Petitions Committee

Item 2 on today's agenda, the evidence session for P-06-1207, 'Start referring to Welsh cities and towns by their Welsh names'. At our meeting on 24 January, the committee accepted an offer from the Welsh Language Commissioner's office to discuss their response to the petition, P-06-1207, 'Start referring to Welsh cities and towns by their Welsh names'. Before we welcome our witnesses from the commissioner's office today, I would like to say a few words.

Following the sad news of the death of Aled Roberts, our thoughts are with his family, his friends, and his colleagues. He was a champion for the Welsh language, and was always ready to support our committee. It's a huge loss for Wales. I'm learning Welsh—

—so my sincere apologies if I have misrepresented some of those words. But it is worth noting that Aled Roberts was a friend of this committee, and a friend of our Parliament. He was a true champion for the Welsh language and it was a sad news story when we learnt of his death. And, of course, all of the committee—from the Members to the clerking team and backroom staff—we pass our thoughts and love to his loved ones and his friends.

But I do thank the commissioner's office for continuing our conversation with the committee in the spirit of what Aled led. And I remind you again that this is a bilingual meeting, and you can answer or ask questions in the language of your choice. Can I ask you to introduce yourselves for the record, therefore?

I'm Gwenith Price, and I'm the deputy Welsh language commissioner.

Good afternoon. I'm Eleri James. I'm a senior officer with the Welsh Language Commissioner's office, responsible for policy, infrastructure and research, and one of my many responsibilities is to administer the responsibility for the standardisation of Welsh place names.

Diolch yn fawr, both, and welcome to the committee today. We will jump straight into questions this afternoon, starting with Luke Fletcher.

Thank you very much, Chair, and a warm welcome to our witnesses. You say that the Irish language commissioner has a statutory role in terms of place names. What powers does he have, and how do they differ from the Welsh Language Commissioner's powers?

Well, briefly, I think one of the main things to note is that the policy decision on the standardisation of place names sits with Government. Legislation makes it clear in Ireland how those places names should be used on signage and demonstrated more generally. The work of the commissioner in Ireland is to ensure that organisations respect the requirements placed upon them and to regulate those. The commissioner also draws up advice and guidance, and does so with relevant departments in Government. Eleri could perhaps go into more detail as to how the legislation leads to standardisation, but, in terms of the comparison with Wales, I do think that the situation that we have is that there is more than one organisation responsible for deciding on place names. Local authorities are the most prominent perhaps, but they don't have any responsibilities as to determining Welsh place names and standardising those names. The body that makes recommendations on standardised Welsh place names is our office and the panel that we have, but, of course, it is not in statute; it's a matter of recommendation, and nobody has to adopt any of the proposals made by the commissioner's office. There is one set of regulations that is specific on the use of the Welsh language, but that relates to placing signs, where there is a standard in terms of the accuracy and meaning of those signs. So, that isn't about protecting Welsh place names, as such, as it's just a matter of accuracy. Eleri, I don't know if you want to go into more detail on the standardisation side of things.

I'll try to explain the situation in Ireland. There is clarity in Ireland as to who has responsibility for determining standardised Irish place names to be used in public contexts, and that is set out in their official languages Act. I have to emphasise that this only applies to the Irish versions, and it's those versions that have legal status. Within the Irish Government, there are experts within the place names branch, who do very detailed research into these names. They work through archives, field work, public consultation, in order to determine which forms should be adopted in official contexts. Those names are then ultimately set out in regulations by the Minister. So, it is a ministerial decision as to which forms of place names should be used on signage and in legislation, and in local authority administration. Therefore, the role of the commissioner there is different. The commissioner does not have a role to question or to advise or to make recommendations on place names, but their role there is to ensure that the names already set out in legislation are used in the appropriate contexts. No debate or question then arises as to those names because they are set out clearly, as are people's responsibilities in terms of using those names.

But we do need to emphasise that there is significant investment in this system. There is a specialist department that does research and presents its work to a committee. There is a statutory consultation period related to making these regulations, and one of the great strengths of that system is the way in which those recommendations are conveyed and communicated to the public. They have an excellent database, which shares those place names and keeps archive files on the history behind those names. There are sound files that give guidance on pronunciation and notes local pronunciation and any folk tales related to those names too. There is also a great deal of communication with the public, who are considered part of the safeguarding and raising awareness of the importance of those names.

Thank you very much. So, just to summarise, would I be right in saying that the Irish language commissioner has a great deal more authority and power than the Welsh Language Commissioner?

Without doubt, yes.

