Local Government and Housing Committee

Okay. Welcome back, everyone, to the committee's third evidence session on local authority library and leisure services. I'm very pleased to welcome Matthew Williams, head of policy and communications for the Welsh Sports Association, and also Fergus Feeney, chief executive officer for Swim Wales—welcome both.

Perhaps I might begin with some fairly general initial questions, and firstly, could you summarise what you see as the key benefits and value of leisure and library services to communities, and what the impact is when those services are withdrawn? Who would like to—? Matthew?

Yes, I'll kick off. Obviously, our comments are largely confined to leisure services, because our membership doesn't encompass anyone in the library sector. The Welsh Sports Association's membership is made up of about 140 organisations delivering sport in Wales. A good chunk of those organisations are the national governing bodies of sport, so Fergus from Swim Wales is here alongside me; Swim Wales are a member. We have a broad range of organisations from quite small national governing bodies—Basketball Wales, as an example—through to some of the largest, like the Football Association. That's about 6,000 amateur sports clubs and about a million volunteers and participants in sport within our membership. I think it's fair to say that the vast majority of those rely upon public leisure services to deliver their activities. They are hiring spaces at public leisure centres, hiring sports halls, rugby pitches, football pitches, et cetera, and losing access to those services, those facilities, would be a huge threat to their ongoing activity, and we have seen that happen, to an isolated extent, in the last probably 10 to 12 years, where a small number of leisure facilities have been closed, leaving gaps in people's access to services. And that has most often happened in rural communities, where travel distances and times are extended, if a rural leisure centre is to close or part of that facility is to close, or change its services dramatically, you'll end up with people either ceasing that activity, or having to move elsewhere in the country to deliver it.

So, broadly speaking, the benefit to having safe, accessible and affordable public leisure services is self-evident to us in that it enables our members to deliver their sporting activity and these facilities act as community hubs in doing so—they're places where people get together; they socialise, they take part in physical activity for their mental and physical health.

Okay, thank you, Matthew. And Fergus.

Thank you, Chair. A lot of what Matthew said—. If I just concentrate on our activities and sports, through your own Welsh Government survey and Sport Wales survey, the active adults survey and the school sport survey recently commissioned—and we saw the result some months ago—there are 500,000 children and adults aquatically active across the whole of Wales, nearly 15 per cent of the Welsh population, which I've said in front of a couple of other committees over the last 18 months, post COVID, and various other committees I've sat in front of, and it gives me great pleasure to say that 500,000 Welsh people are that active in the water. And that could be—without any jokes here, but that could be anything from Miriam on a Tuesday morning with the girls doing aqua aerobics or it could be children learning to swim: 150,000 per week in swimming lessons right across the country, or that startling number of nearly 400,000 active adults just either having a swim before work, after work or generally just using that as a social base for activity. And it's one of the very rare activities and sports where we cater from six months old to—we have swimmers who are 96 years of age, 100 years of age, not in the big numbers, but they are out there. So, it really spans across the ages.

So, that's the first point: half a million active Welsh people. If we're trying to attain a figure—which Sport Wales regularly talks about as well as Welsh Government talk about—of a million active people every week, well, we're halfway there with the aquatic piece alone. So, the connection to swimming pools and leisure centres is quite obvious there. Without those facilities in those areas, those numbers that we have together, collaboratively between Welsh Government funding, UK lottery funding, Sport Wales, via Sport Wales to ourselves, and with our other partners across the 22 local authorities, et cetera, et cetera—. There are lots of partners and we've all worked together and spent millions of pounds and millions of hours building that up and there's a real threat to all of that if we don't take care and take heed of the current situation.

The impact, Chair, very quickly, across mental health, we have lots of reports, lots of studies across England, Scotland and Wales, you don't have to look too far to see the positive impact on people's mental health, their physical health and on areas like pre-cancer treatment, post-cancer treatment in terms of physical health and recovery. And we're doing a lot of work with GP referral, with the NHS at the moment, where this is playing a huge part in the preventative health agenda—a huge part—and all of that's really coming through. Thank God sport and health are coming together to work together for, in my opinion, the first time in a serious way for a long time, if ever.

And then, you have the social connection that I think that Matt alluded to—I'll finish on that. It's the social connection. There are so many stories, and we see that through the free swimming initiative where we've asked people, 'What do you get from the free swimming initiative?', which is a very unique scheme commissioned by Welsh Government. And I'm a massive fan and advocate of that programme and I've been involved in it all of my time in the job at Swim Wales. That social connection, bringing people together, especially from those rural communities. Sometimes, these facilities are the only community hub that they have for miles. There's a lot in that, Chair; sorry, if I went on a bit.

No, not at all, Fergus. We'll be exploring these issues in greater detail as we go through this evidence session and other committee members will want to contribute with questions.

But just picking up on what you said about threats, Fergus, I wonder if both of you could say something about what you see as the key challenges facing local authorities in maintaining and investing in community leisure and library provision in Wales.

I think there are probably three key challenges at the moment. I think the first of them is really that people's habits and lifestyles are changing, and that means the offer that is required is probably going to need to change. The pandemic has accelerated some of that and introduced some new challenges around the lay of the land in terms of what customers are doing. The second is probably ongoing operations and maintenance challenges, and that's really related to the scale of the revenue funding available to these services in local authorities. The past, probably, 13 years have been quite challenging in that context. And then the third is probably the scale of the capital funding. We really welcome the record levels of capital investment coming via Sport Wales into the sector. However, local authority leisure services' capital requirements are probably quite a lot higher than those going through Sport Wales. And Sport Wales is funded to deliver sports development activity, for the most part, and shouldn't necessarily be expected to fund the capital requirements of local authority leisure provision, especially given the scale of them.

