Public Accounts and Public Administration Committee

Well, we now move to our first evidence session on public appointments, and we have one witness with us currently, Dr Doyin Atewologun. We had another witness scheduled, Chantal Patel, who hasn't been able to join us yet. If she arrives during this session, we'll bring her in to join the questioning. So, I believe Dr Atewologun is with us, so, welcome; croeso to this meeting. Could you please state your name and role for the record?

Good morning, everyone. My name is Dr Doyin Atewologun. I am chief executive officer of Delta Leadership and Inclusion Consultancy.

Thank you very much indeed. As you might expect, we have a number of questions for you and therefore, I ask both yourself and the Members of the Senedd who are members of this committee to be as succinct as possible to enable us to cover as wide a range of the issues this topic has generated as we can.

So, I'll open the questioning before I invite colleagues to then pick the remaining questions up. So, in our evidence session on 3 May, the committee heard from witnesses that there was an art to applying for public appointments and that there's a form of words you need to be using to be able to get shortlisted. What is your view or experience of those statements, and why?

I can speak from the perspective of the extensive research I've done and practice in conversations with individuals who experience similar processes or who want to improve the inclusion of those experiences. The idea of the art of applying to public appointments reflects that there is a formal and an informal or an explicit and an implicit way of successfully navigating or traversing some of these major thresholds. The implication for diversity, inclusion and equity is that people who tend to belong to what we describe as the 'in group' have much more access to what the rules of the game are to help them navigate the public appointments process, and other processes, relative to people who belong to 'outsider groups' for whom only what is explicit is made available. I'm happy to say some more, but will pause on that for now.

Thank you very much indeed. As you may be aware, the Wales Centre for Public Policy has recommended that candidates should provide short biographies that they've written themselves, rather than traditional curriculum vitaes—cvs. Do you think that could make a difference, and, if so, what difference could that make for applicants?

I think it could make a difference, because longer bios give people an opportunity to tell their story more authentically and give permission, in some ways, to provide a more rounded, less standardised format in terms of putting one's best self forward. What I would recommend is we think, for each process, what the pros and cons are, because, for example, due to the nature of cvs being relatively more standardised and relatively shorter, it probably is more efficient to wade through a large number of applications considering cvs only. That is just one example of what we can do when we think about the pros versus cons of cvs versus bios. So, I think more attention should be paid to what are we losing or gaining as well as, after a period of time, evaluating the impact of introducing bios—evaluating via looking at metrics, so the data, the figures, but also qualitative data, i.e., the experiences of people who've participated or been involved in the changed process.

Thank you very much indeed. Mabon.

Thank you, Chair. I'm going to ask my questions in Welsh. Just on the question of cvs, and thinking about the way in which a person sees a person's cv, we know that a lot of research has been done with job applicants, generally, that there is unconscious bias with people's names that sometimes may look British or Welsh and then names that don't look like that. Is that true in a public appointments process as well?

That is very likely to be true. I am not aware of research that has specifically looked at the implications of identifying names or hiding names in public appointments, but it is very likely—highly likely—that the phenomenon continues at that level.

One of the things I would also like to add, one of the additional points I would like to make, is, when we think about bios, of course there is a greater chance of more personal information being put in, and therefore one of the limitations to consider is that a longer bio could provide additional information that could either positively bias or negatively bias the candidate, which is why it's important to evaluate the process at the end.

Thank you. Welcome to Rhianon Passmore. I've asked question 3, which I know you'd indicated interest in raising. While we're still on question 3, do you have any additional matters you'd like to question the witness about?

I'm afraid I caught the tail end of that contribution, and apologies for a late start this morning.

I just think it's absolutely important that we get this right. And in regard to what I've just picked up in terms of the response, in terms of the length of bios, I would just tend to concur with what's been said. So, I think I'll wait until my next contribution, Chair.

Thank you very much indeed. In that case, can I bring in Natasha Asghar?

Thank you so much, Chair. Dr Atewologun, I just wanted to ask you: what steps do you feel that can actually be taken to ensure that interviews for public appointments are actually conducted in an accessible manner, and that barriers that may prevent candidates from currently underrepresented groups can actually be addressed at the forefront?

Thank you for that question. The two things that come to mind—the two broad areas that come to mind—are, first, traditional interview, the traditional interview approach, and, secondly, the use of technology; for example, this experience that we're having right now is enabled by technology. So, I will start with the general approach, or the more traditional approach, to interviews, separate to the additional benefits or implications that technology might bring.

Going back to the earlier point around the art of the experience, the art of the public appointments process, it is important to make no assumptions about the extent to which individuals are familiar with the process that they're about to embark on. So, to the degree that is possible, providing as much advance notice, as much as clarity, in terms of expectations; to the degree that is possible, clarity in terms of the areas to be explored, perhaps even examples, to the degree that is possible, of what have been successful application approaches versus less successful application approaches; a number of flexible formats, to the degree, again, that that is possible. That's probably—just thinking about that—that's probably much more applicable when we think about the virtual options.

And when we are—. During the interview, there is mixed evidence on the role of diverse interview panels, but, generally speaking, I would sway towards the importance, or the value, of a mixed interview panel, so a diverse interview panel. I say that because, when we think about the disadvantages, the potential limitations, of a diverse interview panel—for example, the same people being pulled in, for example, then not really having a role to play, because it's a little bit of a tick-box exercise—and you weigh that against the advantage of the sense of safety, or belonging, or reduced stereotype threat that the candidate experiences, broadly, I would say let us continue, to the degree that we can, with diverse panels.

And then, lastly, I would add the importance of feedback. We are, I think, broadly speaking, very good at training interview panels, interview panellists, in being skilled and consistent and, not bias-free, but bias-less, or lower, in terms of the ways in which bias influences their interviewing. I don't think we're very good, generally, in terms of training people with giving feedback—so, this is what good feedback looks like, give feedback as soon as—and that just generally helps. It may not help the individual in that case—you know, in that particular process—but it will more broadly.

I'm going to pause, because I know I've spent a long time on that question, and I haven't necessarily touched on the technical strand of my question. But I'm very happy to unpack that if you want to.

Can I just bring in Rhianon Passmore, who I think has a supplementary question, before Natasha carries on?

Very, very briefly. I think you've touched upon a further question there, Chair, in terms of feedback, but I just wanted to extrapolate what that would look like. Perhaps that could be addressed perhaps later in the questioning, Chair, rather than doing it now. But I think the importance of a standardised feedback, as has been stated, is absolutely part of this experience and learning process. And then, further to that, at some point in today's session, because it isn't actually down in the questions that I can see, I would like to ask a question around both social class, Chair, and also language as well. Thank you.

Thank you. I understand you've got some questions later, but, obviously, come in at any time if you have supplementaries in relation to those or any other matters. Natasha Asghar, could you pick up again, please?

Thank you so much, Chair. So, Doctor, thank you so much for answering the question. I do want to ask you about, obviously, views on software in relation to public appointments. I know you said you were going to touch upon technology, and that's why I'm glad Rhianon touched upon it as well. I wanted to first of all ask you—. The question, obviously, is going to be around the technological barriers that people may face when it comes to applying for public appointments, but also, when it comes to that technology, how important is it with regard to the language that's used in order to make those public appointment representations? Because some people—. For many people, Welsh or English is not their first, if not even their second, language. So, I'd really like to know, and I'm sure the rest of the group would like to know as well, your views and perceptions around that, please.

Overall, I think technology and software is an enabler of accessibility. However, as we all know, the software or the technology changes so frequently that I think it is behoven on us to keep on top of it. So, being quite intentional about the ways in which we can create opportunities for people, for example, who speak different languages, to be in the same space and time—an example is right here and now—using the work of an interpreter. But also there's a number of, I imagine, open artificial-intelligence type, Otter.ai-type, softwares that make it very much more easy than it was three, four years ago to be in the same space. So, I think what I would recommend is that we adopt this with an open mind, but also one where there's a regular monitoring of what the possibilities are. Please let me know if you want me to answer a more specific question, if that hasn't given you the response that you're looking for.

What do you think could be done, Doctor, in order to promote accessibility, then? In your opinion, what can we do?

I think we should look at what the options are. So, pause—. Not pause, but seek from experts, experts in accessibility, experts in technology. So, for example, there's the web content accessibility guidelines that are available on the internet, which has been developed by people with expertise in this area, to explore what inclusive interview, or accessible interview, platforms are available, and what the pros and cons are.

I think we should, to the degree that is possible, provide multiple options to candidates and say, 'We can use A, we can use B, we can use C', bearing in mind the resources and the capabilities that we have to accommodate a range of diverse needs, and then ask, 'What works for you?'

I think we should train the players, the actors, on the wide range of accessible software and platforms that are available, get feedback from them, in terms of their use. And finally, an ongoing theme that you will hear from me—get feedback from individuals who've experienced it on the user end, and qualitative and quantitative feedback to integrate that into a review.

Thank you so much, Doctor. Chair, those are my questions concluded for now.

Thank you. Rhianon Passmore, I think your hand is up.

Thank you. Diolch, Chair. I think there are two stages as well to the access of diversity in this regard. I think one of the biggest issues is in the initial, 'Shall I apply for this important appointment? It sounds very interesting. I think I can do this.' I think, when I speak to my young people in my constituency as an ex-teacher and lecturer, and when they visit with me, one of the biggest things that crops up, and I will say this, is, 'I couldn't apply for that, because I don't speak Welsh.' So, do you feel that there is any work to be done in that regard, bearing in mind our programme for government, which is to expand the number of Welsh speakers, et cetera, et cetera, as part of the cultural heritage movement moving forward? How do you feel that can be countered? Because it is a reality for a lot of young people. Thanks.

I totally understand that reality, and I'll speak from the perspective of lived experience rather than necessarily being an expert in how societies operate with multiple languages that we want to put on the equivalent level. So, I grew up in a country that speaks many different languages—Nigeria—however, because of historic reasons, English is 'the lingua franca'. So, it was clear that there was a hierarchy of language, and there was a language that was required in order for you to navigate more elite spaces. I applaud and celebrate the need to acknowledge the equivalence and live and work in a society where there are two or more languages that have the same equivalence. Based on some of the work that I've done in South Africa, I might even recommend that we look to a country like South Africa, that is really seeking to provide equivalency in terms of experiences in terms of language. More specifically, I would recommend an ongoing duality that the Welsh Government is already doing: everything is presented in both languages. Continue the communication and opportunities to learn, but also continue to share, 'This is our intent. This is why we're doing this. There is a value for society more broadly if we can operate equally in both the Welsh and the English languages.'

