact? Because if not, do we need to look at it again and do something different?’ Because we can’t just keep putting money into something and saying, ‘Therefore, we’ve tackled child poverty, because we’ve spent this money’, if it isn’t actually having that impact on the ground.

That’s fine. I appreciate the time, but if you could speak to the other priorities—mental health, equality in education and ALN—and what you hope to achieve in those areas as well.

On mental health, we again really want to see much greater focus on children and young people’s mental health specifically. The Welsh Government is currently soon to publish the final mental health strategy, which is currently—. The draft, at least, was an all-age strategy. So, we have called for, and in my annual report there's a recommendation, a specific children and young people’s action plan sitting underneath that strategy. And the purpose of that is really to set out what specific actions will be delivered that are focused directly on children and young people, to respond to their growing and acute needs in this space.

The reason mental health is one of my priorities is that it’s something I hear about in nearly every single conversation and engagement that I have with children and young people. It’s impacting on their attendance in schools, it’s impacting on their ability to progress successfully and transition into adulthood, and it’s a growing issue, and service providers are really feeling the strain as well. So, I would really just like there to be much more focus and clarity about what exactly children and young people can expect to receive in terms of services to meet those needs, because that just isn’t clear, and that’s what they want to hear. So, that’s what I would like for mental health.

Going on to equalities, my office has done a significant amount of work in the last—. Well, in the year in question, the focus for us on equalities was on race and racism. We published the report on racism in secondary schools, and we were very disappointed to have to wait nine months for a response from the Welsh Government to that report, and are further disappointed at the lack of progress on really long-standing issues, specifically around how racism is recorded and reported in schools and how that data is collected and shared by local authorities. I’ve been hearing for such a long time now that the Welsh Government is trying to sort out the legislative basis for collecting that data. It should have been done by now. It was already a commitment that Welsh Government had already made in 2022 in their publication of the ‘Anti-racist Wales Action Plan’. My report just repeated that call for that to actually happen.

Now, in 2024, just last week, we now have a refreshed ‘Anti-racist Wales Action Plan’, which just repeats that commitment without any detail on progress to date or any timescales. So, in my view, it’s a far weaker version of the previous ‘Anti-racist Wales Action Plan’, because it doesn’t have those clear timescales for when things will happen by. Again, that really begs the question of accountability again, which seems like things are just on the table for years and years without actually progressing or delivering on those actions and those commitments. So for me, that would be an achievement, a small but tangible and really practical and long-lasting achievement, if Government could actually establish the legislative basis for how racist incidents are recorded and collected in terms of schools.

And then finally—I'm just conscious of time—ALN and education. Again, it's a huge issue, a huge part of our casework. Around a fifth of our casework that we get each year relates directly to children with additional learning needs. It's a really growing area and not only in terms of numbers, but in terms of complexity of issues that children and young people are experiencing. And I am aware that recently the Government has announced a review of the legislative basis for the additional learning needs programme, but the detail of that review still hasn't been announced—what that will actually look like or what exactly that will look at. I would really like there to be a really clear plan and way forward to actually respond to the significant needs of children with additional learning needs, but also a clear plan to resource, and put that resourcing on a really sustainable footing.

Because it seems that at the moment families are just being pushed from pillar to post. They're going from schools to local authorities. We have 22 different interpretations of the Additional Learning Needs and Education Tribunal (Wales) Act 2021 at the moment, seemingly, and there just needs to be that greater consistency and that greater clarity. The review that has been announced, I have concerns about the timing of that review from the information that we have so far. The indication is that that review will report—. I think it's providing an initial update by summer 2025. I don't know if that's the end of the review or the beginning or the middle. There are no further details as yet. But these are crucial years in children's lives. We don't have the indulgence of time, really. These are crucial years for children. They can't afford to lose two or three years of their lives without having the educational support that they need and are entitled to.

Thank you very much. Back to you, Chair. 

Thank you. Next we have questions from Gareth Davies, please.

Thank you very much, Chair. Good morning, everybody. I just want to cover committee areas of interest in my set of questions, if I may. I'd like to seek a response to the fact that there's now a Cabinet role within the Welsh Government with the word ‘children’ included in the title, since Dawn Bowden was appointed as the Minister for Children and Social Care. I'm seeking a response on on what basis this is likely to make a difference, given the responsibilities remain very much in line with her previous ministerial portfolio, which had the title of Minister for Social Care, and particularly following seven years without a cabinet role that had ‘children’ in its title. I'm just wondering how you how you assess that and how that changes your scrutiny and work with the Government in regard to children's matters. 