Matthew, just picking up on what you said about habits and lifestyles, could you just say a little bit more about that?

Yes. So, we saw a fairly substantial drop in participation during the pandemic, obviously, for obvious reasons, but there has been a long and slow recovery post pandemic, and I think a lot of our members are reporting that things are beginning to get back to 2019 levels at this stage. However, contained within that is a challenge in that a lot of our members, particularly in the public leisure sector, are reporting that their income mix has changed. So, those who have come back to activity in public leisure centres tend to be more heavily weighted towards those paying concessionary and social rates. So, the income mix has shifted considerably. So, whilst participation levels are similar, the income is not. And that, coupled with the increased costs we've seen, particularly since the beginning of the war in Ukraine, is posing particular challenges for the leisure sector. And then you've also seen slight shifts in the kinds of activities that people want to do. So, running and cycling perhaps picked up some activity during the pandemic, so did golf and tennis, because they came back a little earlier. Those in middle incomes and higher might have gone to private membership clubs for their activity and aren't participating in public leisure anymore, and that brings its challenges as well.

Okay. Thank you, Matthew. Fergus, would you want to add anything to that?

Yes. I think to answer the key challenges question, and I'll try not to duplicate too much what Matt said, I think No. 1 for us is the post-COVID impact. We're still in recovery. Numbers were down at one stage—participation numbers—on the population, or the active community I've talked about, the 500,000. We were down about 30 per cent, coming out of COVID. That's more like 10 or 20 per cent now. So, we're seeing a nice steady recovery, but there is still a real issue around confidence for some of the older age groups we had who wouldn't have had a problem with mixing in public environments and had confidence about going outside and making that jump, as we always call it, from the sofa to the front door, and from the front door to the leisure centre. So, there's a confidence issue there, but it's building back slowly.

The mix has changed, because ironically, where we're down on adult participation in some areas, we've actually got record numbers learning to swim—150,000 children, versus just over 100,000 pre COVID, which is fantastic. We're seeing waiting lists across a lot of those local authorities, which is fantastic. There's a bit of irony, really. We had a shortage of swimming teachers, post COVID, because a lot of that workforce left because of furlough and various other things. Because of the uncertainty, people lost jobs, there was the closure of pools. So, we're trying to build that up. So, actually, the supply and demand, we're trying to do our best to support the sector and equal that out. We do an awful lot of training. We've put 1,000 new swim teachers out there over the last 12 months, which is obviously going to help our partners across the local authorities.

I think the post-COVID recovery created a situation where revenue streams and profit and loss for a lot of these pools—. They are small businesses, a lot of them, where a local authority has four, five or six pools, where it's devolved with capital asset transfer, or over to a leisure trust. They still have to balance the books; they're small businesses. They need money in, there's money going out, and that's a real challenge. Therefore, they've had to hike up or increase prices. That's put a real strain on affordability, and therefore a knock-on effect on accessibility. Collectively, we're trying to get more people active. That's pricing a lot of the Welsh population out of this, which is pretty concerning. On top of that, we've got what I would say is a significant disconnect in the transport system, where I don't see transport talking. Even within local government, I don't see transport talking, and I'm happy to be proved otherwise, but I do get around, a bit, all of our partners, and I think we could be a lot better in accessing leisure and libraries—I can't speak for libraries, but I'm sure it's very similar—and matching that up with transport, especially in the rural areas and the harder-to-reach areas. That's a real issue.

Fergus, could you tell the committee about the picture across Wales in terms of children learning to swim by attending swimming lessons with their school? I know, locally, for me, I think in the last year of primary, children from the schools in Newport go to the local swimming pool, and that's been a regular programme for a long time. Is that the picture across Wales? Because obviously not all children will have parents who will take them along to the swimming pool or enrol and pay for swimming lessons, but these children who don't benefit in that way can benefit through the school programme. I just wonder if that's consistent across Wales.

With respect, Chair, I think you're spot on with the catch-all role that school swimming plays for all of our children across Wales. It's a real equaliser. The sad thing is, and I'm meeting with, through our sport policy colleagues, who've set up a meeting—. We've reached out to the department for education, because with swimming we're hanging on with our fingernails. We're in the 2022 new curriculum, the competency piece and the water safety piece and the life skill. We've managed to stay in the curriculum because of that piece. So, it's really, really important, but I said in a previous committee when I gave evidence, and there was a bit of shock around the room, that only 50 per cent of the 1,600 plus primary schools in Wales actively take part in school swimming. It's not mandated. It's not regulated, if you like, by Estyn in the way that other subjects are. So, only 50 per cent in our survey. We had to go out and do our own across the whole of the primary school network.

It's a very, very sad situation, and what's resulted from that is that 42 per cent of children leaving key stage 2 or year 6 have the ability to swim. This year, we'll see circa 70,000 children, including two of my own—. I've got four daughters; one in secondary school, one very tiny, and two 11-year-olds going into secondary school. But they'll leave year 6 able to swim. They're two of the lucky ones; we've been able to put them into Llanishen Leisure Centre to learn to swim. But there are lots of other children that school swimming will be the only way they'll learn that life skill. It's a really, really serious situation. So, looking at those figures, 35,000 to 40,000 children will leave year 6 this year without the ability to swim, and that number is going down every year, because of that kind of inactivity.