Thank you. As we are short of time, can you perhaps just say 'yes' or 'no'—do you agree or not that British Sign Language should be incorporated into this?

Yes.

Thank you very much indeed. Well, can I welcome Chantal Patel, who has now been able to join us? So, croeso; welcome. Could you please just state your name and role for the record?

I'm Chantal Patel. I was asked to come today in relation to this inquiry around increasing diversity on public boards. That's what I understood why I was coming today. I hold a number of board positions, and obviously I've been through different interview process applications, and I'm able to give some feedback in terms of my own personal experiences of that particular journey, but also in relation to my community links, which are quite wide within Swansea. I've heard from other members of the local ethnic community around the difficulties of joining the process, if you like, for want of a better word. So, I can give you some of that feedback.

That's great. Thank you very much indeed. As I said to the other witness and Members earlier, I'd be grateful if you could keep your responses as succinct as possible, given that we're on finite time slots and there's a lot we wish to get through with you. But, if I can start with a couple of questions that are specific to you: why did you apply for a public appointment, and how much did you know about the process before your first application?

Before my first application, which was a very long time ago—1993, to be precise—and the process wasn't what it is today, and it wasn't on the recommendation of anyone else asking me to apply, it was something that I saw advertised in the Western Mail, if my memory serves me well—. And I just thought, 'Oh, I feel as if I may have the relevant skills', but I wasn't entirely sure, but I thought I would apply. I didn't expect to be appointed, but I was.

It was a big learning curve, and at that time, there were no official mentoring schemes and there certainly was no induction training per se, which meant that I had to work out myself who was the best person around the table to mentor me in terms of the way in which boards function. And I could see at that time why so many people weren't applying from a diverse community, because it would have been too much of a step for them to be able to engage in that particular process.

But since we've changed the systems and you have to go through the online application, that in itself—. You know, I've gone through two lots of online applications. One was the most horrendous application process ever; it was asking a lot of questions that many ethnic minorities would not be able to answer. So, for example, some of the questions were around, 'What impact do you think you will have, if you were appointed to that position?' And I can tell you, even I struggle with that question, despite having had a long interest in community affairs. I can imagine anyone else looking at that application form and then making a decision not to proceed with the application, because they're not able to articulate what you mean by 'impact' and what they might mean by 'impact'.

The more streamlined application is probably more user friendly in many ways, but it still doesn't use a language that would make people from a diverse background think, 'This is a post for me' or, 'This is something that I can join in and this is something where I can bring my own personal experience or my own lived experiences or my own skills to bear, to contribute to that community or to that sector.'

Thank you. Could you just expand, just to broaden our understanding, why asking about what impact the individual applicant might have could cause a problem for some members of some communities but not others?

Yes. I think it's because, if I'm reflecting on the whole process, from a native perspective, you're brought up with the culture, you understand when people talk about impact, what they mean. But, if you've been parachuted into a culture, as I have been, it means that I don't quite understand that, because I don't know that narrative. So, it's only through mentoring, when someone will explain that to you, that you might understand what 'impact' means or what it is that you're looking for in terms of impact. So, very often, you find that people are applying, but they're not getting to the next level, primarily because they haven't answered the questions in the way in which you are interpreting the questions that are being posed, and the answers that have been given.

Thank you. What, if any, particular sources of information or organisations helped you better understand the application process and the role you were applying for?

The application process itself, I didn't seek any support for that, but what I have understood is that, if I were applying, for example, for an independent member position on one of the health boards, I would myself be doing the footwork, if you like, in terms of finding out about that particular organisation, and then I would seek the individuals who I may know around the table in order for me to be able to have a lot more insight. And that's one of the other problems, because I've been involved with local communities since I arrived back in 1974, so I've built a whole list of people who I can access, but many others won't have that, and that is one of the obstacles, I think, in increasing diversity on boards.

Are there any other specific barriers you've faced in acquiring greater knowledge? And more generally, what could help improve knowledge of public appointment opportunities?

I've attended a lot of meetings where we've been trying to encourage people from diverse backgrounds to apply, and I've heard chief executives and I've heard chairs of various boards who've said, 'Well, we are looking for people with specific skills.' Now, when I was appointed on my first board membership, I didn't have those specific skills, but what I had was a thirst for knowledge and a kind of hunger, wanting to understand how the system works. And with my own ability to be able to pick on the relevant individuals within that board make-up to support me on that journey, I've been able to develop those skills. But I can honestly say that, back in 1993, I didn't have those skills.

I remember that meeting, when I heard the chief executive of that particular organisation and the chair of that particular organisation making that comment, and I can tell you what all of the ethnic minorities in that group said after they left: 'Well, there's no point in us applying. This is just a consultation that is trying to tick a box to say, "We've consulted with ethnic minorities and we're trying to encourage them, but we're not getting the applications."'

So, I think if you really want to do that, you've got to be looking beyond whether you're seeking specific skills, but you're looking at talent that's going to be able to bring a different perspective on the make-up of the boards. After all, if you choose the same kind of people you're going to get the same results, the same outcomes. You're not going to be more innovative and make changes. That's my view.

Thank you, and before I bring in another questioner, did you have any contact with the Welsh Government's public bodies unit at any stage during your application or appointments process? And if you did, how would you rate the service and effectiveness it provided?

I didn't. I remember that, by the time all this was brought in, I'd already had some experience of being a board member, being on a board, so I probably wouldn't have looked at that to seek support.

Okay, thank you. Rhianon Passmore.

Very briefly, just to totally concur with what's been stated, because as a young single mum on a council estate, as a single parent, if I'd been asked what are my accountancy skills, what can I add in terms of finance, I would have absolutely not gone on to become a BBC broadcasting council member or a Home Office appointed probation board member, and many other things. So, I think it is really important that we take that lesson, and it is talent and an ability to contribute that we are testing, and that is a very, very different process. Thank you.

Thank you. Can I bring in, please, Mabon ap Gwynfor to take up the questions?

Thank you, Chair. I just want to return to a point that we've touched upon in terms of feedback, and the need for feedback. Dr Atewologun mentioned it earlier. I just wanted to look at this in more detail, in terms of how that feedback should be given, in what ways. And is there a way that would be more appropriate than other ways for giving feedback to people who apply for public appointments? Could I ask Dr Atewologun first, given that she mentioned it previously?

Best quality feedback is given as soon as possible, is actionable, and gives individuals the opportunity to give feedback on their own experience.

Thank you. In the same way, Chantal, is there anything you'd like to add on that?

Yes, and I think I've had good experiences of being given appropriate feedback when I have not been selected for a particular position that I have applied for. But on the other hand, I have also had the very, very bad experience of being sent a letter, for example, saying, 'You interviewed very badly and therefore we didn't select you.' And I've kept it. I've kept the letter just to remind me to never do something like that. So, yes, I think there should be some sort of approach in terms of how we give feedback, but also allowing the other person to give feedback as to what their experiences were when they went through the process. I can tell you of two incidents—two experiences—where I could have said to them, 'Don't bother, don't waste your time. I know you've already chosen someone else. Why are you even interviewing me?' So, I think it's important for us to be very clear about the process. A process is a process, at the end of the day, but is it as transparent as we think it is and are we being genuine and authentic in the wish to interview people and to assess them in the way in which you think that they might make a positive contribution to that group of individuals for that particular sector? That's my answer to that.

Thank you. To be clear, therefore—and we've had evidence from others suggesting that receiving feedback in a negative way or a way that's not constructive can put people off applying for public appointments—do you think that there should be good practice that should be shared across the public sector and that there should be a particular way for them to give that feedback? I can see that you agree with that.

Yes, I totally agree with that; I think there should be a consistent approach. I can tell you, after that last experience, it took me nearly three years, and with a lot of encouragement from Usha, to apply for other board positions, because I was so disappointed with the whole process that I felt that—. I think at the time I just felt that they hadn't really heard what I said and they certainly minimised my skills and the value that I could have brought, my knowledge. I have a very eclectic knowledge. I've worked in the health sector for 11 years as a nurse, I've got a legal background, I've got an educational background and I've got lots of community links, but none of that was commented on at all, as far as the feedback that I received. I'm not saying I should be appointed. All I'm saying is, 'Give me honest and authentic feedback', and I can work on that or I can decide that, perhaps, this organisation wasn't for me after all and that would be my decision, rather than saying, 'Well, actually, you didn't interview well and there we are'.

Thank you. Doyin.

I wanted to add that a lot of research shows that where there is no standard approach or consistent approach to giving feedback, giving feedback across difference is poorer quality, it's less frequent, it is less consistent and it is less actionable. So, I just want to reinforce that research indicates that more standardised feedback is good for everyone, but in particular is helpful in building a more diverse and equitable space.

Thank you, and I'm sure that that information will be very useful for us, as a committee, as we study this subject. That's feedback. Thinking about the pre-appointment process, in some cases people are expected to go to pre-appointment hearings. Particularly in public appointments in Wales, some candidates are expected to appear before a Senedd committee before there is an appointment. Do you think that pre-appointment hearings are a good thing? Are they effective? What's your view on that process? I see that Chantal—.

I attended one pre-appointment hearing, which was not with the Senedd, but it was the organisation itself that had set it up in order to give an insight into the organisation and what the work might entail. But, actually, I remember my own view at the time—it was almost as if the organisation was testing whom they might want on that particular panel, and it did prove to be the case that the people who were chosen to be on the panel were the ones I had already worked out they were going to have. So, it depends how genuine your pre-appointment hearing is, in order for those individuals to be able to determine for themselves whether they want to be part and parcel of that organisation or not, and it's not almost like a selection process—it's a kind of informal selection process, if you like, for want of a better word.

Thank you. On that point, you suggested that there are some processes where you know beforehand who's going to be appointed. We've heard about the former chair of the BBC, that he was friends with the Prime Minister, and it might be a case of who you know. Do you think there is a problem with the appointment process here in Wales, or more generally, that someone needs to know someone or mix in the right circles, or be part of a particular club or party? Do you think that that is part of the problem, or do you not see that so much in terms of public appointments in Wales?