Yes, and there is a long tradition of respecting place names, of investing in the system, and of establishing a framework in order to provide assurances to the public and public bodies as to which names should be used, particularly in the case of the Irish language. I think we need to emphasise that—Irish forms in all parts of Ireland have official status, but, in the Gaeltacht, once these regulations were passed, it's only the Irish versions that are used in the Gaeltacht. The English versions lose authority in terms of their official legal status, but there is a difference between that and day-to-day usage, and usage by organisations and in publications. But, there is clarity on the status of the names in that context.

Great, thank you. Just for the sake of clarity, for committee members and the public, would you therefore want to see the Welsh Language Commissioner holding the same power and authority, or perhaps even go further than they have done in Ireland?

I don't think that I am, or any official within the commissioner's office are, in a position to say that the kind of situation that they have in Ireland would be appropriate in a Welsh context. But what I do certainly feel is that there is room for us to carry out a review of the situation in Wales and to find solutions that are appropriate to our circumstances. One of the things that I think is extremely important is that we do get that clarity. It's clear to me in Wales that there is quite a bit of confusion. Now, you don't have to have legislation to deal with confusion, but I do think that very often we fail—. Although there is hard work done, we are failing to deliver to the utmost of our ability the work of promoting and safeguarding these names because of uncertainties in this area.

I would certainly endorse that and note that there is a model that we could look at in Ireland. Other nations have certainly looked at that model and have decided to adopt that model or to adopt parts of it. That has certainly happened in Canada, for example. But there are very good relations between our offices and the relevant offices in Ireland, so it would be no problem to put you in touch with them and to include them in the dialogue too. There is great willingness to support the work in Wales, and that's certainly something to be looked into and discussed further, in my view.

Great. Thank you very much for that. Back to you, Chair.

Diolch yn fawr, Luke. Can I ask, therefore, in response to Luke's questions and your answers there, is the legislation or is legislation necessary here in Wales, and, if it's not, what are those other options? What do they look like? Maybe you can tell us a little bit more in detail about that. And you also mentioned the review. Who would carry out that review? Would that be the commissioner's office or would that be the Government? Who would do that?

Thank you. Well, as I said, I'm not in a position at the moment to say that legislation is necessarily a good idea. I feel that it's important, and that's why I refer to the need for a review, so that we can understand in what direction we should travel, and it may be timely to do that now. But I certainly think that we do need to tighten things up. Therefore, I think what I would want to do is to understand who the contributors are. Certainly, there are people at a local level, there are academics, the commissioner and officials in the commissioner's office, who work very hard, local authorities, and institutions such as the Ordnance Survey, all have a part to play. There is also the Welsh Government's translation unit, and so the Government has an important role in this work.

But I think what we're seeking is something that will tackle the confusion between the various roles in this area, and that will ensure that the framework is clear and that the status of the standardised names is also clear. I mentioned earlier the fact that the commissioner's office can make recommendations in terms of standardised place names, but there's no requirement on any party across the public sector or beyond the public sector to take note of those standardised forms, despite the work that's been done on them. So, there is a lack of power issue, certainly, but I don't know at the moment whether we should jump immediately to legislation, and I would suggest that we need to be cautious.

In terms of a review, I have no doubt that there is expertise and some history within our office, because that's where the core responsibility for this work sits. But I am also aware that the Government has made a commitment to safeguard and to promote, and to promote and facilitate usage, and I think the use of place names is another problem that needs to be addressed. Even when one has standardised and made a recommendation, and if a body accepts and adopts these new forms, then we in Wales do have a difficulty in terms of the use made of those forms later within different systems, on signage, and so on and so forth. So, in the public sector, I think there is room for us to look at how public bodies make use of the standardised Welsh forms. So, I think a combination, perhaps, of the commissioner and the Government would be the best approach in terms of carrying out some sort of review.

Thank you for that. I think my supplementary question to that was answered at the very end there. So, I'm grateful for that. Joel James.

Thank you, Chair. I've got a few questions I'd like to ask, but I just wanted to touch upon something that came up with Luke's questioning, about the place-name standardisation panel. I just wanted to have some idea of how that's made up—who decides who's on that panel, how is that scrutinised or reviewed? I know it's a highly academic panel, and I just wanted some idea of that make-up, if I could.

Eleri, would you like to take that question?

The commissioner has invited the current panel and drawn them together. The detail of the membership is on our website. It's a panel of six at the moment, and the members are recognised specialists in orthography—the Welsh language system of spelling—but also more generally in place names.