It's not a blame thing, but I think we've taken our eye off the ball with regard to school swimming in a big way, because those children that can't afford those lessons—. The average lesson pre COVID was £6.50 for a swimming lesson, and post-COVID, in the current environment across Wales, the average cost of a swimming lesson is £12.50. So, we've nearly doubled the cost of a swimming lesson. Those children in those harder-to-reach areas, underserved areas, socially and economically deprived areas, have no chance, and that's why school swimming is so important. We celebrate the 150,000 who are in those lessons—that's fantastic—but they're the ones that can afford it. We're going to have a situation very soon where, dare I say it, white middle-class children will be able to swim and the rest won't.

Thank you very much for that, Fergus. Sam.

Thanks, Chair. Just on a point you mentioned earlier, Fergus, in relation to the quality of the estate, as it were, whether it's swimming pools, or whether it's perhaps leisure more broadly, do you think we've missed a trick in terms of twenty-first century schools? Clearly, there's been huge investment in our school grounds and estates to bring them up to standard. Do you think we should have done more, and perhaps in the future should do more, to incorporate within that twenty-first century school programme leisure facilities, so that funding can take place, and the experience of children at school can be appreciated more wholly? Do you think we've missed a trick there?

Can I take that one? I think it's topical. My senior management team were away for a strategy day recently, and we are launching a new framework for aquatics in Wales over the next few months. We've been working on that with staff and partners, and all the rest of it, for about 12 months. One of the areas that we're going next level down in terms of aquatics—. We have a plan for, obviously, our performance and our national squads in the Commonwealth Games and the Olympics and that side of things; that's one area. But on the aquatics piece, the core aquatics piece, school swimming came up, and somebody asked me 'What's our strategy for school swimming?'; it was a board member. We went away to produce that strategy for school swimming. We have a strategy for school swimming. The next question came up: 'So, how does that connect to the strategy for school sport and school activity?' So, we went looking for it. There is no strategy in Wales for school sport and activity. It doesn't exist.

I think, with respect to my colleague, if I can answer it that way and say, 'How can we design facilities?' The twenty-first century school piece is, in my opinion, crying out for an informed strategy that says, 'This is what a school should look like with respect to sport and activity'. I think we leave a lot of that to chance in Wales. I think if a school is minded, if a headteacher is minded—. I might be speaking out of turn a little bit, but we know from the swimming piece that 50 per cent of those headteachers will wake up in the morning and think swimming, they'll think 'This is a life skill. This is important for my children to leave the school.' And that's great. But there's 50 per cent who won't think that. They'll be thinking English, maths, which are important, of course they are; the curriculum is hugely important. And all credit to our colleagues—the new Curriculum for Wales has been produced, but it's missing, in my opinion, that piece around sport and physical activity; there doesn't seem to be an overarching strategy for all of us to get behind.

Thank you, Fergus. Thank you, Sam. Carolyn Thomas.

Thanks. I just wanted to come on that regarding swimming for schools. Teachers have said that one of the biggest things that stops them is transport to get children to the swimming baths; it's really expensive to hire a coach. That was one of the biggest issues. I'm on the culture committee, and I know that Jayne is on the Children, Young People and Education Committee and they've looked at it as well, sports and the curriculum. So, I just wanted to feed that in, the transport. I suggested that, if there could be some social value added to procurement of school transport, where the operators could possibly give social value to schools to provide free transport later on in the day to swimming lessons, that could be helpful.

If I can, Chair, very quickly. Thank you. We've touched on this, I think, before. We have costed that up. To fully fund school swimming, which accommodates for my colleague's question there in terms of transport cost, that will equate to £4.4 million a year, and we've presented that paper in to Government. It's being discussed at the moment—where does it sit; is it sports, is it education. The debate continues, but that will put a frame on that. I think the procurement piece is a really excellent point. I think there is a great opportunity to consolidate some of that across local authorities and to help schools out, because that is the barrier. It's not so much training teachers and teaching assistants to help, it's not swim schools, it's not the local authorities, it's not the pools. That infrastructure, that piece of the jigsaw, is in place. But that gives you an idea: across Wales, we could do this for £4 million.

I'd be grateful if whatever work you mention to committee—. If you haven't already shared it with our committee clerks, it would be useful to receive that. Mabon ap Gwynfor.

Thank you very much, Chair, and thank you for appearing before us here this morning. In looking at the different models that we have in terms of provision and how these facilities are run, I know from your own evidence, Matthew, that the WSA is model agnostic, but there are different models. There are some internal to local authorities, run by those local authorities. We have some arm's-length companies that have been created, as is the case in Denbighshire and Gwynedd. And we have some independents, such as the Calon Tysul pool in Llandysul. So, there are all sorts of different models available. Do you have a view on these models? Although you as WSA have said you're agnostic, do you have a view on how they operate? And in terms of Swim Wales, do you have a view on which model works best for the users of those service?

I'll try to answer in Welsh, Mabon. As we see it, there are three different models, so there is the traditional in-house model, there's the contracted model, such as in Gwynedd or Denbighshire, and what's going on here in Cardiff with GLL as a charitable trust, doing the delivery on behalf of the authorities. And then there's the third model of the community asset transfer where there's no contractual relationship between the authorities and the deliverer, but they still do something for the community locally. I'll turn back to English now, if that's okay with you.