I think that is an issue. The way I would have expressed it would have been that Wales is a very close-knit cultural entity. So, people will know each other, and people will have a lot of informal knowledge of people who are applying for these various positions, and as a result of that, they often will be in a better position to be appointed on these various boards. For us ethnic minorities that have come into the culture, we've got to build that, and often we're doing this in an ad hoc, very haphazard way, if you like. It takes a long time for us. I can honestly say it took me a long time to work out how to navigate myself within this particular culture, and it allowed me to be able to expand myself. All of the things that I do, I really enjoy, because I'm curious, I'm hungry for that knowledge and I want to contribute, and it's not because I can go around and say, 'I'm on this board' or 'I'm on that board'. I'm not interested in that, but actually I'm very interested in the whole fabric of our society, how that's moving forward and how I can make a positive contribution. But it is difficult to get into that mould, because if you look around all of your boards, take a good look at who you are appointing as your chairs of all of your boards, and that will give you the answer that you're seeking.

Thank you. In the same way, Dr Atewologun, is there research showing that those informal circles that people are part of influence appointments?

Absolutely, and it does it on both sides. It gives you as a potential candidate greater conviction in your entitlement to the role, which helps in many different ways subconsciously as well as consciously. But it also, absolutely, from the external perspective, from the individual who is inviting you in, feels a lot more natural. A lot of information is passed, a lot of informal coaching happens, a lot of socialisation and nurturing. Both reinforce each other.

Just one more thing to say is that nobody is necessarily thinking explicitly in those dynamics that what they are doing is providing additional attention and support within that space, and, therefore, by doing that they are, essentially, not providing the same degree of support to people who are different. So, there is a degree of ignorance, a lack of awareness that by engaging in these practices they are sustaining and reinforcing the inequalities in the system.

Thank you very much. So, the informal process is going on, whether we like it or not. Of course, we have here the public bodies unit and that unit is supposed to provide training or support to encourage people from underrepresented groups to apply for public roles. Do you think that that is working here in Wales, and where should that unit or the provision that unit gives—? How should it be strengthened and improved? Chantal, do you have any experience that you’d like to share?

I haven’t got experience of having to access that particular service, but I can see that there is value in doing that, in ensuring that people do have access to the support that can be provided by the unit. I don’t know how well—. Honestly, it’s my own ignorance, but I don’t know how much people know about that, and I think that’s the issue. I didn’t use it, obviously, but I don’t know whether others have used it. I certainly have not heard people within the local communities that I tend to work in—. I’m a member of the African Community Centre, I’m a member of the Indian Society of South West Wales, I’m a trustee of the Birth Partner Project for women who are on their own having to give birth in Cardiff, for example, but I have not heard anyone who has wanted to apply for these positions say, ‘Oh, yes, I went to this meeting’ or, ‘They gave me this particular support’. I haven’t heard that.

Thank you very much. That’s very useful and says a lot about the unit and how it needs to be promoted, perhaps.

On a different level, in my experience, I know when I put my name forward to be a school governor, for example, I was convinced to do that and I was told it would be just a few hours a month, and it turned out to be many hours per week, in truth. So, do you think that the time commitment that’s advertised, that we are informed about when we apply, lives up to what the actual expectations are of a person? Do you think that we need to be more transparent in that process of advertising these roles?

Yes. I don’t know whether you’re asking me, but I can tell you that with all of the board memberships that I have done, they’ve said two days a month or four days a month, but it’s not, and it’s almost as if you have to spend a lot of your own time, outside of your own working hours, in order for you to be able to fulfil that particular role. And I enjoy what I do, so I don’t see it as a burden per se, but I can see that others who may have young children—I don’t have young children now—may not be able to put in that level of time, the time that I’m putting in outside of working ours, in order to be able to keep abreast of all of the updates, all of the reports et cetera. That may well be a barrier to people actually applying, because they might say, ‘Well, I can’t commit to that amount of time.’

To be fair, I think in some of the meetings that I’ve been to, the chairs of these various organisations would have made the comment about the fact that although it says four days a month, it might be more. They just don’t tell you about the volume of work that you’re going to have to deal with on a regular basis, because when you look at a lot of the board papers, they’re not 10 pages. Yesterday, I attended a meeting, and the board papers were 695 pages, which means that you do have to have a lot of time in order to read all of those for you to be able to contribute to that work. So, yes, the time commitment, I think, needs to be reviewed, or certainly needs to be relooked at, in a way that will make it much more appealing to others who might want to make themselves available for these board positions.

Thank you. And Dr Atewologun.

To raise a couple of additional points, first off, if we continue in this process and those who are less resourced engage in a voluntary capacity for something that they thought takes four days, but actually takes eight days, it limits their ability to do good work and therefore it potentially reinforces the stereotype, or an implicit bias, that they weren't going to be able to do it anyway. So, we're actually, in some ways, shooting ourselves in our feet by being unrealistic and providing opportunities, so to speak, that individuals, without the full story, are unable to fulfil. So, that's another really important reason for us to be realistic. If we are realistic and explicit, what we could do at the same time—. Because, yes, there is the risk that it therefore reduces the number of people who put their hands up, who belong to under-represented groups, but perhaps really being explicit about the ways in which alternative forms of support are available—. And it may not just be pounds, there might be other ways in which we can think creatively about how to build support in. And perhaps there are peaks and troughs—being explicit about the high workload periods and the low workload periods helps as well.

I just wanted to make an additional point on top of what you've said, and I think the boards need to be very clear about what they expect from the board members. Because what I have experienced in the past is the whispering campaign, as I will term it, in the sense that you come along, you think it's four days—you're supposed to be giving four days—and then suddenly you're thrown into this pot, where, suddenly, you're expected to be doing a lot more. And very often, what you are expected to do is very diverse from, let's say, dealing with a people's committee, to going into audit committees, to chairing public and patient experience, et cetera. And your brain is running around trying to do all that, but they don't see the value of what you're doing. They certainly don't value what you're doing because they're saying, 'Oh well she's not really doing all that well because she's not doing what the others are doing', but we don't know what the others are doing—no-one is telling us. What are the others doing that I'm not doing or that I should be doing?

Thank you very much. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you. Natasha Asghar, I believe you have some questions.

Yes, thank you so much, Chair—much appreciated. How do you assess the Welsh Government’s progress to date in delivering its diversity and inclusion strategy for public appointments? Chantal, your facial reaction just changed there, so do you want me to go to Dr Atewologun first?

I'm happy to answer that question.

I would love to hear your responses, being more directly linked to the process, and then I do have a number of points to add on. Chantal.

Yes, I think the strategy is right, but it's the way in which the strategy is being implemented at board level. So, there is a, for me—. It's a bit like the 'Anti-racist Wales Action Plan', for example—it's great having that, but how are we going to hold people to account in order for that to be implemented? And that's exactly the same thing. So, it's all very well for us to have a strategy up there, but do the chairs, or do the public appointments—are they taking that on board or are they seeing ethnic minorities as a quota? You know, 'Oh, we've already got one, so, we don't need another one'. One of the appointments panel interviews I went to—I knew I would not be appointed, because they'd already appointed someone from a diverse background. It would have been far more honest for them to say, 'Look, you're wasting your time, we've already got one from a diverse community, so, we don't need anymore'. Is there an informal quota going on, or is this process transparent? Is it genuine? Is it authentic? And, so, yes, strategy is great, but is it being implemented? I could not give you a positive answer on that.

Okay, thank you so much for that. What about yourself, Dr Atewologun?

A couple of thoughts in preparation for this meeting. First off, I've been the academic adviser to the Parker Review of ethnicity on boards of FTSE 350 firms since its inception, so I'm going to draw on some of those experiences. I think the intention and the commitment and the visibility and the centrality is a good thing. So, there is evidence that there's a strong commitment to diversity and inclusion, it's published, it's available. I think we could do a lot more in terms of holding ourselves to account through metrics and mechanisms for monitoring, evaluating, saying, 'We checked in on ourselves with regard to our progress on these aspirations, these targets and these goals. This is how close we are to meeting them. These are the learnings that we have, and these are the adjustments that we've made', so being really explicit about that.

In addition to the idea around being explicit about mechanisms and holding ourselves to account, I haven't seen enough—and this builds on what Chantal has just said—with regard to the individual leader's role and conviction. So, throughout the system, chairs, for example, chairs of boards, and the ways in which we evidence that it is core to their functioning for their effective performance at the individual level. This is no longer about the system, so to speak, but that they particularly are driven and are authentic, with genuine buy-in in this.

And then, one more big picture point is intersectionality. There is an intention, from what I can see, to stagger different identity groups, and I challenge that. For example, if we're going to focus on women, all the women have a position in terms of ethnicity, in terms of ability or disability, in terms of their sexual orientation. So, even if we're only going to focus on women for a given period of time, let's tune in to that, to those goals and those targets, and check to see that there's intersectional representation in those groups.

Thank you. I really appreciate the answer, but I'd also like to know—. The Welsh Government's diversity and inclusion strategy is going to be coming to an end at the end of the year. You mentioned about strategies going forward, barriers. I really appreciate both the answers that you've given to the previous questions, and also I'm sure that you're going to be able to help me answer this question I want to pose to you now. What do you think are the key actions and priorities for you personally, now—having had the experience yourself, having gone through it yourself, having seen and supported others doing it—that you would like to see included in future successor strategies? Because ultimately, we are going to be voting for them, pushing them forward—the Welsh Government's agenda is going to be there. So, what would you both like to see be included going forward with all the experiences that you've had, with all the strategies in place, with all the personal experiences that you can share with the committee here today?

I don't know whether anybody else—. I seem to be doing a lot of talking. I think, for me, a key issue should be two things, depending on which boards. Obviously, I've been involved heavily with educational boards as well as health boards, and for me, what I would want to see is a key performance indicator, if you like, for the chair of that particular board to ensure that her board is diverse, or her or his board is diverse, and that that person is being held to account on that. It isn't just as part and parcel of the specific KPI for the chair of that particular board, but also I think, for example, with a health board, we do have to submit an annual plan as to what we're going to do, and I think if you're really genuine about diversity, that should thread through all of the annual plans that are being overseen by the Welsh Government. And I don't see that. The anti-racist action plan, for example, they're asking us all what we're going to do, but at the end of the day, someone somewhere has to hold these individuals to account, and how are we going to do that? We can only do that through a very specific KPI that has to be a fundamental aspect of you being party to that agreement.

I will add on. Overall, I think there should be less of a focus on the under-represented individuals, and more of a focus on the system and the people who wield power, with examples of what we've said so far. So, for example, individual accountability, as well as focusing on a mindset change, at the individual level, of those who have, of chairs, for example, of others who have power within the system.