Thank you. It is welcome that, after seven years, there is now a Minister with the word ‘children’ at least in the title. I think that does bring a level of visibility and focus that perhaps was not there previously. However, we do share the concerns that you've alluded to in terms of the actual practicalities and the actual duties that fall underneath that Minister's portfolio currently. A good example is the issue of children's health, where we would like to speak to the Cabinet Secretary for health, but we are directed to the Minister for Children and Social Care, who doesn't actually have health under her portfolio and doesn't have responsibilities in this area, ultimately. And similarly, on issues related to education, there's a different Cabinet Secretary, and our link Minister is another Minister. So, I think, practically, there's a real danger that children's issues actually fall between two stools or even three stools. Another limitation is that the Minister for Children and Social Care is not a Cabinet-level position, so doesn't have that seat around the Cabinet table, ultimately. So— 

Just to interject, sorry, I was just wondering if you had a potential solution to that problem and what would be your opinion on that fact, in terms of looking at ways to navigate that area of responsibility better. Is it better communication between Cabinet Secretaries, or is it possibly the role of the Minister for children actually being able to have better conversations with colleagues within the Government? Where would you see areas to improve in that and the best way to go about achieving it?

I think a Minister for children and young people would provide more focus, but, clearly, there will always need to be connections to other Cabinet members and there will always need to be those really good, clear connections across Government, because children and young people, although they are a discrete group, they're human beings with all of the needs of people of other ages. I think it's about having really clear lines of communication, but also, for us as an office, we need the ability to have those communications and regular meetings with the different Ministers and Cabinet Secretaries to respond to the issues that we are hearing from children and young people.

Thank you very much. This time last year you told us that you would take a slight change of emphasis to previous commissioners, who have focused on influencing legislation, focusing more on influencing the lived experience and practical outcomes for children and young people, and how they experience services on the ground. So, has that shift in the emphasis worked over the past year, for example, in terms of influencing what local authorities and health boards should be delivering for children?

Thank you. This is—. You're right to say that that continues to be my emphasis. I realise and I understand, however, that it is services on the ground that are actually doing that delivery. So, one of the ways in which I hope to influence and improve the experience that children and young people have is through increasing and strengthening the narrative around children's rights. There's a piece of work that we have proposed and are working with Welsh Government on, and I'm pleased to say that it is something that the Minister for Children and Social Care has actively embraced. The piece of work is called 'A Wales for all children' and it is a strengthened communications narrative, a campaign to highlight and celebrate the significant achievements that exist in relation to children's rights in Wales, but also to remind people and act as a call to action to public bodies, local authorities and health boards to ensure that they are delivering on children's rights commitments.

This is something that I've been pleased, as I've mentioned, has been supported and embraced by Welsh Government and the Minister for Children and Social Care, but also we have started to have conversations with local authorities. We presented this recently to all 22 local authorities' communications teams, so that they can also build it into their communications too across their organisations. It's something that I hope will actually lead to improvements in how children receive and experience services on the ground, because having that clear understanding of children's rights should be something that is completely embedded in every single person working in public bodies. So, from nurses to teachers to housing officers, if we could have every one of those individuals really understand what a children's rights approach is, what the importance of children's rights is, what their commitments and duties are, and delivering those to children and young people, that would make a significant and tangible difference to those experiences of those services. So, that is a piece of work that I'm working on actively this year, and hope to report back to you in terms of the actual difference that it has made next year. So, we're working on a monitoring and evaluation framework for that.

As you say, there'll be an opportunity for you to report on that in the future, but are there any early indicators that you can share with the committee this morning, in terms of the responses received from local authorities? You were saying you need to send, obviously, comms out to 22 local authorities. What's the response been across the 22? Is it quite consistent, was there room for improvement, and is there synergy between local authorities and health boards in terms of receiving that message and whether they're willing to incorporate that into their comms and practices?

It's too early to give you any indicators or stats in that respect, but I very much hope to be able to by next year. So far, it's been well received, but I can't give you any more specific numbers beyond that.

Okay. Not to worry; I was just curious. Just a final question, if I may: as part of our scrutiny of support for care-experienced children, we have been repeatedly told by Welsh Government over the past two years that its work on new national standards of practice for children will deliver improvements in practice on issues that this committee has expressed significant concerns about, such as manageable workloads for front-line social workers and having an agreed Wales-wide approach to children who go missing. What's your view on the impact of the delay in getting these national standards in place, and are you confident they will make the difference where needed?