Those three different models present different challenges and different opportunities. I think for those where there has been a community asset transfer, there's a real opportunity to deliver something in partnership with the community, something where the community really buys into it, where local people have a real stake and say. Because it's not a contracted relationship I think there's no financial safety net in those delivery models, and a lot of those facilities that came through the community asset transfer process are probably those most under threat at the moment. I know you've got examples in your own constituency around that, and there are others elsewhere in Wales where single-site operators are finding the current environment really challenging.

For those contracted services where they're run by a third party on behalf of the local authorities, they've been able to access alternative financing arrangements, and there have been some tax incentives for them over the last 10, 12 years. So, they've probably got a slightly more favourable bottom-line position and have been able to invest. That isn't across all of them, but some of them have certainly been able to modernise more effectively and readily, perhaps, than some of the in-house deliverers.

In-house delivery, I think, is still in the situation where closing leisure centres, et cetera, is a politically difficult decision to make for council cabinets, council members. And there is a level of protection that's associated, I think, with that in-house model of delivery, despite the often increased costs that in-house delivery faces.

Thanks.

If I could just add to that rather than take away, and I will be brief, Chair; I understand you've got other questions. I think there are no right or wrong models—and I won't repeat the models that Matt just listed. There are no right or wrong in our opinion. I think what it does boil down to—. Somebody I heard, not so long ago, talked about some of these having devolved responsibilities, but devolved responsibilities to an operator or to a trust doesn't mean you're absolved of responsibility. And I think that's the question for me: some of these, with what we've seen through COVID and post COVID, and now with the energy crisis—and I'm not going to name them, as such—but some feel really out on a limb and cut adrift. And while it's really important to have these different models, because some do benefit—. Some local authorities run their leisure facilities in a very professional manner and are very competent and have a very competent skill-base, workforce, et cetera, and that's fine. Others see a need to give that to a more professional outfit or professional operator who does this stuff for a living, and I think that should be commended.

But I think the interest and the will—and I go back to strategy—somebody needs to still care about how those services are delivered and what support that outfit needs. And that could be through more experience, more skills, it could be through procurement or whatever, but there needs to be a connection maintained and a support network maintained, even though they are managing separately day to day. Does that make sense? So, that will needs to be there. And I do question, on my travels across these local authorities, and all of these partners that we work with—there's some brilliant work in Wales, there really is, and I could list a whole load of great examples of good practice—but what it boils down to is: where does health and well-being sit on the agenda? How far up the agenda does that sit? And I think there's a direct correlation between the social value of health and activity and well-being, and how that local authority sees that. There are lots of different priorities, of course there are, but it boils down to will. If there's a will there, they will support whatever operating model exists.

Now, having heard what you've said about how different models provide different things for different communities, and there's no one right model in any circumstance, have you seen any pattern, within these models, that one kind of model increases participation and usage, and that you see more people using those services in one model? Or do you have examples of good practice, perhaps, that you'd like to share with us, so we could learn from those?

In reality, no. We haven't seen evidence of that at all. Participation relies on so many factors on a local level, it's difficult to work out what drives things like that. So, no, I don't see evidence that one model makes more of a difference to participation than any other.

No, but what I can say is that I think there is definitely a connection between some of our leisure trusts. There aren't many of them; I think there are 10 in Wales at the moment, something like that, Matt—just double checking there. So, there are 10 in Wales, and I do see a correlation between the leisure trusts being closer to the community. They talk to the community, the feedback loop between the community itself and the leisure trusts seems to be stronger. Sometimes, in some of those operating models, there's a distance between the head and the tail. So, talking to the community, finding out what the community wants, can be a hard thing to do, getting that insight and data, and then reacting fairly quickly. So, I do think it's a bit like the oil tanker and the speedboat—some of these leisure trusts are more of the speedboat model, where they can listen, readjust, and, next week, they can put on a class because they've had 25 people rock up to reception and say, 'Wouldn't it be great? I was in Carmarthen last week, they had a class X, Y and Z—could you do the same?' Suddenly, it's on. That's as opposed to maybe some of the other feedback loops, where you fill in a form, it goes into the reception, it goes up the ranks, through the local authority, and somebody might read it in six months' time. I'm not saying that's always the case, but for me, they seem a lot more flexible and adaptable, and closer to the people.

And I think you could probably put concrete examples of that, post pandemic, where the contracted operators tended to return to activity and opening a little quicker than those that were directly in-house. And that, again, varied across local authorities, and some of it was down to arrangements made with local health boards, around keeping leisure centres as field hospitals, vaccinations, et cetera. But there was almost a natural incentive for those third-party contracted, whether it's trust, trading company, et cetera, to get their doors open a little quicker.

Thank you. And if I could follow up with a final question—thank you very much. In terms of economic benefit, financial benefit to local authorities, do you see that these models do provide financial benefits to local authorities and are beneficial to them, that they've got an external company to undertake these operations?

'Yes' is the short answer to that. There's a reason why so many local authorities have undertaken these arrangements. The trust model ensures that these services can still be provided in the community. So, yes, there are some problems with management fees that are paid to the trusts, especially, and there are problems as to just ensuring that some of these trading companies are going back to a situation where they are profitable. But across the whole piece, these arrangements have been successful.

Thank you.

Fergus, would you agree with that?

Yes, I would. Very quickly, I think that, sometimes—. And it's not, again, a blame thing at all; it's just an observation as a national governing body—and after football and rugby, one of the larger ones—that our view is that there needs to be a lot more data and insight as to social value and the return on social value, and I think that there's a lot of information out there. When you're looking at a spreadsheet in isolation—I run four businesses myself—you're looking at the numbers, you're looking at the profit and loss, and it's very, very easy just to see those numbers, try and balance the books, and not look further afield.