I think, before I move on to discuss the panel, it might be useful for me to describe the process that the panel goes through, and our approach to this work, and how we seek input and information from other sources too. So, what happens is that we invite a local authority to become part of a standardisation project along with us, and so that emphasis is there from the outset—that we wish to collaborate and that we do recognise that local authorities are some of the most important users in this area. They are responsible for the forms used on local signs, to a great extent, and they have statutory responsibilities in relation to naming and numbering streets and so on. They also have the easiest access to information and detailed data on these names, and they too represent the views of the people and know about any local difficulties that might arise—differences of opinions or discussions at a local level. So, it is a partnership—that's certainly how we see it—it's a partnership between ourselves and the local authorities.

We are reliant on them then to provide us with data from their central systems in terms of which forms they have on record and which names need to be considered. And then we internally as officials within our office do some research ourselves, desk-top research, looking at standardised literature and so on. And we also commission research notes from an outside consultant, providing us a lot of data on the historic forms of these names and how they've been recorded across decades, or even centuries in some cases—all the different forms that have been used across the years.

And then we do assemble the panel and present all of this information. They, of course, will have done their own research and will have started to come to a view on those names. Then the next step is to present draft recommendations back to the local authority, which also include a number of questions, we have to admit. Sometimes the panel doesn't know how a name is pronounced, if there is real usage of a form or is it something that only exists on paper. So, having up-to-date, reliable information as to which names are used in Welsh can be challenging, and we do see that step as a conversation between the panel and the local authority in order to gather information. And then we come back to the panel for further discussion and then back to the local authority. It's a dialogue back and forth in order to try and reach consensus. That's what we're looking for. We don't want a position of disagreement or where there is different usage by different bodies; we want consistency in terms of the forms used in public administration.

No, no, I think that was perfect actually, because it's almost addressed many of the questions I wanted to bring up in the next set of questions, and, for the record, they're council related and I'm still a councillor.

Back in 2018, I was part of Rhondda Cynon Taf council's Welsh-language steering group and we were presented with a list of standardised names for the new towns and villages in RCT. And, at the time, a lot of these contradicted A Gazetteer of Welsh Place-Names, and the highways department at the council was basically saying this, that you don't diverge from this gazetteer without really good reasons. And there was a lot of concern on the committee at the time about that lack of awareness that this was coming, for one, from the commissioner, and that lack of consultation with local residents. Because a lot of the proposals that were put forward were different to what Welsh-speaking local residents were calling their towns and villages. Issues like with Treorchy, Rhydyfelin—what other ones were there—Llanwonno, Treforest. So, for all these, what was being proposed was remarkably different to what local residents were calling them, or even the council, and even A Gazetteer of Welsh Place-Names. And so I wanted to ask: really, do you see, then, that there could be an element of conflict here with that, with this petition, then, when you start then looking at referring to all English names in Wales in Welsh? And how would you mitigate that element of conflict, if it could come? How would you look to involve local people more in the process? I know that you touched upon it then, previously, with answering about the panel and that. How do you ensure that it just doesn't seem to be like a top-down academic process, if that makes sense, like a bunch of intellectuals have sat in a room and said, 'Well, from now on, this is what you call Pontypridd'? And I think Pontypridd is a good example, because, originally, when that was built as a town, it was Newbridge and, somewhere along the line, people there just gradually decided to call it Pontypridd rather than being told to call it Pontypridd. And I was just wondering how you address all those concerns, if that makes sense. Sorry.

If I could come in first, perhaps, in terms of the local element, I think one of the important things for us all to recognise here is that there's huge interest in place names, and that isn't unique to Wales; it's something that people take an interest in in terms of the history of names in the area where they live. That is something that we should all respect, I think.

What I would like to say is that I know that Eleri, and Manon who also works in the team, do work very hard in co-ordinating all of this. As she has said already, we don't work from a distance; we work with local authorities. But it's the role of the local authority mainly to deal with their town and community councils or with groups in the area, or even individuals who are very interested and have information that they can contribute to the process.

But I think our expertise is in research into the historic place names. And I think we can take examples of good practice from academia just by thinking of some individuals who have contributed to Welsh life over decades in this area. Professor Bedwyr Lewis Jones was an excellent example of an academic who got out and spoke to communities, he had a column in the Western Mail, he had a radio programme, and those columns that I mentioned have been translated into English and the title is the 'Place-Name Detective'. He took delight in combining the historical and the local and working with people, and I think that's the spirit of the approach that we want to adopt.