Also, like I've said, a refocus on intersectionality. Whatever group it is that we're looking at, that group comprises multiple identities. So, if we are going to continue with the stepped approach, within those targets or goals, also build in intersectional perspectives on that. And, generally speaking, when you think about minority ethnic, break down that community, because the experiences of people, for example, who self-identify as black will be different from the experiences of people who self-identify as Asian.

Ladies, thank you so much. Chair, those are my questions completed, I believe.

Okay, thank you. I'm going to come in on the next question. Unless, Mabon—I understand you have to leave us briefly shortly—unless you'd like to raise the next question.

Not now. I'm afraid I'm going to have to leave now, sorry, Chair.

That's fine. We'll see you later.

In that case, we'll move on to discuss mentoring programmes, which are often cited as a way to develop potential candidates from under-represented groups to become so-called 'board ready.' To what extent are you aware of any mentoring programmes, and how, if you are, would you assess their effectiveness in increasing diversity in public appointments?

I am aware of a number of what are sometimes called 'board apprenticeship'-type programmes. I think they are generally a good thing. I would encourage them. At the same time, I would reinforce or reiterate the point that that is part of the work being done; the other part of the work being done sits at the board, for example, sits within the board, for example—what is the role everybody is playing to ensure that all of the information is consistent, the relationships, the political skills are being developed, and the opportunities to sit on more high profile sub-committees are given out equally?

Thank you. Chantal Patel, do you have anything to add?

No, I totally agree with the comments made. And, I think, on the issue around mentoring, there is another layer that needs to be looked at in terms of mentoring. And what I have observed is, when you're mentored by someone who's white, you're more likely to get a board position. You're more likely to be supported, or—I can't think of the word that I want to use. But if you're being mentored by an ethnic minority, and, although I may know all of the ropes, I may be mentoring in the same way, that person is less likely to get appointed. So, what you find is that, then, people don't want to—. I put myself forward as a mentor, for example. I've got lots of experience of board membership, but my success rate will be much lower than that of a white mentor. And, I think, this is something that we do need to look at—what does this mentoring look like? The apprenticeship, board apprenticeship—these programmes are really good. I've seen lots of those in action, and they've been very good. Whether they actually translate into these individuals becoming board members, I haven't seen the data on that. But I think there's another layer to mentoring that we need to look at—who should be mentoring us as ethnic minorities wanting to access those board positions?

Thank you. Well, further, what in your view, would an effective monitoring programme for public appointees look like? And, given the comments I think you've just made, Chantal Patel, why do you think that a mentor from an ethnic minority background is less successful in successfully supporting a mentee into appointment? Where are the barriers in the system that need to be addressed?

Well, I think, in the first place, there are very few of us on board positions where we are able to influence and understand how the system works from within. And even if we did know about that system, it would be much more difficult for us to influence the people who are going to be on the appointment panel, for example. So, I think that's where there is a specific barrier. I think that needs to be looked at. I've seen that in action, where I've been mentoring someone, and we've shared notes, we've done exactly the same thing, but the white person who's been mentoring the ethnic minority was the person who got the position, because that person was able to have regular chats with the chair, where very positive feedback was given about that particular individual. So, to me, when we're looking at that mentoring process, it's great to have mentors, but we do need to look at how that particular system is working in order to maximise the success rate, if you like, for want of a better word, because my compatriots, for want of a better word, are looking at me and they're saying, 'Well, you've mentored me. I haven't got anywhere. Why would I come to you again?'

And Dr Atewologun, what would an effective mentoring programme look like for you?

One of the things we haven't mentioned yet is focusing as early as possible in the pipeline. So, yes, we need to think about just below board-ready, wherever that is, but I think it is important to think more broadly in terms of pipeline, so that the numbers that Chantal has spoken to increase in due course.

The other element that I would like to introduce is that a mentoring programme should also have at its core reciprocal learning to it. So, it's not purely about someone who belongs to a more powerful, privileged role giving out all their learning in a benign way, but that it actually respects and understands that both parties have experiences and insights, and it's a reciprocal relationship.

More broadly, I would say it is somewhat structured, somewhat more formal, has many different players and parties, so that people have an opportunity to have access to many different types of sectors, and there is potential for partnerships, not just in the public sector, but also in the private sector, and perhaps in the third sector as well.

Thank you very much indeed. In that case, could I please invite Rhianon Passmore to pick up the questions?

I think I'm unmuting, Chair, and somebody else is unmuting me. Fascinating and really, really good food for thought, actually, and very interesting. Before I go on to my question, there are a couple of points that I wanted to ask, briefly, if I may, in terms of the importance of support networks. We mentioned not just financial support networks, but things like childcare. Where does that come into this?

We've talked about, potentially, going into an area of what your views may be around having a pool of candidates that may then be able to be mentored by a systemic process. I don't know if that's of any merit to throw into this conversation. But we do have many very good governors in different health boards and governing bodies across Wales, who may never even consider a type of public appointment. So, there are two points there I—[Inaudible.]—you know, is there any merit, to then go on to my question, Chair, if I may. So, I don't know if there are any comments about those two areas from both.

I mean, if you do want to have younger—. If you want to build the pipeline, if you like, then, yes, you will have to put those measures into place because childcare is an issue and people also—

Also caring for older relatives.

Yes, and they are working as well as wanting to engage in those extra activities. So, you do have to put in measures that will allow that to happen, and if you are looking for the younger contribution, and if they do have children, then something needs to be done in order to support that, I would say.

Absolutely, and I think it's also important to communicate to people how research indicates that often, when we make an adjustment when we think about a particularly under-served population, that actually benefits everyone. So, we might find that it's more than young, single mothers who really appreciate the additional support given.

Okay, thank you. In terms then of something that we've also touched on previously, in that there's been potentially an increase in Welsh Government appointees who have declared a significant political activity, you both, in a sense, highlight your huge interest in, expertise and knowledge of current issues and affairs, and it's quite rare to get somebody that's not also politically active in some way. What is your view about appointments with a political background, where we talk about the pipeline that we're looking at? Do you have any comments to make around that?

Well, we could do a whole essay on this. I think, if we're looking at candidates, we have to look at where they stand in terms of their political beliefs. If we already know what their political beliefs are, and we need then to identify how that will work in terms of their contribution to the agenda of that particular board, but if we already know that and it's not going to make any other contributions, then why would you appoint that person on that particular board? I have my own political convictions; I'm a member of a particular party, I'm not an activist, and I'm not active—I don't canvass, et cetera—but I have very strong views around social justice. But, at the same time, I do also have a level of pragmatism, which I can look at in terms of the board agenda to say, 'Well, this is something that we need to look at perhaps through a more pragmatic lens in order for us to be able to come to a solution, and a better outcome for the people that we're serving.' That's the way I would look at it. But, there are so many facets to your question.

There are, and we don't have the time, I'm afraid, do we, Chair, to go into it all in great detail.

No.

But, it is an issue, and we did touch upon it earlier in terms of networks, and obviously it's an important topic. Dr Atewologun, would you like to answer that?

Indeed, and particularly probably because I have a slightly different philosophical stance to Chantal, but I think it is important for us to consider both, of course, Chantal's perspective and my perspective—that's why we're having this process. I think, broadly speaking, because we want to avoid polarisation in our societies, echo chambers, that having a range of ideological views is better for us, rather than worse for us, but I do understand that everyone else has much more pertinent experiences in terms of how this literally plays out for you. So, that might be less relevant in the examples you're thinking of.

Okay. That's quite clear. So, my final question is around something that I did touch upon earlier, and that is concerning something, actually, that the Commissioner for Public Appointments has also touched upon and highlighted. We've talked about intersectionality earlier, and I found that very, very interesting. In terms of the description of diversity, which needs to be widened to include social class, from all of my understanding of where we are now, I think it's very, very easy to gloss over those who may be of a lower socioeconomic class, for many of the reasons that have been talked about in terms of under-resourcing in many, many different facets of people's lives. I mean, I don't know what your views would be around that in terms of being able to look and seek from all quarters of society.

I think it is important, and maybe even critical, to the degree that you can formalise and expand your definition to include socioeconomic background. Understandably, socioeconomic background is somewhat more nebulous than some other social identity groups, but there are people out there, experts out there, who have developed a more standardised way of measuring this, and I would encourage you to seek those out. And, like a number of other social identity groups, these definitions change over time, so commit to reviewing it after, again, another couple of years.

Okay. Thank you. Have you got any comments either? No. I think that's it, Chair.

Okay. Thank you very much indeed. Well, time has virtually caught up with us. I will slip in a very short question to conclude: how important do you feel it is for the Welsh Government to increase the diversity of public appointments based on geographic location?

It's an interesting question. I think you do have to, because, obviously, Wales is very large and there's rurality that one needs to take into consideration, and the north-south divide, et cetera. So, yes, I think it is important for the Welsh Government to look at increasing diversity on a geographical basis. And, if we are putting in all of the measures to support those individuals who might be interested in these positions, then that would be fine, in my view.

Thank you. Nothing to add, Doyin? No. That's great.

Sorry. Can I just follow that up? I know you want to close the session, but in regard to the fact that Wales is a very, very diverse geographical country, we know that, for instance, Cardiff and Swansea and Wrexham, et cetera, there's always been this accusation that we mustn't be Cardiff centric. But, in terms of looking at our ethnic minority communities, there's a lot of centralisation within Cardiff, so it was, really, probably, more a question to drill down into it in terms of should we be looking more immediately around in our city centre areas as well. I don't know if that can be addressed in any way before we close.

Any brief response to that from either of the witnesses? I would comment. For example, I live near Wrexham—and you mentioned Wrexham—and there is increasing diversity in that city; a number of communities that are very active locally and have a recognised presence. So, yes, it's not just north-south, it's ensuring that communities in all those areas have the opportunity to engage, advise and do things together.

Yes. Again, there are lots of things we could do. I mean, I've been reflecting, when we've been talking, on the fact that one of the things that I feel I could have done better would have been, for example, to invite the public body to come to our organisation, so that they can talk, they can tell us what it is that they're looking for, do a demonstration of what that work might involve. And then, maybe there will be individuals within the society that I'm party to who might be interested in that. That's something that perhaps I will take forward and I will think of doing that, because that is something that we haven't done. Certainly, I know, with the African Community Centre Wales, we haven't done that; we certainly haven't done that with the Indian Society of South West Wales or any other organisation that I'm involved with. But it would be something that we could do in order to support the activity in terms of increasing diversity in all its forms. I'm not just talking about ethnic diversity; I'm also talking about people with disabilities and all people from different aspects of our society.