I'll give you a quick example. We deliver eight national events a year at the Wales National Pool Swansea. We have a commercial arrangement with the university and Swansea Council, because they co-run and own the Wales national pool—WNPS—and Swim Wales is, effectively, a long-term tenant. So, we do have a commercial contract in place with them, and I have to remind them all the time that those eight events a year bring in £3.7 million to the local economy. We have to paint that wider picture, to say, 'When these events go on, it's not just paying money, that I pay you to hire the pool, they pay money in, and if there's money left over, it goes into sport.' There's a whole bigger picture.

And I think that data and insight is missing across Wales; we could be much better. Again, there will be people out there, listening to me today and saying, 'We do a great job on that.' They probably do, but there are gaps. I think that, as a collective—and I'm sure Brian Davies and his team in Sport Wales would agree with me—we need to be better at collecting that data and insight to show that picture, rather than focusing on this post-COVID energy-crisis PnL only.

Okay. Thank you, Fergus. It takes us on to social value, and Joel James. Joel.

Thank you, Chair, and thanks everyone for coming in this morning. Yes, as the Chair said, this takes me on because I'm quite interested in the social value. One of the concerns that I have is whether or not local authorities, for example, place enough emphasis on social value, and I just wanted to get your idea—obviously, I think, Fergus, you've just touched upon it—but, given your experience, do you think local authorities place enough emphasis on the social value of swimming pools and what they can bring to communities? Thank you.

I think, overall, yes, they do place quite a lot of value on the social value of these places and buildings, and I think I touched on it earlier, that it's a politically difficult decision to close facilities, to reorganise facilities, and that is because of the value that communities and voters within local authority footprint areas place on these buildings. And I think the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 has helped in this regard, in making sure that local authorities do pay some regard to the wider benefits of having leisure facilities within their footprint, and the things against which they deliver in terms of education, health, community well-being and community safety. But, yes, I think Fergus said it in his last answer: we could probably get a lot better at this. I think local authorities could probably be better at articulating the social value of the leisure facilities in their areas.

Okay. Okay, Joel?

Yes. Thanks ever so much, Matthew, for that. We've heard, then, from different evidence sessions—and Mabon touched upon it—about preferred options, and that. And I just wanted—. And we've heard about alternative models like social enterprises anchored in community hubs, and all that. I just wanted to get your opinion, based on your own experiences: to what extent is that becoming the default model now from local authorities? Are they looking to offset their community assets, maybe because they might see them as a financial liability, and as you mentioned, there isn't necessarily that statutory duty to provide them? Or are you seeing a concerted effort by local authorities to try and keep them in-house, and that, as you mentioned, they have recognised that social value to try and maintain them? I just wanted to get your opinions on that sort of thing. Thank you.

I don't think there's a—. There is roughly an even split in Wales today around whether services are delivered in-house, or whether they are contracted to a third party, whoever that third party might be. So, I don't think there's a particular direction of travel. We've seen one contract that's going back in-house at the moment, though that has been delayed by a year, I understand, due to financial challenges around bringing that contract back in-house. And I think, as I put in my written evidence paper, a lot of the challenges in this space come around that transition point, in whichever direction that transition is—whether it's going from an in-house model of delivery to a third-party model, or vice versa. So, I don't think there is a default option in Wales at the moment, and I think there are sets of decisions made based on local priority and local need, and that is probably the best way for it to be done. Our interest in this is always in either improving or preserving the existing levels of service.

Okay, Joel, I think we'll have to move on, I'm afraid. We're so tight for time, I'm afraid. Carolyn Thomas.

Thank you. I'd just like to understand a bit further about the rising energy costs and the cost of living. How have they impacted on public leisure facilities, and the impact on footfall and usage? I know you touched on it earlier, but if there's anything else you'd like to add.

As far as we're aware, energy costs in the sector have roughly tripled for some organisations. That’s a really significant impact on the bottom line, and as I said for those single-site operators, often, those who’ve undergone community asset transfer, that’s a real problem, and those are the ones we’re most worried about at the moment. I know you heard evidence from Sport Wales last week, and there’s also some evidence from the Bevan Foundation’s tracker survey, around the impact that this is having on people’s participation levels, and in particular those on lower incomes currently appear to be doing less and less sport, and that is worrying. We don’t want to see participation become the preserve of the middle and upper income brackets here in Wales.

Okay, thank you. Fergus, have you got anything to add?

Just a little bit, Carolyn, if that's okay. The work that we’ve done across the board suggests that the gap in energy bills across all of our partners—and I mentioned just under 500 pools—if we just look at local authority or local government leisure facilities alone, the estimated gap is between £26 million and £32 million. So, that’s the increase compared to this time last year. In fact, I’d go further than Matt and say that energy costs are three to five times, in some cases, what they were before. I’d go a little bit further on that.

So, we think those 10, actually—there is a correlation between the earlier questions—those 10 leisure trusts, the smallish leisure trusts, where they have better connectivity with the community, et cetera, et cetera, they actually are the most fragile, the most vulnerable. Community Leisure UK, our colleagues there estimate that 70 per cent of those leisure trusts face imminent danger over the next six to 12 months. Some of that is really, really close to us. So, between £26 million and £32 million, just to average that off—whatever—£30 million is the gap. We’ve done a bit of work, and it’s not scientific. We did a bit of work, this is literally picking up the phones to development officers, speaking to all of our contacts across our partners, just sense-checking, things like the recent Welsh Government settlement will have helped ease that £30 million somewhat, because the increased settlement across local authorities will be fed into the system, obviously, through local authorities, and will go to leisure facilities, and we think that might satisfy maybe a third of that.