But I think the conflict perhaps arises from the fact that there is more than one form in use, and sometimes that is entirely appropriate, there are reasons as to why there is more than one form of a particular name. What I wouldn't want to see is conflict arising because there are problems with the way in which things are done here in Wales, that there are deficiencies in the infrastructure and arrangements and confusion. Perhaps people can work very hard to find that standardised form, but because there is uncertainty as to what we should put in the gazeteer, whose responsibility is it to share it with the Post Office, for example, that uncertainty can lead to conflict and, the hard work done by so many people, it would mean that it's done in vain. I think Eleri has some examples of some things that can go wrong. I don't know if that would help the committee.

I would endorse what Gwenith said there, namely that communication is so crucially important, that being able to communicate the rationale for recommendations as to why the panel has come to a certain conclusion and why it's providing certain advice, is crucially important. Because, as we've suggested, there are a number of different forms for many Welsh place names and there are valid reasons for a number of the different spellings, and it's not always easy to come to a decision. But, on occasion, you do need to choose between two forms or even more than that, very often, because it wouldn't be wise to record all of those variations on a sign; you do need to make a decision. And then, recording that and communicating that is crucially important.

Now, you mentioned a particular project there in Rhondda Cynon Taf. We've had a number of very successful projects in the south-east, where I think we have ultimately reached consensus and we've had that dialogue. And perhaps the panel, at the outset, did push the boat out, proposing one form for somewhere like Treorchy, where there are a number of variations. But wouldn't it be good just to have one that could be used in all languages? But the panel has had to listen to local views and to the views of local councillors and decide that that isn't practical for the time being, and that we couldn't deliver that ambition of having a single place name. And, of course, having that single place name can make life easier for a number of reasons, if we are dealing with a Welsh name.

I would also emphasise that it is not the panel's agenda to push the use of Welsh place names only; the panel addresses English place names to variations of Welsh place names, such as Caerdydd and Cardiff, for example. But also names that have no relation, such as Abertawe and Swansea, y Bont-faen and Cowbridge. So, the forms used in English are not ignored; they are all given attention and given the same status in the work of the panel. But perhaps what you're pursuing is when there are minor differences in the way a name is spelt in Welsh and the way in which a Welsh name is spelt in English contexts. Over time, we would like to see some of those inconsistencies ironed out, and these things can happen gradually over time without too much conflict. We've seen that in the history of place names such as Llanelli, which in the past would have been spelt with a 'y' at the end. Think of all of the different ways there have been of spelling Dolgellau, for example. And those issues have been settled, providing clarity, ultimately. It doesn't mean that the variations weren't important or historically interesting, that they don't tell us something about the names. But I just want to emphasise we are talking about public administration here, and that's why we need to standardise these. We don't want to ignore the wealth of the names that we have in Wales and the stories told by those variations in place names.

Okay, Joel? On that note, we've got to—. We're really pressed for time now. We've got about two minutes left, and, since you mentioned Treorchy, I think we should go for the final question to the Member who represents Treorchy. So, we'll fly over the screen to the Rhondda and invite Buffy Williams for a short question and a short answer, if that is possible, please.

Diolch, Chair, and thank you, both, for joining us today. Without the correct legislation, how do we ensure that key organisations, such as the Royal Mail, media, the Ordnance Survey and others get this right, moving forward? And how do we make sure they work closely with the commission to make sure that there is no confusion?

Who would like to pick up?

I think we've already suggested that we see local authorities as being a crucial part of this picture. The way that data on addresses is recorded and reported and shared among public bodies is complex, but we do see local authorities as the starting point. Therefore, ensuring that appropriate collaboration with them is crucially important and will be a starting point in terms of getting that data right from the outset, and also it's where there is that closest link with local residents too.

And I think we do have to recognise that an agency such as the Ordnance Survey, what they do is record usage; they have no role in deciding which forms are the standardised forms. They simply report what they see on a sign, for example, because the purpose of a map is to help someone find their way, of course. But their work can be difficult, because sometimes, within our villages, names are spelt in many different ways, either in the village itself or on the signs that direct people to that village. So, there is confusion in the current situation that we do need to overcome in order to avoid conflict and inconsistency, and confusion, ultimately.