Thank you. We're aware that this has been a real flagship area of Welsh Government's programme, and they have committed to transforming children's social care. But in terms of the actual national standards, we've been involved throughout, I think, in this conversation, and have responded to the various consultations on the various iterations that we've seen so far. We responded earlier this year to what was initially shared as the national practice framework. We responded with some of our concerns around that, which were that it seemed to only apply really to social care organisations rather than to other organisations, and given that it was meant to be a multi-agency framework, we didn't feel that it would really work in that space. And we were also not clear how it would fit with existing legislation and professional standards.

But we've been engaged, and we're trying to provide constructive feedback in this space. So, last week, we responded to what is the most recent iteration of this, which is now being called a multi-agency practice strategy, and have welcomed the fact that time has been taken and effort has been made to consider and respond to the first set of feedback. We're pleased to see that, instead of 26 standards, there are now five, which is much more manageable. However, we still feel that the overall purpose and what value this strategy will add is still quite unclear. It seems like it's more a list of principles rather than a strategy, and exactly how the standards, or the strategy, will be implemented isn't clear at all in the strategy. So, we have strong reservations about whether this will lead to the transformation that Welsh Government intended.

Thank you very much. Back to you, Chair.

Thank you, Gareth. Now we have some questions from Cefin Campbell, please.

Diolch. Bore da, and thank you for your report. You make three recommendations in your report about the new single unified safeguarding reviews, which have replaced the child practice reviews. So, are you satisfied that the recently published guidelines around these new reviews address what you said were significant concerns about whose role it is to ensure that recommendations from such cases are implemented comprehensively across Wales?

Thank you. From what's been published, from the new guidance, it's still not clear to us exactly who would be responsible for implementing the recommendations from the new SUSR reviews, and that is the crux of the concerns that we have: it's, again, accountability. Who is ultimately responsible? Under the new guidance, under the new arrangements, it's still the case that the recommendations from CPRs just continue to be owned by the safeguarding boards, by the owners of those reviews, and it's not anyone else's duty to actually implement those recommendations. So, there's a lack of oversight over whether and how recommendations are implemented.

What the new arrangements bring that wasn't there previously is effectively a repository of previous and existing CPRs or SUSRs. So, it's a database, it's a good place to bring information together, but the questions that we still have are exactly how that information will be used, who will be charged or tasked with interrogating it, how will they make those decisions and what is the process for doing so. All of that is still very unclear to us.

I have been given a space, a position, on the ministerial advisory board, which I will attend for the first time in January. So, I welcome that. We're already part of the strategy group, which has met a few times, but none of that—. We still have many unanswered questions about the processes by which the repository will be utilised. It also seems that there is very minimal resourcing, actually, for playing that role, so we know that that is now in-house. A Welsh Government hub will be tasked with managing the repository, as it were, but how issues, themes or patterns will be identified and escalated to the ministerial advisory board is still unclear. So, it comes back to the question of how will we be sure that recurring patterns, recurring themes, are effectively identified in the first place, and then, when they are identified, whose responsibility is it to make sure and implement recommendations, and make sure that lessons learnt are effectively applied, and applied nationally. So, those things are still very unclear. We're willing to see how the new arrangements go and hope that they work better than we are envisaging at the moment, but currently we have many unanswered questions.

On a practical basis, the repository is something that I know has been spoken about in this committee by Welsh Government Ministers and others as a really kind of groundbreaking introduction, and it is a positive introduction, but there's very limited access to that currently. So, although Rocio mentioned we have a role in the structures that will look at these pieces of work, we don't have access to that repository at the moment and there's no indication of when we will have access. So, in terms of playing a full part in that, we're very restricted in doing so without access to the actual documentation that goes back to this.

The Government has committed to reviewing the implementation of SUSR one year on, and we are currently having some conversations with them now about what exactly that review will look like, because as Rocio said, we still have a number of unanswered concerns there, so we are trying to work with the Government to make sure that those concerns can be picked up through that review. But, again, that might be an area of interest for the committee to ask your own questions about how that review will act and what it will entail.

If I can just follow up on that, I mean, I obviously share your concerns that the lessons learnt are so important, but the important part then is that they lead to positive outcomes and results, and a change of practice, maybe. Could you maybe elaborate, then, where do you think we need to go in order to get that clarification around responsibilities for outcomes from safeguarding reviews?

To us, this is the missing link, really, that just isn't there, currently, in the governance structure. It's a very complex governance structure, with strategy boards and ministerial advisory boards. Interestingly, it was initially going to be chaired by the First Minister, but is no longer—that's no longer the case. It just feels like that hasn't been resolved effectively, so it could be something that you might be interested in looking at as a committee.

Yes, okay.