Then there are other—. There are five different energy models, I’ll just add. There are five energy models in terms of people who have hedged and bought energy, and don’t have an issue; people who do have an issue; operators who foot their own bills; operators who don’t foot their own bills, the local authority has that, and it’s netted off against the wider procurement piece. So, there are five different models at play here, but in essence, we think that the recent settlement may have eased some of that, and reserves across the local authorities may have eased other parts of that, but there still could be £10 million, £12 million of a gap that somebody has to fix over the next 12 months—somebody, somewhere.

And if we look at recent announcements from England, the £63 million that has gone into servicing leisure centres and pools and helping support that, which, albeit, is very welcome in England, and if you look at the consequential, they apply a similar Barnett formula, it might equate to £3 million. We’ve got our ear close to the ground, don’t we, Matt, about what’s coming down the track? And that’s for others to decide. But if there was a figure of £3 million put into that, and I’ve just outlined a best-case gap of £10 million or £12 million, you can kind of see—. And the terminology that colleagues of mine used last week was, ‘This is a lifeline, not a life-saver’, which rings very true, actually.

We visited a community asset transfer that had a swimming pool in it—a leisure centre with a swimming pool. And they said that they were unable to access grants to decarbonise because they had to do that through the local authority as well. So, I think, because they don't have that partnership with the local authority, they're not getting the funding to assist with the core running and they're not able to apply for grants either. Is that something that you've come across as well, that you agree with?

It's definitely not something that I agree with, because I think it's a barrier, but there would be reasons why that's there. That's again for other people to debate and decide, but I have heard that several times. If you have one example, I could give you three or four or five examples of where we've heard similar barriers, where pools desperately—. There are some really energetic and clever people out there trying to problem solve with sustainability, with futureability, with different ideas, and we need to help them in every quarter. There's the short-term financial support, but there's also the long-term picture, where, again, I go back to my stat that I gave you earlier, 80 per cent of that estate is 20 years or older. So, this is a sticky plaster. There's an immediate issue with bills and energy, but there's a long-term issue around sustainability, and we have to find a way of making it easy for people.

I think on that point—sorry, Chair—just very, very quickly, unfortunately, it varies dramatically from local authority to local authority. Sometimes, it's very relationship dependant, and we probably need to try and find ways to make it less dependant on that personal relationship and knowledge.

Yes. It should be more systematic, rather than relying on particular individuals in particular positions at particular times, really. Okay. Jayne Bryant.

Diolch, Cadeirydd. Good morning, everyone. You've touched a lot, this morning, on sustainability and the challenges that are faced. Do you think there's a need to legislate to ensure that the provision of leisure services are a statutory requirement in Wales?

We definitely think there's a need to explore the options around that. I think, as I've alluded to in an earlier answer, the well-being of future generations Act has probably helped crystallise the position of delivery of public leisure, but whether it goes far enough and has the appropriate funding attached to it, and those kind of things, is an outstanding question, in our view. I know, last week, when you heard evidence, there were significant questions around what a statutory responsibility could look like, but I think it's an area that hasn't been fully explored. We certainly probably haven't done all the work needed, but it's definitely something that we think needs to be looked at, as we move forward.

Yes. Briefly, I would agree with that. I think that the framework is there for all of us to get behind, I think, to legislate. Do we need to legislate? I think that would be a pretty strong response. I wouldn't say no to that, because obviously it would be in all of our interests in terms of what I do for a living and getting as many people aquatically active across Wales as possible. But I think the framework is there across the well-being of future generations Act. I talked earlier about the will. I think there's a very strong will across Wales, across all of our partners to do this. They know it's the right thing. I'd like to think that the will and the overall strategy and ambition for Wales would override any need to legislate. But, clearly, if that's not happening, then, we run out of alternatives.

Thank you. Diolch, Cadeirydd.

Diolch.

Okay. Sam, do you want to briefly come in?

If I've got time, Chair.

Yes.

That's very kind of you. Thank you very much. I just want to touch on obviously, the existing policy is in place by Government to try to support people engaging with activities. And I mentioned earlier the twenty-first-century schools programme or policy, a framework they have there to see those assets being improved. If I remember, right towards the start of the session, I think, Matthew, you mentioned the national exercise referral scheme as well. I just want to touch on some of those policies and how, as leisure-type organisations and services, you're able to effect change in those policy areas, not just the ones I've mentioned, but more broadly in terms of the types of things that Welsh Government are trying to achieve. How can you directly or indirectly support those policy objectives by Welsh Government? If you could touch on that at all.

I know these are big questions, but I'm afraid we've only got a few minutes left, I'm sorry. [Laughter.]

I will absolutely happily default to my policy colleague here.

I was just trying to think of a way to respond to that question succinctly. Sport and leisure services, I think, as we've talked about, support a wide range of Welsh Government policy outcomes—school swimming, for example, in delivering life skills. You touched on national exercise referral. I think one of the challenges we have, in our view, is that sport's place around some of the decision-making tables isn't clear. So, for example, in the public services boards, there isn't necessarily always a place for sport, and that may change now that Sport Wales is beginning to roll out the regional partnership model. I think that's one of the key areas of alignment that could happen. Sport's role and voice in, for example, the national exercise referral system has been tricky, and the level of subsidy that is provided to the national exercise referral system has been unchanged for the better part of a decade now. That's made me delivery of it increasingly challenging. I think all of that comes back to how sport doesn't always have access to the decision makers in the right places, in education policy, in health policy, et cetera, et cetera. Does that answer your questions?