Okay, thank you. Well, the clock has well and truly overtaken us, so can I conclude by thanking both our witnesses today? A copy of the transcript of today's meeting will be published in draft form and shared with you for you to check for accuracy before publication of the final version. So, thank you very much, both, for being with us and for sharing your thoughts, knowledge and expertise. I won't say, 'Safe journey home', as we would normally, if you were physically here, but may the remainder of your day go well for you. So, take care.

Thank you very much, and all the best.

Thank you. And once again, apologies for turning up late, but I couldn't get out of the other meeting to come to this one. So, sorry about that.

Don't worry. That's life.

Okay. Well, we'll now take a short break to prepare for our second evidence session before restarting. I'd be grateful if we could perhaps reconvene at 10:50.

Bore da. Croeso. Welcome back to today's meeting of the Public Accounts and Public Administration Committee. Our second evidence session this morning is on our regenerating town centres inquiry. We have three witnesses with us. Thank you for being here. For the record, could you please indicate your names and roles?

I'm Stuart Fitzgerald, deputy director, homes and places division.

I'm Tracey Burke, director general for climate change and rural affairs at the Welsh Government.

Good morning. Emma Williams, director of housing and regeneration.

Thank you very much, all three of you. As you will expect, we have a number of questions for you this morning. I'd be grateful if both Members and witnesses could be as succinct as possible to enable us to get through these within the time available. I will begin. To explore the progress of the ministerial town-centre action group and sub-groups in addressing the recommendations of the Auditor General for Wales and Professor Karel Williams, how frequently does the ministerial town-centre action group and its three sub-groups meet and how well attended were those meetings?

Thank you, Chair. The action group has had various forms. So, it's been the original action group, as was set up, and then underneath that was a series of task and finish groups. Latterly, it became a delivery group and some regional groups as well. From memory, the action group met on a quarterly basis, I think, Stuart, wasn't it—a quarterly basis—and that's been running for over two years now, that they've been meeting. It has been well attended right across various sectors for both the task and finish groups and for the main group itself. But, I think, Chair, it's not just been well attended; I think it's fair to say there's been very good participation. So, people haven't just been turning up; they have been really actively contributing to it, because I think there's something about town centres that stirs something in all of us. You know, we all love our town that we live in, and I think, as I say, it's not just been people turning up because they've had to; they've made excellent contributions to it.

Thank you. Any further comments? No. That applies to the sub-groups also, does it?

Stuart, how often do the sub-groups meet?

The sub-groups met from November 2021, every three to four weeks. They've had some excellent discussions on the three areas they were set up for, and then, following that, the Deputy Minister for Climate Change at the time created the deep-dive action group to take all of that work and to refine it into the actions that we've come up with today via the position statement.

Okay, thank you. What do you believe have been the action group's achievements and what else needs to happen?

That's quite a big question, Chair—so, what have they achieved? I think a range of things. Probably one of the most important things, I think, they've achieved is bringing all of the voices together. They have been genuinely cross-sectoral and have allowed a lot of different perspectives to be brought to the issues around regenerating our town centres. I think, initially, probably, the biggest achievement was that the action group was set up initially to look at the impact that the pandemic was having on town centres, and they played a really strong role in advising on the sorts of adaptations that would be needed in town centres. I think they really helped to deploy quite a lot of money—about £5 million, really—on adaptations. So, they played a really central role there.

They've played a really important role since then, I think, in overseeing our response—holding our feet to the fire on our response to the auditor general's report and to the report of Karel Williams. That's been another achievement, I think—overseeing that. And then, I think, finally, in their slightly revised form now, they've been very helpful in terms of steering the town-centre position statements. So, I think I'd probably characterise it as enabling all of the voices to be heard and then using that to shape and inform Government policy. So, going forward, I think, Chair—sorry, the second part of your question—we see them as having a key role in stewarding the town-centre position statement action, Stuart, don't we, really?

That's right, yes.

That's something that we're hoping that they'll do.

So, with the position statement, now we're looking at whether that governance—. It's been in place since 2020. It's done a huge amount of work, as Tracey said, during the pandemic to help town centres adapt meanwhile use guidance, that kind of thing, as well as administering the £5 million of extra funding that went towards that, into the position statement, and really tough, complex discussions because it's so multifaceted, regeneration, so the kind of multistakeholder attendance of the ministerial town-centre action group was excellent. But now we're just considering what form of governance we need to take the town-centre action group forward in terms of the overarching oversight of that, as well as the task and finish element of those actions. So, we're just working through that now.

Thanks.

I think it's been really, really helpful that the broad membership of the group has ensured that we've been kept very clearly focused on the fact that different towns, different cities have very different needs. And I think that without that broad membership and those different voices around the table, it could have been very easy to focus on more of the larger cities and the shared problems rather than reflecting, in the way that the position statement does, on the fact that every town and city has a slightly different set of circumstances and needs.

Thank you. For the record, and to help our understanding, you referred to a variety of groups and a variety of representation, but, without naming every one of them, can you just briefly summarise the key groups you're referring to?

Sure. Stuart, you're probably better placed than me. Do you want to start with the action group? Would that be the—?

The ministerial town-centre action group has broad membership: so, the Welsh Local Government Association; it has Community Housing Cymru in terms of housing input; the Federation of Small Businesses; and a wide range of internal colleagues as well, across planning, non-domestic rates taxation, regeneration, housing, climate change. We've also had external representation from—I can't remember the name of the organisation—a Scottish regeneration partnership there, as well as the Design Commission for Wales, and people like Karel Williams came to that in order to demonstrate his work and report, and help us to respond to that. So, not an exhaustive list, but across—

It might help if we send you a note, Chair, because underneath that then were regional groups. So, obviously, people from the different local authorities were on the regional groups, and then the task and finish groups as well—they had a specific cohort of people who were on those. So, a note might make that a bit easier.

Mr Fitzgerald, when you were previously responding, you referred to the early days of the pandemic in 2020. I was chairing, as I do now, for example, the cross-party group on disability and I was approached by a myriad of different groups representing a range of impairments, where they hadn't been factored into the design of the adaptations to town centres, which Welsh Government provided local authorities with funding for. That created barriers, which we then raised both in the formal Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee at the time and through the cross-party groups, following which Welsh Government established accessible communication groups and so on. But how have you, if at all, now adapted the process and the participation to proactively involve such groups before those barriers are created?

So, through the Transforming Towns programme governance, any scheme that comes forward from a local regeneration action group would have to demonstrate that those issues had been considered. And, at a local level, groups that can provide advice and recommendations on those elements should be and are engaged. So, by the time a scheme comes to national governance to take decisions on whether we should fund something, my expectation would be that that would have been considered at a local level, and it certainly wouldn't get through that governance unless we were assured that it had, on a range of accessibility measures.

And there is a series of impact assessments isn't there, I think, that have to come into all of our planning.

Obviously, that wasn't, clearly, the case in early 2020 when a variety of groups—. I'm still meeting groups where there's a desire to have greater engagement in their town and city centre design as we go forward, so that they're accessible for all.

I think those early days of COVID were a 'test and learn' process on a lot of fronts, and I think this is a case in point, where, I think, we described it at the time as a 'pivot' of our funding, trying to respond to a very different set of circumstances on the ground and provide the right support, and I think you saw that more from change over time as we learnt what would and wouldn't work. So, it's probably fair to say that was a lesson that we learnt the hard way early on, in terms of how we responded, but they were difficult times.

Okay. What, if anything is the Welsh Government planning to do to address the situation where local authorities have been largely reluctant to intervene and use the powers they have to help regenerate towns?

Gosh. I'm not sure I'd agree that local authorities have been reluctant to intervene. Local authorities are very active, as you know, in town centres and undertake a range of actions. I suppose they have been maybe reluctant to intervene at the harder end of those powers, so perhaps things like the compulsory purchase orders. I think we've maybe seen less activity there from local authorities, because it's quite complex to take a compulsory purchase order through. It takes a lot of time, there's quite a big risk associated with that. I think, actually, that was part of the auditor general's report as well. Certainly, we've taken quite a bit of action in that area because we have engaged an industry expert, who's done quite a bit of training with local authorities now on compulsory purchase orders, and we've also recently put in place a loan fund to try and de-risk local authorities' actions, so this is an empty property enforcement loan fund. So, therefore, it takes away the financial risk that local authorities might face, and might be a barrier for them in going forward with a compulsory purchase order. I think it's fair to say we've seen a number of local authorities gearing up more lately in terms of taking compulsory purchase actions. But, as I say, that's probably at the very hard end of their powers, Chair. We'd like to see them operating with carrot powers as well as stick powers, if you understand me. But we're going to be evaluating, I think, what's been happening on enforcement next year, aren't we, Stuart? Or it might even be this year now, isn't it, 2023-24?

Yes. Quite soon, we'll be evaluating the work of our industry expert. I don't have the actual figure, but a vast array of training across Wales, across local authorities, has been really well received and helping local authorities to target properties in their areas, but, as Tracey said, multiple ownership issues can really get in the way of that. Yes, removing the financial risk of taking those things forward is something that will be taken up more. But, also, if I may, Tracey, the powers that local authorities have around the 'town centre first' principle as well is something that we've identified, certainly in the position statement, that perhaps we can help strengthen implementation of, if you like, at a local level, and that's something that we set out in the position statement, and we need to work with local planners to understand that a little bit more and how we might help.

I think one of the important things with compulsory purchase powers is, actually, when a local authority starts to engage and head down that avenue, what you quite often see is that just engaging in a process that might lead there quite often unblocks that property, develops the engagement that's needed in order to bring an empty property back into use. But I think it's around 800 councillors and officials across Wales who have received training. That's within every local authority area. So, they can see the different stages and the different options, depending on what the property is, the status of the property, whether it's in a very derelict state, or just empty et cetera. I think encouraging local authorities to think creatively about how they use the tools or the threat of heading down that avenue in order to encourage people to the table and to discuss and then access the myriad of funding that we have available to help them to bring those properties back into play—.

But, at the end of the day, I think we start from a point of view of these are people's assets, and it is right that we should be very cautious before we move or encourage somebody to move to take that asset away from an individual. So, that's why there's a need for specialist skill here, which most local authorities don't necessarily have access to—so, developing their knowledge base so that they know when to use the tools and when to go and look for specialist assistance to support them to do that and talk amongst local authorities of trying to pool some of that specialism and share the specialist knowledge.