So, for example, we had concerns about this before SUSR. So with the CPRs governance, all reports are sent to Welsh Government as matter of course, before they're published, and the action plans too. But Government don't have to do anything with those at all. So, where there are issues of national significance or that require national action to implement, they just sit in a box in Welsh Government. There's no specific role for them to respond within a certain time or confirm what they would do. And that has just been copied across into the new system. So, again, when the repository was being created to house all of the previous reports, Government weren't even sure that they had copies of all the ones that had been sent to them previously, let alone that they'd done anything with them. So, there's no role for Government. They will send reports out and say, 'By the way, this has been published', but they don't have to provide that response, they don't have to commit to taking any actions. So, there will be recommendations that are 10 plus years old that have never had that national look or drive and direction. And it's so important that, as you say, the lessons are learnt, not just in the area where the review originates, but replicated across all areas of Wales. And where Government can play a part in that, there needs to be stronger governance that compels a response in that space, to show that that will be taken forward.

Okay. Well, I'm sure that's something we'll look at as a committee.

So, moving on, we've done some scrutiny work on radical reform for care-experienced children and children on the margins, and we've been examining the impacts of Welsh Government's voluntary corporate parenting charter. What are your views on the extent that this charter would lead to a fundamental change in the quality of services that is required for care-experienced children?

Thank you. So, we wanted it to be statutory not voluntary before, but, since it is voluntary, we have some concerns about the rate of sign-up. We know that most of the local authorities have signed up, but not all, and it's concerning that we know there are four that haven't, or, we're told, are still going through corporate sign off. But for that to take a year is concerning and signals, perhaps, a lack of buy-in to the charter. But beyond that, it's not just about sign-up, it's about actually detailing what the actions that will sit underneath that sign-up will consist of. And from what we know, only seven have detailed that through a pledge. Our office is one of those seven. We've published our commitment and our own promise to care-experienced young people through a series of actions that we will deliver, including offering targeted work experience to care-experienced young people, and we're happy to say one young person is actively looking to set that up with us.

But it does feel like not enough is being done to push or require—. Well, they can't require them, because it's voluntary, but there needs to be a much stronger way of getting more public bodies to sign up and actually deliver on this vision, on this commitment. It is a huge issue for—. It's a huge commitment that Welsh Government has already made, but, for care-experienced young people—. My office has only recently—. We held an event last week in the Senedd with this group, and it highlighted their experiences of when they moved between foster placements. And that exhibition was the culmination of a piece of work over many, many months, and I've had the opportunity to have many conversations with these young people, so I've really heard first-hand the impact that, the difference that, it makes when they meet an individual, a service, which is actually fully on board and understanding of its corporate parenting duties and responsibilities. And I’ve also heard so many examples of when that doesn’t happen, and how devalued and dehumanised, really, they feel in that process. So, I hope that—. Our recommendations that we’ve set out are that there should be much more awareness and sign-up of the corporate parenting charter, but also that Government should set out a way of monitoring the impact of the work, to enable them to review, then, if they do need to go further and put the charter on a statutory footing.

Thank you for the question. So, this is clearly an issue where there’s a huge amount of confusion and inconsistency around how additional learning needs are defined and dealt with and supported by different local authorities and different schools. And I would say that it’s that confusion and that inconsistency that is behind the drop in the numbers, compared to children who were on SEN previously.

From the casework that we’ve had, in the office, as I mentioned, it’s around a fifth of our casework that we deal with. But we very commonly hear about, for example, disputes between schools and local authorities about who’s actually responsible for the individual development plan. When schools and families feel that the child has a higher level of need, it’s when the local authority should take on that IDP, but that transfer is often disputed, or can take a very long time, and families are just stuck in the middle. And I don’t why that would take a long time. It could be that there is a lack of understanding about the actual responsibilities on and requirements of schools and local authorities under the new ALN Act, or it could be that it really boils down to resources, because with that responsibility for the IDP comes the responsibility to deliver the specialist provision. And, clearly, in financially challenged times, you could understand why there may be some tension in those arrangements.

But we hear about so many young people who are really struggling, with really complex needs, who are—. They don't even—. Children and families are not always given an IDP, even by the school initially, as they should. So, I think there’s just a very complex, confused system at the moment, and very inconsistent.

It’s why the review that the Government have talked about, the details and timing of that are so important. So, we know from our own casework, and from discussions with the Education Tribunal for Wales, that the code of practice on ALN, effectively, says, ‘If you had SEN under the old system, then you will continue to have ALN under the new system.’ But we’re only actually aware of one local authority that has fully implemented that and has taken that on board to transfer all of those children across into IDPs. So, where you had lots of levels in the old system, where you had formal statements and then you had the sort of lesser levels of intervention of school action and school action plus, and various other levels, they should all now be ALN with an IDP, but we’re only aware of one local authority that has fully made that transition, and that could be a significant explanation for that drop-off in numbers that you’ve referred to. The tribunal is clear that that one local authority is taking the right approach, and the rest are perhaps not. But it’s urgent to get to grips with that if there are children falling out of the system now, and if that interpretation continues to be applied to new children coming in or not entering the system, as it were, if that interpretation is—

So, what role are you playing in trying to improve the system so that we have earlier conclusions as to whether they have statemented support?