Yes, I think it does. Perhaps, Chair, just briefly to expand that a little bit, I suppose the question is, from us as a committee, in terms of our inquiry into these services in our councils, if these services didn't exist, either in the way they do today, or to a lesser extent than they do today, how would that impact on Welsh Government's ability to deliver on policy? And I guess you would say that it would detrimentally impact, it would be more difficult for Welsh Government to deliver on a policy they'd want to see succeed because these services aren't available in local authorities.

I think, for our membership, the membership of the WSA, for those bodies in our membership who are funded via the Welsh Government, or via the UK Government, indeed, most often via Sport Wales, they are funded to deliver sports participation, visibility on the world stage—all of those things. So, the most direct policy impact, in our view, if public leisure didn't exist, is that delivering against all of that remit would be far more challenging. It would be very challenging for Sport Wales to deliver on its remit letter if public leisure wasn't sitting there, providing this backbone of infrastructure. So, I guess that is the most immediate answer to that.

Great, thank you. Cheers, Chair.

Thank you very much, and thank you to both our witnesses. You will be sent a transcript to check for factual accuracy. Diolch yn fawr. Okay, a quick break for five minutes, and we'll be back at 11:35. Diolch yn fawr.

Welcome back, everyone, to our fourth evidence session on the committee's work on local authority library and leisure services. I'm very pleased to welcome Dominic MacAskill, Unison Cymru Wales regional secretary. Welcome, Dominic, and thank you for coming in to give evidence today. Perhaps I might start with some fairly general questions. Firstly, could you tell committee what you consider to be the key benefits and value of leisure and library services to communities, the impact on those communities, and, indeed, the local workforce, when services are withdrawn?

Okay, thanks for inviting us to give oral evidence. Obviously, this is supplementing the written submission that we've made, and I think the first thing to say is that Unison's position with regard to local government services generally, but library and leisure services quite specifically, is that these are our services for creating healthy and more equal communities. So, in effect, local government services are our health service and our NHS predominantly is our sickness service. In terms of library provision, and in relation to the pandemic and the cost-of-living crisis, they've really come into their own in terms of providing spaces for people who don't have the capacity in their own homes for study or for the equipment in terms of technology and Wi-Fi access, so it provides an equal platform for communities to access those services. And library services provide services for all ages from reading groups for young children right up into support for people looking to apply for jobs, with CV preparation. It provides study, it provides a warm place, and this is all of the things that are above and beyond just looking to see whether you've got reading materials that are going to interest you, but, obviously, access to books that you don't have to pay for. So, it provides that equal platform for communities.

In terms of leisure services, we have all sorts of campaigns to combat obesity and other chronic health problems that are preventable through people having more healthy lifestyles, and in order to have more healthy lifestyles, you need to have good access to affordable leisure services, whether that be your local swimming pool, which obviously has the added benefit of reducing the risk of fatalities when there are accidents close to water. So, you can see all of the potential benefits of these services.

In terms of the workforce, when you have these provided historically by councils, then the workforce is paid reasonably, consistently, with access to reasonable terms and conditions and pensions, and so you have a well-motivated, well-trained group of staff with proper professional and career progression, which allows for greater retention of expertise.

The problem we have is—and I'm sure in subsequent questions we'll get onto that—is the tendency to respond to monetary pressures by looking to outsource these services, predominantly to save money, not to improve the quality of or access to those services.

Okay, Dominic. So perhaps we could go on from your answer to ask you to outline the key challenges that local authorities face at the moment in maintaining and investing in that community leisure and library provision in Wales. What would you see as the key challenges to local authorities?

I'll make some general points about the overall challenges to public services generally, but local government services specifically, and that is the continued, albeit reduced, policy of austerity that we've been living under since 2010, which has put an immense strain on local government budgets. Obviously, it's coming through from Welsh Government, but Welsh Government's funding has been restricted, and, in terms of the amount of money—I think it's in our report—that Welsh Government would have had if it had just kept pace with inflation is in the billions. And that could have been translated into support for public services and, in particular, library and leisure services, which we are talking about today. So, there are immense constraints on budgets for councils. And the response, unfortunately—. In the short time we had in preparing our submission, we did a survey of councils, which is included in the paperwork, which shows that the response of a significant number of councils has been to outsource part or whole parts of their libraries or leisure services in various models—a whole fragmented approach to the provision of the service, but driven mainly by budgetary considerations. So, those are the challenges.

Responding to the provision of these services in such a disjointed way does have consequences, particularly for the staff that are employed in providing these services. And the main problem that we encounter is that, in order for budgetary savings, it's mainly savings on staff costs. So, we see outsource services looking at moving away, as soon as they're able to, from Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) protection so that you end up creating a two-tier, away from local government workforce, which is lower paid, moving away from the local government pension scheme, because of the costs associated with that.

There are some—and I'm sure we'll get into some more specific questions—systemic problems as well, which councils look to benefit from in their outsourcing, and those are around business rates. So, community mutuals can be given up to 100 per cent relief on business rates, whereas directly provided council services are not able to do that. Because of the way that business rates are collected, i.e. pooled by Welsh Government and then paid out to councils on a formula basis, there is no direct consequence for councils in making those decisions. So, there is a budgetary advantage for outsourcing services—leisure and library services—which is not, in terms of an all-Wales approach, sustainable, and actually reduces the finances and is an unequal playing field. I think that's a key issue, which, if this committee can have any influence, would be one to address.