Diolch yn fawr for that answer and all answers today, and perfect timing, as well, to end the session. It's been very useful for the committee. I'm sure we could talk for a lot longer, but we do have a pressed schedule today. So, can I thank you both for attending? I reiterate my words about the commissioner, Aled, and his sad passing, at the start of the committee. Again, our thoughts are very much with the commissioner's office and his loved ones. There will be a Record of Proceedings sent to you to check for factual accuracy, and please feel free to amend the Record as you see fit. If there are things that you think you have missed, or perhaps the committee has missed, feel free to send in written correspondence; we very much welcome that. We will take forward this petition at a future meeting and discuss in private session later the evidence we've heard. So, feel free to stay on and join us for the next session, or feel free to leave and enjoy the rest of your busy days as usual. Diolch yn fawr. Thank you.

Moving on to item 3 on today's agenda, and new petitions. Item 3.1, P-06-1240, 'Improve health services for people with epilepsy living in Wales':

'We are concerned that the current services for people with epilepsy living in Wales are not providing people with the help and support they need.

'Epilepsy Action recommends a caseload of no more than 250 people per Epilepsy Specialist Nurse (ESN), in order to minimise the effects of their condition and provide the best possible care. Currently no area in Wales is meeting this recommendation.

'There is a lack of ESNs and waiting times to see neurologists are over 12 months in many areas.'

There is additional information on this petition in Members' packs and also available to members of the public online. This was submitted by Janet Paterson, with 1,334 signatures. Before I invite Members to discuss this petition, I should note for the record that I know Janet Paterson well and I actually launched the all-Wales adult first seizure and epilepsy management pathway in the Senedd last year, I think towards the end of last year. So, I'll note that for the record, and I'll bring Members in to discuss this petition. Buffy Williams.

Diolch, Chair. I have a personal interest in this petition. My grandfather was severely epileptic, and I really understand the knock-on effect it has on a person's well-being and also on the family that is supporting that person. I do agree with the Minister's points on the petition that each health board needs to be properly funded, staffed and resourced to help the epilepsy service, but I really do think it was an underwhelming response. I think we need to write back to the Minister and ask what plans the Minister has to increase the number of epilepsy specialist nurses, right across Wales, to ensure that if you need help and support, that help and support is readily available for you. I really think we need to write back to the Minister and get a more definite and accurate response to the petition.

Diolch yn fawr, Buffy. I agree with your suggestion there, and I look to Members for agreement too. No other comments? So, we'll agree on that.

We move to item 3.2, P-06-1247, 'We call on the Welsh Government to lead the way by supporting trials of a four-day week in Wales':

'Moving to a four-day working week boosts productivity & workers’ wellbeing.

'After successful trials of a shorter working week in Iceland—with no reduction in pay—governments in Scotland, Ireland & Spain are all devising their own four-day week pilots that are scheduled to begin next year. There's also serious moves towards a four-day week taking place in Belgium, New Zealand, Germany & Japan.

'We call on the Welsh Government to lead the way by supporting trials of a four-day week in Wales.'

Again, there is additional information in Members' packs and also available to members of the public online. This was submitted by Mark Hooper, with 1,619 signatures. I again, for the record, will state that I know the petitioner well and I also have been a supporter, as have other members of this committee, of calls for a four-day week trial in the past.

I'd like to ask Members to consider supporting a short study into this petition. We've seen the recent reports from the future generations commissioner around the topic. I believe the successful investigation and inquiry we did into the policy area of a universal basic income really went down well, and I think this is another area where the committee can lend a hand in shaping policy in Wales, as we wish to do. I think starting points for that would be to obviously invite the petitioner in to give evidence, to take a view from Wales from the likes of the future generations commissioner, CBI Wales, the TUC Wales and others, and then perhaps extend our reach and look to the global scene and have a view from experts beyond Wales—perhaps those who are seeking to introduce trials in their own countries. I look to Members to discuss further this petition and any points they wish to make or are in agreement with. Luke Fletcher.

Diolch, Gadeirydd. I fully support a short inquiry. I agree with you; I think our UBI inquiry has contributed quite a bit to the debate in Wales, and I feel like this is something again that this petition could lead on. There have been trials globally. Iceland, for example, are looking to conduct one now. We know that the Scottish Government are planning to conduct a trial as well. As the petition mentions as well, there's places across the world—Spain, one of them, Belgium, New Zealand, Germany, Japan, with one of the worst work-life balances in the world there. I'm fairly supportive of a four-day week and I should also say that I also know Mark Hooper quite well. I support the suggestion that we do an inquiry and that we again play a vital role in contributing to this area of policy.

Diolch yn fawr, Luke. I look to Members. Joel.