Thank you. In addition to incentivising town-centre development, which you've been explaining to us, what action, if anything, are you taking to disincentivise out-of-town development? And in terms of both town-centre development and out-of-town development, given the measures you've described and will be describing in a moment further, how are you monitoring and evaluating progress to ensure that the desired outcomes are being delivered?

Thanks, Chair. I think our main focus is on incentivising town-centre development; I think that would—. That's a stronger incentive, I suppose, than the disincentives for out-of-town, if that makes sense. So, we're putting our money where our mouth is. Our money is in transforming towns and in town centres. But all of the actions of our town-centre position statement are all about what we can do in town centres. I think our strongest incentive for that is it is our policy, it's Government policy—a 'town centres first' principle.

But, as you will rightly say, just saying that doesn't make it so, so that's where our work across the public sector needs to happen, and wider. So, within Welsh Government, we're doing a lot of work internally looking at future capital and revenue spend, future procurement spend, to try and get in early in the decision making to make sure people are making the right decisions to locate in town centres, working hard with local authorities in very much the same way, and, as we've already discussed, trying to strengthen the arm of our planners. But this is going to be quite a long-term project, I think, Chair.

But will there be quantifiable outcomes that this committee can look at, given its audit role?

Gosh, I think that's quite hard to answer, as to what we would be measuring in a quantifiable way. I think I'd have to reflect on that a little further. We will all see individual developments taking place, and we've seen a couple of announcements even in the last few weeks. But to think about how we might quantify that, I think I would need to take that away, Chair, if I could. I would certainly be open to thoughts from yourselves or from the auditor general about what those metrics might be.

Chair—

Just going back momentarily—sorry, Stuart—to the disincentives, of course, the way that local authorities can use their planning powers is really important in this space. They have—. 'Town centres first' is built into their planning powers. We have a mantra that we use around towns, 'Live, learn and leisure,' as being the mixed economy for town centres, but also quite a lot of changes around the tax regime and how taxation can be used effectively locally to incentivise and disincentivise.

Yes, that's true. Have you got any more thoughts on the measures?

Just on the measures, at a local level, on regeneration-scheme level, they get evaluated. If we pull that up to a more macro level, we've invested in technology within town centres so businesses can understand a bit more about footfall and the time of the day, that kind of thing. So, we have some measures around that—baselining is quite difficult—and then to measure from there. We're looking to try and bring together those, or to learn from those, investments to see what we can use as measures and metrics around that, but I wouldn’t underestimate the complexity, because of the difference in local areas, actually, as well.

I’m just trying to think about how we can do that for a national picture that would be something that the committee could see, because I know obviously we’ll evaluate and monitor individual projects and areas in different streams. Can we take that away, Chair, please—

Please do, yes.

—and try to think what would be helpful to you that we could bring, that you could then assess progress?

That’s great, yes. Because you obviously understand the remit of this committee is to look at the effectiveness as well the efficiency in administration of public resource.

Absolutely.

So, we’re always looking at how it’s being done, but what the outcomes delivered are and what the learning from that might be.

Exactly. So, to show you, we’ve got lots of measures in place for individual things. It’s just, for you as a committee, what would be good indicators that the overall policy was going in the right direction, other than evaluation, which will be there.

Okay. Thank you very much. In your view, to what extent has Welsh Government simplified and streamlined Transforming Towns funding and made it easier for local authorities and their partners to deliver projects?

So, I think it’s an area where we’ve done quite a lot, actually, Chair. So, the Transforming Towns programme has done, really, just that. It’s a co-ordinated funding package for town-centre regeneration. That has streamlined previously a range of different funding streams that maybe had slightly different criteria, maybe slightly different application processes et cetera, so we’ve brought that all, now, together into the Transforming Towns programme, and that, I think, was one of the recommendations from the auditor general’s report about streamlining and co-ordinating, but also I think it addresses a couple of other areas of the auditor general’s recommendations around moving away from annual cycles, annual bidding cycles, because this is a three-year programme, so that’ll give a bit of certainty now to local authorities, and we hope that that will also address another recommendation, which was to help with the capacity and capability skills and expertise that local authorities will be able to retain people, have more confidence to keep people on programmes longer because of this funding stream. So, I think we’ve done quite a bit on that, including trying to simplify the claims process as well, Stuart, there, haven’t we? I think this is an area where I think we’ve really made some progress, Chair.

Okay. And do you consider the remit of the ministerial town-centre action group is focusing on the right, or most significant, issues affecting towns, and if in part, or not—I suspect you’re going to say ‘yes’, but—what areas could we learn—? Or what are the learning experiences from this that you can change things with in the future?

Thank you. So, yes, I am going to say ‘yes’, I do think so. And I’m going to say ‘yes’ because the group have been focusing on the issues that have been brought to them by a wide range of stakeholders and cross-sectors; they haven’t been focusing on the things we told them to focus on, so I feel confident that they’ve been focusing on those issues because of the broad range of stakeholders, with great knowledge of town centres, who’ve been working with them. But also, as the town centre action group has sort of progressed, they’ve been focusing on the recommendations of the auditor general’s report, on the recommendations from Karel Williams’s report. Again, I think those are the core issues, so I do feel confident that they have been focusing on those things.

Going forward, I hope that, as Stuart said, they will provide a sort of very firm lens for us on the actions from the town-centre position statement, and I think that’s—. We’ve learned from the oversight we’ve had with the recommendations from the two reports that that’s been a very good role that the group can play, so I think that’s probably where we’ll focus the group’s attention going forward now: on overseeing those actions from the town-centre position statement.

And given the three key areas you’ve asked them to look to work on, how effective has engagement with communities been to ensure that they have a say in what happens in their towns, and how is that monitored?

The engagement with communities is mostly through the placemaking plans, really, Stuart, isn't it? I think the task and finish groups themselves will have had engagement, but the main engagement is through the placemaking plans in each area.

Yes, and the regional regeneration groups and networks that our Government regional regeneration teams attend. With those actions now, that's the 'what' we need to do to operationalise some of the things and the different reports that we've had. We need to move now at pace to look at the 'how' of all of that and engage with local authorities locally, but also all the other policy areas that affect town-centre regeneration to work out how best to deliver those actions. So, as I said earlier, we're looking at bringing together focused task and finish groups to do that, but then the oversight of the ministerial town centre action group will be really, really important there.

And I would add to what Tracey said my reflections of attending the group. Town-centre regeneration needs so many different policy areas to deliver for it to help, whether it's across climate change or our economic policy or transport, or housing. The broad membership of that group is really important, and we need to retain that because we rely on that membership to make sure that we're tied into the different policy areas of Government and that they all work together.

Okay, thank you. I'll move on to our next question, and invite Rhianon Passmore to take over.

Thank you. I'm not going to try and unmute; it's going to be done for me, I need to recall.

Thank you so much for that. Obviously, in terms of the reduction in planners within local authorities, the capacity is very different now and the need is great. If I can just preface my questions—the various arms of state levels of Government in this area can often seem like King Canute trying to hold back the tides. We talked earlier about carrots and incentivisation programmes. If you think outside of the projects that we've just been talking about, the initiatives and proposals and the work that's ongoing, how realistic do you feel it is in terms of being able to carry out the mission and the mandate in terms of what we want to achieve?

It was breaking up a tiny bit there, sorry, just to—. How easy is it going to be to achieve what we're setting out to do here in terms of regenerating town centres and trying to stop the out-of-town sprawl, I think, as it's sometimes been referred to—is that the nub of it really? Yes.

Us just saying that that's what we want clearly isn't sufficient. That's not going to make it happen. It is Government policy, so I think our strongest lever, in a sense, is that a 'town centre first' principle is our strongest lever, really, in that sense. I think all the planning policy is in place. We are not short of planning policy in this area, from 'Future Wales' to 'Planning Policy Wales', through to the various different levels of plans. So, it's not—there's no shortage, I suppose, of planning policy; I think it's comprehensive and well established. I think the real issue, and I think this is the issue that the auditor general got into in his report, is the implementation of it—the actual embedding it and driving it through, and making sure that every single decision actually really does keep that policy in mind. I think that is the really tricky bit, and that's where we're working to, I suppose, strengthen the arms of the local planning authorities and the planners, to feel able to turn down out-of-town developments and to support town-centre developments. But I think there are issues in doing that, if I can be really honest, Chair, in the implementation. I think one is a capacity issue; right across the chain, there is a shortage of planners right across, at a national level right through to a local level. And I think that a lot of the criticism that we sometimes get of the planning process is around that resource capacity, because things take a long time to come through. So, I think one issue is resourcing, and then I think the second issue, on implementation, is actually making sure that decisions are in line with policy, and that's the critical bit.

What I would say on a positive note is that I think it works to the system's advantage that there is cross-Government support on this. There's Cabinet-level support, so this is not one part of Government trying to push an agenda; this is a shared agenda. The 'town centre first' principle is adopted and being implemented by all parts of Government. So, when parts of Government are looking at where large investment should be, where education functions are cited, the principle is that you look first and foremost to, 'Is there a town-centre location for this facility, that it can increase footfall?'. And I think that's a real strength in this area, and actually enables us to go forward and work with our partners externally, knowing that we have a collective view and that, actually, all partners involved will be pulling in the same direction.

Thank you. I'm not going to keep pushing on this, but in regard to capacity, we can have all the high-level inspirational plans, but in terms of implementation around this particularly difficult area, if we don't have local planners in place who are able to fulfil or to carry them out, then it's going to be very, very difficult. So, there may be some questions later around that.

I'm going to move to my questions. What else does the Welsh Government need to do to create a coherent policy and planning framework? We've gone through some of the things that we are doing, but what do we need to do, then, to support local authorities—you've just touched upon the capacity issue—and their partners to regenerate and create sustainable towns?

Yes, thank you. I think I probably said quite a bit in terms of I think that there's a lot there already, as you've just summarised. So, in terms of the planning policy and the framework and everything as set out, I'm not sure there's more for Government to do in terms of setting out the framework or the policy. I think there is more for Government to do in terms of supporting local authorities, and local planning in particular, in terms of both advice and guidance, but also, we're doing some quite proactive support for local authorities. So, placemaking support to help them; some financial support, which has been absolutely key here. So, as I said, I think the thing that we can do the most is try to support the implementation of the policy, really, rather than add more to the policies themselves. I don't know if there's any other examples that we've got that we can offer there.