Our casework service intervenes individually in many of these cases, and many times we are able to assist the family to get an IDP and to make that happen more quickly than would otherwise happen, but those are just individual outcomes that we're achieving. In terms of the system, like Rachel said, we are analysing and looking at these trends and we feed back that evidence to inquiries such as the one carried out by yourselves. We're currently producing a video output to illustrate the experiences of different families who have had these experiences, in order to—. I was going to say 'showcase' but it's not showcasing. It's just really showing what they're going through and what this means for them as a family, and really looking to—. This is a topic that I regularly discuss in my conversations with and my meetings with the Cabinet Secretary for Education, to highlight what's going wrong, and the specific recommendation that we've made in the report is that the planned guidance for local authorities should be expedited so that there is more consistency, but now that a review has been announced, as Rachel said, it's about having that clarity of exactly what that review will entail, and also looking at the timescales, because, from the sound of it, something that is going to have a first update by next summer, 2025, is potentially just far too long and slow to really respond to the very urgent needs of children and families. There's a lot of evidence around this already. It's not necessarily the case that we need to look and find out what's going wrong. Your own report on the experience of disabled children and access to education, for example, highlighted so many of these issues in a really powerful and detailed way, so I'm not sure that we really need to invest a lot more in finding out and hearing again what the issues are. It's time to act and respond to the issues in a quicker way.

Diolch yn fawr. Yes, on post-16 education, I think the topic of travel, learner travel, is really critical, from many conversations that I've had, and we were disappointed that post-16 travel wasn't covered at all in the learner travel review, but, of course, being able to get to a college or a place of learning is a crucial factor in deciding what you're choosing to do, so it can really affect and impede choice, and it can really affect and impede—. Even if you've already chosen to go to a particular college, whether you have enough money on that particular week or particular day to get there can hugely impact on attendance and on successfully completing that course. So, I would really encourage you to look at transport as part of your work.

And the other issue, I think, is around EMA, educational maintenance allowance, which, for learners from poorer backgrounds, can really significantly make the difference between being able to continue in post-16 education or just having to get a job. We know there has been an increase recently to EMA, but it hasn't been an increase in line with inflation, and I would support the calls that have been made for that to increase further to really meet the increased costs of living, the costs that we've had in recent years, and to make that more equitable and an equitable choice for post-16 learners. And I think that all of those issues—EMA, travel—also impact on other protected characteristic groups, including Welsh language speakers and the choices that they have, and their ability to get to their preferred or chosen place of learning. So, those would be some of my suggestions.

On teacher recruitment and retention—

Oh, yes. Sorry, I forgot.

—there's clearly huge pressure on the teaching workforce currently and issues with recruitment and retention, which is why you're doing your important work. But the issue of the diversity of the teaching workforce is one that came up strongly in my report on racism in secondary schools. I know that there are some schemes in place already around increasing teachers from ethnic minority backgrounds, as there are bursaries, and so on, which are welcome, but I would encourage you to maybe look at how successful they have been or are being, and perhaps broaden that out to diversity in a broader sense and looking at other protected characteristics, including teachers who are disabled, who are also not equitably represented in the teaching workforce. So, that would be one suggestion. 

And in terms of retention, I know also, during our racism in schools work, we heard from many teachers who spoke about the importance of practical support for them. So, not just guidance, but more easily accessible support that they could access—in the case of racism, to have those difficult conversations. Equally, more recently, I've heard similarly from teachers about the issues of misogyny and the impact of Andrew Tate, and so on. And with the changes around middle tier support for schools and the changes to school consortia and so on, I wonder how the changes to that level of support would impact on how supported teachers then feel to be able to carry out their roles. So, I wonder if that could be a part of your work as well.

Thank you. Thank you so much for your time this morning. We really appreciate you joining us. You'll be sent a transcript for checking in due course. Thank you.

Thank you. Diolch yn fawr. 

Thank you.

I will now move on to item 3, which is papers to note. Full details of the papers are set out on the agenda and in the paper pack. Are Members content to note the papers together? Thank you. 

Moving on to item 4, I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17.42(ix), that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting and for the whole of the meetings on 28 November and 4 December. Are Members content? We will now proceed in private.