Thank you, Chair. As you know, and as you can already suspect, I'm not necessarily in favour of a four-day working week. I think people would rather have flexible working than have statutory four-day working. I think it favours the big companies, local authorities or governments that are able to provide that and take on that extra burden that comes of it. I know from speaking with people who have gone down to four-day working weeks that they've soon gone back up to five-day working weeks because of that compressed load where they're expected to do five days worth of work in four days with less pay. I definitely do support your calls to have that review, but one of the things I'd like to do—. I know from the report it mentions about maybe talking to the Icelandic study, Scotland and Ireland. I'd be very keen to hear from—I know it's transatlantic, but we do have Zoom—Utah, because they trialled a four-day working week with their public sector, and then ultimately it didn't carry on because of how poorly received it was. It would be good to hear from them, really, as to why, so that we're not necessarily hearing from those who are supportive of it per se, but we're hearing from those who have trialled it and then have ceased it.

I would agree with the Member there. The committee will seek to go transatlantic. Luke, you wanted to come back in.

Obviously me and Joel are on different sides of this debate, and I respect his view, but I just wanted to support what he said there in terms of ensuring that we do get a diverse range of people in and potentially look as well at the different models that we could put in place with a four-day work week. I'm sure there are models out there that might actually convince Joel—you never know. But, yes, I think it's important that we try and get as much interest in this as possible and bring in those different views, and, again, add to the quality of the debate here in Wales.

I will go back to Joel for one final comment before we see what the Rhondda wants to say.

Thank you, Chair. Just to tie up what Luke said then about the different versions and that, obviously I've mentioned flexible working hours, and I know the auditors—and I need to get my notes—KPMG have recently brought in flexible working. I wonder whether or not we could link up with them to see why they went down that route as opposed to what seems to be quite fashionable, that four-day thing.

That's noted. I can see that the clerks have also made notes there. I think we can carry on this discussion in private session. Buffy, did you have any further comment?

Only to agree with what Luke said. I take on board everything that Joel has said as well. If we can investigate this a bit further, I think that's the route to go down.

Great. I think we have consensus on where to go with that.

We will move on to item 3.3 on the agenda today, P-06-1251, 'Secure the Right to Remote Access for Disabled and Neurodivergent People':

'I am a student with fibromyalgia and C-PTSD. Having the ability to access my course remotely greatly benefitted both my physical and mental health. Other disabled and neurodivergent people have had similar experiences and would like the option to continue accessing their courses in this manner.

'The Senedd should ensure the right to remote access to education, and further should enshrine in law the responsibility of educational institutions to dedicate complete commitment to creating an accessible, inclusive environment. Refusal of this robs disabled and neurodivergent people of the life and liberty we deserve.'

This was submitted by Caley Crahart, with 158 signatures. I look to Members to discuss this petition further, and any actions they may wish to take. Joel James.

Thank you, Chair. Just for the record, I'd have to declare some interest here, because I have family members with fibromyalgia, and I definitely sympathise with what the petitioner is saying and why they've started the petition. But I'm also conscious our universities and colleges are separate entities, really, from the Welsh Government, even though they do get funding, in terms of the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales. I was just wondering whether or not, as a committee, we could write to that council or funding body just to see how they are supporting universities and colleges in terms of making as many courses as possible accessible, and how they are tackling issues like this on the campus.

Thank you, Joel, for that recommendation. I can see that all Members are in agreement with your suggestion. We will take that forward as a committee.

Item 3.4 on today's agenda, P-06-1253, 'Ban greyhound racing in Wales':

'In Wales we have one independent greyhound track racing once a week. Since April 2018, Hope Rescue & their rescue partners have taken in almost 200 surplus greyhounds from this track, 40 of which sustained injuries. There are plans for the track to become a Greyhound Board of Great Britain track, racing four times a week, greatly increasing the number of surplus dogs & injuries. Greyhound racing is inherently cruel & greyhounds have little legal protection. It is already banned in 41 US states.'

This has been submitted by Hope Rescue, with 35,101 signatures worldwide, with 18,707 of those signatures coming from Wales. It was great to receive the petition on the steps of the Senedd with Members and other Members of the Senedd outside of this committee this afternoon, to meet the petitioner, and, of course, meet some of their lovely greyhound friends. I do invite Members to discuss this petition with a significant number of signatures, and any actions they may wish to take. I'll bring Luke Fletcher in to start.