You touched on the placemaking work there. I think what's really helpful for local planners and for us when we're assessing schemes and investments and that kind of thing is that there's a really coherent placemaking plan in place, and that's had the engagement locally and input, and it sets out a really coherent plan for a place over the next five to 10 years with connected developments—something that Karel Williams talks about a lot—so, they're not just individual or what he might call pepper-potting; they're connected developments, all of which contribute to each other. I think, where that's in place, it helps a local planning authority and nationally to see the picture and to oil the wheels of town-centre regeneration. And through our PFG commitment around making sure that there are master plans and place plans in place, we've put in more support for local authorities via the Design Commission for Wales to help them bring those plans about, so just to make sure that there's a bit of extra capacity there. That's been happening for a year. We're just reflecting on all of that work now and talking to local authorities about how that's gone. We've seen some more placemaking plans come forward, new ones; we've had revisions just to refine what our support for the next two years should look like, so there's a number of ideas around that as well. So, I think that not directly supporting is planning there, but that infrastructure, if you like, makes it a little bit easier for local planning authorities.

Thank you. That's a very full response. What are we actually doing to grow planners? What are we actually doing to make those planning officers be able to [Inaudible.] local government to be able to carry out the frameworks that we are instructing around?

So, we're doing—

Could I just say that I'm conscious that there's a problem with the IT connection, so if you're not catching what Rhianon is saying, please let us know.

Thank you.

And Rhianon, I've been informed that the IT team is on standby to help you, perhaps when you finish your questioning. So, over to you.

Fine. Thank you. We're doing quite a bit in the Welsh Government, looking at the planning profession and what more can be done to encourage more people to come into the planning workforce. It tends to be a bit of an ageing occupation, and I don't know if it's quite as attractive to younger people coming in. So, we're looking at what can be done to encourage more people to come into the planning profession. But, in the interim, we're really encouraging local planning authorities to work together, and I think the regional working agenda has been quite helpful in that score, because there has been quite a lot of over-reaching between local authorities, to lend support between them or to work collaboratively. So, I think, probably, in the short term, more collaborative working amongst local authorities, and then, in the more medium term, hopefully making the occupation of becoming a local planner more attractive to people to want to come and train in that profession.

[Inaudible.]—Chair, because my reception is not working and we're going to try and reconnect. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you. In that case, if we could move on to Mabon ap Gwynfor, please.

Thank you, Chair, and thank you to the witnesses for joining us this morning. Just to touch a little bit on what has already been said—the previous question from Rhianon, in terms of local authorities' ability and capacity. We have touched a little bit on that capacity; that's an issue. Do local authorities have that ability and capacity to do the vital work to tackle what needs to be done to create prosperous town centres in Wales?

So, yes, I do think that they—. There are very significant resource pressures, let's not shirk away from those. Local authorities, if they were sat in the room here today would themselves say that they have very significant pressures. But local authorities are doing a tremendous amount in town centres. I think just reading the Welsh Local Government Association's evidence to this inquiry, they list the range of things that they are doing effectively in their towns, and that ranges from mobilising and co-ordinating partners through organising town-centre management groups, community safety partnerships—as we're talking, they are the local planning authority as well—and they're the deliverers of very significant grant schemes. So, local authorities are doing a tremendous amount in town-centre regeneration, but they are under a significant amount of resource pressure. And there are fewer planners across—it's not just a Welsh issue; I think this is a UK-wide issue, listening to evidence from some of your other contributors. There are fewer people in the planning family, from local area through to national level, than we need, really. There are fewer, so that is something that I think we're all conscious of. And, as I said before, I think there are ways in which we're trying to support that, but perhaps collaborative working in the short to medium term is a solution to that.

And further to that—the Chair referred earlier on to the fact that out-of-town developments have taken place over the past 20 years, or perhaps even longer than that. Do you think that local development plans, and the unitary development plans that we had before them, are fit for purpose? Do they promote and encourage development out of town? Or do we need to look again at local development plans and redraw and reframe those plans?

I think there's always an opportunity to keep refreshing policy and keep refreshing our plans. I think that we'd be in greater danger of out-of-town development without LDPs, because then planning can happen in an unco-ordinated and in an unplanned way. But the 'town centre first' principle is embedded in our planning policy, and therefore it is embedded in local development plans, which are part of our planning policy. That’s not to say that more can’t be done, but it is there as part of the 'town centre first' principle, as part of the fabric of planning in Wales. I don’t know if any other colleagues want to add anything to that.

Just in support of the importance of those placemaking plans, we have put some funding in place to support local authorities in developing those plans and I believe that they can access support from the Design Commission for Wales, as Tracey has said. The plans are all in slightly different statuses. We've got some that are being reviewed at the moment, some that are being refreshed, some that are bringing forward second LDPs, and so on, so they're all in different stages, but there is, I believe, around £0.5 million—Stuart is that right?—of funding going in to support those plans.

It's £1 million a year over three years in revenue, yes.

The one thing I have to confess I struggle with very often in these kinds of sessions, particularly with Government officials and public bodies, is that it's clear that there is an issue, it's clear that things aren't working as they currently stand, but the Government is always very defensive of the situation and says, 'Well, we're doing all these excellent things'. So, who is to blame? If the Government is doing these things already, and these plans are in place, and that is the Government's ambition, namely that town centres will be regenerated, but yet we're seeing evidence that that isn't happening, then there is a gap there, isn't there, between the rhetoric and the experience? Who is to blame? Why is this happening, and who should be getting to grips with solving this problem that we're discussing today?

Chair, I would argue that we are getting to grips with trying to resolve the issues that exist in terms of town-centre regeneration. That's why we've had the ministerial advisory group on town centres, that's why we've been working so solidly on this over two years at a regional level, at a national level and at a local level, and that is why the town-centre position statement, which was only published at the beginning of this month, sets out a series of actions that are needed, not just by Government. The issues that have arisen with town centres not just in Wales, but right across the UK, are complex and have taken place over a number of years. I think you've seen that in all of the evidence that you've had in front of you. And they will take time to address, but I think the town-centre position statement, and the considerable number of actions that are there, are front and centre to addressing the challenges that our town centres are facing.

Thank you. So, steps are being taken. Could you expand a little bit on the role that you think that transport has to play in this—public transport specifically? We've seen less funding going into bus services because there is less public funding available, perhaps. The number of people using buses has decreased. We haven't seen the numbers returning to pre-COVID levels. Do you think that public transport has a role to play in trying to regenerate town centres? And what steps does the Government consider should be taken in order to strengthen the role of public transport, if you do think that it has a role to play?

Certainly, transport is a key part of town-centre regeneration. It is central to the way that people can access the town centre for leisure, for learning, for work. So, yes, transport is absolutely key to town-centre regeneration. That's why the regional transport plans are so important, and that is why the 'town centre first' principle is going to be embedded into those regional transport plans, so that that takes into account not only people who want to go in and out of the town, as I say, for leisure, for work or for learning, but people who want to visit the town, but also for pedestrians, for freight—for all sorts.

Public transport, particularly buses, is a key cornerstone of that. There have been challenges, as the committee member raises, particularly in terms of funding for bus services. Emergency funding was put in to assist during the pandemic, and that emergency funding has now been extended to the end of July. The Deputy Minister for Climate Change has set up regional planning teams, which constitute the local authority, the community transport associations, Transport for Wales and the Welsh Government, to understand better the patterns of public transport use post pandemic and to help us plan to make sure that we have the bus services in the future that are in keeping with the new transport patterns post pandemic. So, yes, transport is key to town-centre regeneration, and, as I say, we've got a number of actions in place.

Thank you. But, in terms of the vision, I've had the pleasure and privilege of travelling around a number of European countries over the past few years, and they have, from the smallest towns to the larger cities, trams—light rail—connecting communities, going through cities, going from one town to the other, ensuring that people can link their journeys up. If you look at any part of Wales, you see that as being an option, but we don't see any such plans or that larger, broader vision to ensure that town centres are regenerated with new modes of transport. Do you have that kind of vision in order to connect town centres and the communities nearby, developing light rail, for example, as a way of getting people into town centres and to travel back and forth?

Can I just check—I believe you have to leave at 11:45, is that correct?

No, Chair, we're okay until just before midday.

Okay, thank you.

I have a funeral to go to, unfortunately, so it's quite a hard end for me, but we're okay until just noon, if that's all right.

Okay—yes, please.

Back to the question, obviously, future vision and future policy, they're not matters for us, as civil servants; they're matters for Ministers to determine. But, the vision for transport is set out in the Wales transport strategy, which was published just a couple of years ago, and that does see and wants an accessible, multimodal transport system for Wales, which does all of the things that the committee member has set out, where people can travel on different modes of travelling. The ambition is to have a one-ticket approach so that you can use your same ticket regardless of the mode of transport that you are undertaking and you can actually switch modes of transport. So, if you are coming to a town centre, you could come in by one way and go home another way, all using your same ticket.

There are plans set out in the Wales transport strategy that are being rolled out now, and, as I say, transport for town centres is absolutely critical, and that is why we, from our town-centre regeneration perspective, have been influencing the transport planning to make sure that 'town centre first' is at the centre of this so that people can get into and out of towns, because it fulfils multiple Government policy objectives to do so.

Thank you.

Thank you. I’ve taken up enough of your time. I know that Natasha takes a specific interest in that point on transport, and I see her hand raised there, Chair, so, if I can, I'd like to pass the reins to Natasha.

Please do.

Thank you so much, Mabon, and thank you so much, Chair. I did actually really appreciate the answer; I know Mabon has clearly got psychic powers, because I am going to go down the line of transport. You mentioned about how the Welsh Government has plans to have this multimodal shift, but, I’ll be very honest with you, having sat in that Chamber for over two years now, it doesn’t seem that that’s going to be happening any time soon. I appreciate the one-Wales travel card, but I’d like to know to know what specific KPIs have you got in place to actually hit these targets of actually making this multimodal shift. The problem we’ve got, and the frustration we have—and it’s not just me; I think everyone on this committee and beyond who've been watching this says, ‘There are no clear time frames'—is that we’ve not had any clear guidance as to when exactly things are going to be falling into place. So, can you please give us some clarity as to what exactly is the time frame for this multimodal shift, for this one-Wales travel card to kick in, because we would love some clarity on this?

Okay. Chair, I really don’t think I’ll be able to answer that question here. These colleagues are not the transport team within Welsh Government. I would need to go and ask for a note from colleagues to provide details such as detailed timetables for various things within the transport strategy, if that’s okay. I’m sorry if that’s disappointing to the Member, but I think we would be freelancing, really, to try to answer that question properly.