Diolch, Gadeirydd. I don't think it surprises Members to know that I have an interest in talking on this. I just want to refer to my earlier declaration of being a member of Greyhound Rescue Wales, who had their extraordinary general meeting yesterday, where they voted to support a ban on greyhound racing, but as well to declare that I also know the staff at Hope Rescue very well. I've worked on a number of campaigns with them since being elected. They're just down the road from me in Llanharan. I think this is something that has definitely built up a lot of steam since the Senedd has first sat, and I just wanted as well to take to opportunity to thank you, Chair, as well as other members of this committee as well for taking an interest in greyhound welfare, as well as other colleagues, such as Peredur Owen Griffiths and Carolyn Thomas, who have all been asking questions around this particular topic.

I would like to suggest that we hold an evidence-gathering session and short inquiry to delve into this a bit deeper, and invite, of course, the animal welfare charities, such as Hope Rescue and Greyhound Rescue Wales, as well as GBGB, to give evidence on this and have a debate in the Senedd Chamber as a result of that as well. There's a lot to be said—. We know that regulation isn't something that is in existence in Wales in comparison to England, of course, where regulation is in existence. But the reality is we're going to see an increase in the racing of greyhounds in Wales if Valley track becomes a registered Greyhound Board of Great Britain track, which, as a result of that, is going to increase the number of greyhounds being injured on the track. So, this is something, actually, that is quite important for us to discuss as a Senedd now. So, I'd hope the committee would agree with some of those recommendations that I've given.

Thank you, Luke. Joel.

Thank you, Chair. Yes, I agree with the recommendations Luke has asked for in terms of having that evidence-based session. I think that's vitally important. One of the things Luke mentioned is, then, about the regulation that is in place in England compared to Wales, and I just wondered if we could have a look a bit more into that as well, then, just to see what they do differently across the border, as we say.

Noted, and I think the clerking team and the researching team have noted that. We could certainly have a look into that. Buffy, any comments from you?

I was just going to say what Joel said, actually—we could get a bit more information on what they do differently across the border. But I totally agree with everything Luke said. If we could have an evidence session to get a bit more knowledge on the subject, I think that would be really, really useful too.

Okay, so I think we have consensus there to arrange some evidence sessions around this petition, with a view to informing a Senedd debate, and informing our contributions as committee members in the Chamber for that Senedd debate in the future. I think it would also be worth noting that a similar petition is in the UK Parliament with over 100,000 signatures—104,000-plus signatures. So, I think we'll watch intently for the UK Government's response, and the contributions made within the UK Parliament as well, and see if that can inform the committee's work. Agreed? They are.

Item 4 on today's agenda: updates to previous petitions. Item 4.1, P-05-1106, 'Introduce Personal Health Budgets and Personalised Care in Wales'. This was submitted by Rhys Bowler, with 779 signatures. I'll invite Members to discuss this petition further, and I will look to the Rhondda and Buffy Williams first.

Diolch, Chair. I know the petitioner was frustrated and disappointed with the Minister's comments on this. So, if we could seek clarification about whether there would be an expectation for local health boards to provide joint packages and commission independent user trusts, and what guidance and support would be in place to ensure this happens. Also, given that the legislation is a barrier, why are steps not being taken to amend the flawed legislation? So, if we can write to the Minister once more and get answers to these questions, it may give the petitioner more of a mind, then, on how to proceed with this.

Thank you, Buffy. Any other comments? No. Just to note as well, I think in the response we've had from the petitioner, the petitioner has named a few experts within this field, so perhaps the committee can also reach out to those individuals and get some of their views to perhaps inform our letters to the Minister, as you suggested, Buffy. We'll go ahead and do that. Diolch yn fawr.

Item 4.2, P-06-1200, 'Make horse tethering, with or without shelter, illegal and an act of cruelty in Wales'. The petitioner who submitted this wishes to remain anonymous, and I have agreed for that to happen. It has collected 4,637 signatures. I will look to committee members to discuss this petition further, starting with Joel James.

Thank you, Chair. I note that, since the last time we debated this petition, the Minister's come back with more detail about how they plan to progress with animal welfare commitments, which are clearly an issue with this. It's pleasing to note that they are working to improve training and skills of local authority enforcement officers, and they're not letting this go away. So, with that in mind, I don't necessarily know what more we can do as a committee, if I'm honest, other than noting the action the Welsh Government's currently taking, really. I think it's positive, and I think, hopefully, it will have some good results, long term.

Diolch yn fawr, Joel, for that, and I can see Members are in agreement. So, I think we can thank the petitioner. Again, a success of the Petitions Committee, and how they can change and shape policy decisions in Wales.

Item 4.3: P-06-1228, 'Give secondary teachers a bonus for marking and standardizing summer 2021 official assessments', and this was submitted by Lisa M. Williams, with 1,252 signatures. And I'd like to invite Members to discuss this petition and any actions they may wish to take on that. I'll go to Luke Fletcher first.