Well, that would be appreciated, thank you, yes. Obviously, as I’m sure they’re well aware, if you could perhaps remind them, this committee’s focus is on the who, what, why, when, where, how, as opposed to the merits of policy or otherwise.

Yes, I will do, of course.

Thank you very much indeed. Natasha, do you wish to pick up the questioning?

Yes, thank you so much, Chair. So, I’m going to be focusing a bit more on non-domestic rates in relation to town-centre initiatives and tax, going forward. So, I’d like to know what progress in fact has been made on reviewing non-domestic rates, and what are the plans for reforming the current system that we have in place, given that the town-centre position statement makes no reference to this past commitment that we’ve had?

So, on non-domestic rates, there’s been, I think, quite a lot of activity in terms of non-domestic rates, and particularly in terms of reform. These are all areas for the Minister for Finance and Local Government, but she made a statement, I think, at the beginning of May, setting out the reforms planned for this Senedd term in terms of non-domestic rates—things like moving to a three-year revaluation cycle, which will mean more frequent updates of rateable values, to take more account of market conditions. Also, she undertook to do a review of non-domestic rate reliefs. As you’ll know, there are a number of different types of rate relief available to businesses in the system, and the Minister undertook a review of those, and I think that was a recommendation from the auditor general’s report, which is why I know a reasonable amount about it, because the auditor general, as I say, felt that there was review and reform needed in this area, and, as I say, the Minister’s made a statement on that.

Okay, that’s absolutely fine. So, from the work that you do, from the experience that you’ve had particularly within this area, how can non-domestic rates be revised now to encourage new businesses and start-ups all across Wales?

I think that the review that the Minister has announced on non-domestic rate relief will probably generate a lot of different ideas for new reliefs that could be brought in, and there would be options for people to suggest reliefs for new business start-ups—for example, to incentivise enterprise. I think my only thought on that is that the small business rates relief covers a wide range of businesses up to a certain size, and that’s at a 100 per cent rate relief. So, there are no rates paid by small businesses under a certain size, as Members will know—sorry, that’s probably telling you things you already know. But start-ups, obviously, would tend to be small, and so they would already benefit from the small business rate relief. So, I think there’s no impediment—rate impediment—for a small business starting up at the moment, but, obviously, as I say, there’ll be a review, and ideas will come forward there.

Okay, that’s fine. From your position, obviously, do you feel that there are any other options the Welsh Government could consider in incentivising high street renewal, such as specific economic zones? I know you mentioned reduced rates in your previous answer, but just from your own experience—like I said, you're in that role that we are perhaps not privy to, and there's information that we perhaps don't have access to—what do you think would be the best way forward in that regard?

I think it's always tempting to think that a certain relief will lead to a certain effect, and from my experience sometimes it has unintended consequences. You mentioned economic zones; I'm familiar with enterprise zones previously, from my work on the economy side. They had rates relief within that. But it can lead to displacement, and so businesses moving purely to—. So, it doesn't generate new economic growth; it just leads to businesses moving from one area to another. I think it's always attractive to think about new rate relief, but I think we really need to think about what the possible consequences of that rate relief are. But as I say, there will be plenty of opportunity to do that in the review of rate relief that the Minister has announced.

Can I just add very briefly? Of course, there is local discretion in relation to some of these taxations, but obviously local authorities will need to think carefully about how they use those discretionary powers, because of the related loss of income. So, there's a balance to be struck there, but there is some discretion available at a local level.

Okay. Fine. How does the Welsh Government view the UK Government's proposal to require property owners who hold buildings that are vacant for a year to have a rental auction to incentivise their reuse, and what impact might this have? Is this something that the Welsh Government should be considering, is considering, or will be considering in the future?

To my knowledge, we haven't considered rental auctions, but my colleagues might be able to tell me differently. I know that we have got other disincentives to having a property vacant for a long time, and actually those are around non-domestic rates. We've recently changed the policy so that if a building is empty it can have reduced rates, but we've now increased the time that a building needs to be occupied before it can trigger empty rate relief again, because I think there was a little bit of playing with the system there. So, that's one thing that's been done to try to bring empty properties back into use. But also, I think just this week, the Minister for finance announced a property improvement rate relief. I think one of the issues that we've noticed is that people feel that if they improve their property then the rateable value might go up of that property, and then their non-domestic rates may increase as a result, and it can be a bit of barrier to actually improving or enhancing their property. So, just this week, the Minister for Finance and Local Government announced a relief, so that if you do improve your property, you won't have to pay higher rates on it. Those are some of the things that we've done, but I'm not sure that colleagues have considered the rental auctions.

No, we haven't considered it in detail, and there's not a huge amount of detail currently available about the proposals from the UK Government. I think it's probably fair to say that we look and seek to learn from what is going on in other nations, both nearby and further afield, and where we can see that there may be merit in an approach, then we would look at it, evaluate, and discuss with Ministers.

Okay. Thank you so much, Chair.

Thank you very much indeed. Can I bring Rhianon Passmore back in? As you're aware, Rhianon—. Hopefully, your IT is operating, but as you're aware, our witnesses have to leave in just over five minutes.

Okay. I'll keep the questioning brief. Do we feel, and do our witnesses feel, that the 'town centre first' policy approach is deliverable?

Yes, absolutely. I mean, I don't think we would be pursuing it if we didn't. It's early days, and as with a lot of these things—. And actually, Chair, I was thinking back to your challenge at the start about how we monitor and measure and provide you with something. A lot of this is long term. I think it is deliverable. I think it will take time to do, but the policies are in place. It is now about hardening ourselves and making sure that the right decisions are taken within that policy. But I think the policy is deliverable—yes, I do.

Thank you. And in regard to what committee members have touched upon earlier, do you feel that transport access issues are going to be integral to the delivery of Welsh Government ambitions in terms of a 'town centre first' approach?

Yes, most certainly, and I think we probably touched a little bit on that when you had to exit and come back in because of IT issues. But, yes, transport is a key plank in town-centre regeneration, and accessible, affordable, reliable, multimodal, all of the things that the transport strategy aims for, are played out in our town centres, so that people can get in to work, to live, to learn, et cetera.

Yes. I was able to hear—

Sorry. Apologies.

No, no, that's absolutely fine. We could have a whole session in terms of transport access in this regard, couldn't we, so I'm hoping that we've covered that in enough depth. Do you feel that the local planning system is, though, flexible enough to support businesses and partners to respond swiftly to problems when they arise? What more can be done to improve this, if not?

I think the planning system is flexible enough. It's certainly comprehensive. I think we always need to keep a weather eye on changing circumstances, if we look at how quickly things have changed in the last few years. We need to keep planning under review—planning policy under review—but I do think it does have the flexibility. I think people get sometimes frustrated with the planning system, sometimes because it doesn't give them the answer that they want, their planning application is turned down, but, quite often because it just takes a long time, and we've touched on some of the pressures on planners at the moment. But I think that's not an issue of the policy; I think the policy is flexible and sound enough.

Okay. In regard to living locally and working locally and the Welsh Government's target of 30 per cent of the Welsh workforce doing so, is there any tracked or measured trajectory on what impact that might have in terms of our town centres?

It's something certainly that we're looking at very closely. I think, listening to the evidence of other contributors to this session, everybody feels it's quite early days, post pandemic, to know whether we've actually settled in a long-term position of commuting and working remotely and office based, et cetera. I think there have been pluses and minuses for different towns and, indeed, for cities as well. Research has shown that cities have had impacts from this policy, and from the ways of working, really, post pandemic. So, it's something we're going to keep monitoring, and using that to inform future policy.

Okay. Thank you. In regard to office accommodation in our towns that is surplus to requirements, what is the general thinking around this?

It's quite a challenge, I think; I think that's fair to say. We've had conversations where people have come up with what they see to be the obvious answer, which is where we know we have housing shortages, that office accommodation could be turned into homes for people. But I think we need to be careful, because not all office accommodation is suitable for that, both in its nature and structure, but also its location. Things aren't in the right places. We've been looking at practice elsewhere, where sometimes quite vulnerable people have been a bit cut off from services because of offices being reused. So, I think, for us, our view—and this is something, as I said, we've talked about quite a lot—is to get the balance right between needing to respond to change to economic circumstances, and needing to do that reasonably quickly, so that buildings don't get dilapidated, et cetera, but trying to balance that with taking the right decisions about those buildings. And the way we think to do that is through placemaking plans, to have agreed approaches to places. That's our way through that.

Thank you. My final question is a big question. I've heard what you've all said in regard to the appropriateness and fit-for-purpose nature of what we currently have in terms of planning policy, rather than on the implementation side. But as I sort of inferred earlier, it is a little bit like King Canute trying to trying to stop the sea in regard to how citizens perceive this. So, what more do you feel that Welsh Government not just could do, but should do, to influence the behaviour of developers and property owners in regard to supporting 'town centre first', and just to combat the out-of-town developments and the current status quo in that regard?

It is a big question. We have literally just earlier this month set out our town centre position statement, which has a range of actions—I think about 10 actions there that we will be taking forward. And I think what we can do is really loudly bang the drum on those actions to make it front and centre that 'town centre first' is our policy, but we can also work with our local authority partners to give them the empowerment—. I don't think we can give empowerment. To make them feel more empowered to take some of those tough decisions, and stand with them when they do take some of those tough decisions. So I think it's more the doing of the doing, really; that is what we need to do, and to be really strong in our resolve in the doing. I think the policy and plans are there. We just need to be really very firm in sticking with it.

Thank you. Diolch. Thanks, Chair.

Thank you. I'm conscious you've got to run on. A transcript of today's meeting will be shared with you before publication so that you can check. We've not had time to raise with you our final set of questions on the availability, management and impact of Welsh and UK Government funding on town-centre regeneration, so if it's agreeable to you we'll send you those questions.

Will you write to us? Yes. Okay. And I've committed to write back on a couple of issues, so we'll build those into the answers to your questions.

Thank you. Thanks, all three of you, for being with us today, for answering our questions. I hope the rest of the day goes as well as it can in the circumstances.

Thank you, Chair. Thank you, everybody. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Members, I now propose in accordance with Standing Order 17.42 that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting, and for all items other than items 1 to 3 at the concurrent meeting with the Health and Social Care Committee on Thursday 25 May. Are all Members content? Thank you. Members are content. I'd be grateful if we could go into private session.