Diolch, Gadeirydd. I've noted that the petitioner has asked why the research report from Qualifications Wales hasn't been published. I'd be interested if we could perhaps ask the question of the Minister why or when the report will be published. But I think now at this point, we are going to have to wait for the publication of it before we have a better understanding of where we can take this petition. I think now this is a matter of just putting it on the back burner for us for the time being, wait for that publication and then decide where we go from there. But I would like for us just to explore why that hasn't been published as of yet.

Are Members content? I see they are. Thank you, Luke.

Moving on, then, to item 4.4 on today's agenda: P-06-1230, 'Every Second Counts: Install a defibrillator at every school in Wales for the public to access'. This was submitted by Rob Shill, with 64 signatures. And, again, I'll invite Members to discuss this petition and any action they may wish to take, and I'll go again to the Rhondda and Buffy Williams.

Diolch, Chair. This petition is something that is really important to me, because we've got a fantastic organisation based in Rhondda called RCT Heart Heroes who do nothing but raise money for defibrillators, and anybody that needs one can contact them and they make sure that they get one. I'm also pleased to say that the Minister is now considering the potential for more funding for defibrillators, and also considering allowing schools to apply if they want money for defibrillators at the school site. I think that this is the way to go now. I think if colleges and schools and other community projects would like a defibrillator, there are plenty of places they can access them from, and Welsh Government are ensuring that the door is open for that. So, I'd like to thank the petitioner and close this petition.

Thank you, Buffy. Are Members in agreement? I can see they are. It's a really important petition, again, and something that always seems to have cross-party support across the Senedd, whether in committee or in the Chamber. So, we're all in agreement with you there, Buffy, and your recommendation, and we do thank the petitioner for submitting this petition.

Item 4.5: P-05-949, 'SAVE COWBRIDGE OLD GIRLS' SCHOOL FROM DEMOLITION', and this was submitted by Sara Pedersen, with 5,541 signatures. And I will ask Members to discuss this petition, noting that we did hold our debate in the Senedd Chamber on 16 February, just a few weeks ago now. And I'll ask Joel James to come in.

Thank you, Chair, and, again, I'd just like to thank you for what you said during the debate a couple of weeks ago, and it was great to see that we actually had quite a good level of cross-party support. And following that debate, I'd just like to add that myself, colleagues Heledd Fychan, Rhys ab Owen, Darren Millar and Jenny Rathbone have all written a joint letter to the Vale of Glamorgan Council urging that the application be refused, and appropriate action be taken to preserve the building. Again, my thoughts on this still exist. I think it's something that should be saved, and I know that the petitioner has done remarkably well in getting the level of coverage that they've created. It's shown that this issue hasn't gone away. I think we've debated it about six times now over two years. Going forward, I don't think there's much more we can do as a committee, as a Petitions Committee, and it might be the case where we might have to close the petition. I note that the petitioner has come back with some concerns about the Deputy Minister's response, but I think that's something that we could take on, or myself could take on, in a regional MS capacity.

I'm grateful for that, Joel. I would agree, and I can see Members are also in agreement with that. This has, you're right, been to the committee six times in the last two years, and we have taken it to debate on the floor of the Parliament, and the Deputy Minister heard what Members had to say, and, of course, I think the Vale of Glamorgan Council too took notice of that debate as well. And as you said, I've seen the letter that you and other Members have sent to the council, and I'll reiterate what the Deputy Minister said in the debate where she urged anyone who had objections to the school and what the intention is to happen with the school to get in touch with the council again. So, I'll say that for the record again, and we'll agree to close the petition, and obviously thank Sara Pedersen for all her work with the committee over the last two years, and of course the clerking team who've been ever so helpful, as they always are.

Moving on, then, to item 5 on today's agenda, a paper to note. There is a letter and a report from the Children, Young People and Education Committee regarding the engagement with children and young people about the committee's sixth Senedd priorities. Are Members content to note both the letter and the report? I can see they are. Thank you. And that's us for today.

I'll move to item 6, and it does conclude public business today. So, we will go into private session shortly to discuss the evidence we've heard from the Welsh Language Commissioner's office. So, can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17.42(ix), that the committee does now resolve to meet in private for the remaining items on our agenda? Everyone content? I can see they are. I'm grateful for that. Thank you. The committee will next meet in two weeks' time, on 21 March, for those who'll be watching and enjoying our sessions. And on that note, I will say diolch yn fawr iawn and close today's session. Meeting closed.