I think I'll end there and wait for more specific questions.

Yes, that's great. As you say, we will come on to these matters in more depth, Dominic. So, Mabon ap Gwynfor. Mabon.

Thank you very much. I will contribute in Welsh. Following on from the point that you've just made, there are a number of delivery models here in Wales for these services: there are independent companies that have been established, which are community co-operatives; some local authorities have established arm's-length companies; some have bought services in from other companies; and some have retained those services internally. So, in your view, what are the advantages, if there are advantages, of outsourcing these services but in having a co-operative or an arm's-length company running these services for the local authority? Are there any advantages to that in terms of the provision and the survival of services, or in budgetary terms, perhaps?

Yes, from our perspective, in terms of quality and sustainability of services, going forward, there is no advantage to outsourcing in any form or model. In terms of the staff experience, our survey has demonstrated that there are no benefits to staff; in fact, quite the opposite. There are lots of detrimental experiences of staff in terms of leisure services, but also library services as well. There's a greater reliance on zero-hours contracts, or under-hours contracts, and by 'under-hours contracts' I mean that you would expect somebody to be working 20 hours but you give them a 10-hour contract, and so you have the ultimate flexibility of the workforce, and moving away from the National Joint Council—that's the national local government terms and conditions and pay. And so we've got examples, and I think we mentioned one in Blaenau Gwent, where they refused to pay the agreed annual pay uplift one year for staff employed in the outsourced services in Blaenau Gwent. We have attempts to move away from the local government pension scheme. And because these are outsourced, then the council basically says it's nothing to do with them.

The thing about outsourcing services is that you don't outsource the responsibility to provide those services, but you lose control in providing those services. I think the pandemic and the holistic approach of public services in adapting and changing services to respond for the benefit of their communities—. You're less able to have the ability to do that with outsourced services, because they're subject to tendered terms, which are fairly rigid and inflexible. And if you wish to change and amend them, then that comes at additional cost. So, we believe that council services should be married together holistically, they should be under democratic control, and should not be outsourced as silos, because that reduces their effectiveness and ability.

Now, there are some budgetary benefits, and I mentioned the one, which I think, in all-Wales terms, is an illusionary benefit, but that's the business rate relief. So, if you're going to be able to give 100 per cent business rate relief to a library service or a leisure service that's outsourced, you should also be able to give 100 per cent business rate relief if you retain it in-house. It shouldn't be an unlevel playing field, which distorts the economics of the situation. It can't be right that you cede democratic control and the ability to adapt a service just because there is a model that provides some financial benefit from doing that without any benefit to the service that is being provided or to the workforce that is providing that service.

Thank you. In the evidence that we've have heard this morning and previously, some of the providers, these arm's-length companies, say that they feel that they are better placed, they can respond more flexibly to needs, whereas, under a local authority system, there might be an idea for a new provision, which would have to go through an accountability chain, and it would get to some head of department and then come back down to the service level, and there could be a process lasting months before its implemented, where these companies say that they can be far more flexible and, if there is a new idea, they can implement it very quickly, or overnight, almost. How would you respond to that? Do you think that is a benefit and a merit of these arm's-length companies as opposed to internal provision?

Well, certainly there is a track record of alternative providers implementing changes very quickly without any consultation with either the local authority or with the staff that provide those services. In fact, that's one of the criticisms that we put in our report, that the social partnership model that we benefit from in public services is not always translated or taken on board by the outsourced providers.

There probably is a built-in ability to be able to do things quicker, but that doesn't necessarily make it better. Again, in our report, the main driver to changes that are implemented by outsourced bodies is our financial drivers, which rebalance the services to increase the income, rather than for the social need and the health and well-being of the community across the board that they're providing for. And I think there is no—. This is not to say that in a number of areas councils couldn't do exceedingly a lot better in terms of engaging with their communities and with their workforce on providing improved access and improved quality and variety of the services that they provide within their library and leisure facilities. But I don't think there's any substitute for having accountability for those services, which is democratically accountable through the local councillors, which, as soon as you outsource these facilities, you lose that direct accountability. An ordinary citizen would not know who to contact within an outsourced provision, whether it's a community mutual or a private company, but they know who their councillor is.

[Inaudible.]

Dominic, just before I bring in other committee members, could you give us some idea of the extent of union membership of local authority employees delivering these services compared to the other models?

At the point of these new models being established, then the union density is probably on a par with the centrally paid staff, and the union density within councils is very high; it's probably around 70 per cent. So, at the commencement of a new service, then you'd expect that to be of a similar proportion. Over time, and this is—. Again, some of this is reflected in our report—over time, the relationship between the partnership arrangements that are for existing public services and local government in particular get eroded by some of these outsourced bodies, and so they create barriers to trade union organisation through restricting facility time, not engaging with the recognised unions in consultation, and this goes back to the point about making quick decisions without fully consulting staff, and sometimes on important areas—. We've got Celtic Leisure, a recent example, where they gave a 45-day notice for, basically, a fire and rehire without going through the appropriate consultations. So, that does create problems in retaining trade union organisations in those areas. Having said that, in the Celtic Leisure model, it actually worked the opposite way. We actually had a higher density, in the end, in Celtic Leisure, because of the negative experience of workers—

Oh, really? Oh right, yes. So, it can work—.

—and it led to a community campaign, led by the trade unions—

So, it can work both ways.

—which led to changes to the position and agreeing to insource that service.

Okay. Joel James. Joel.

Thank you, Chair, and thanks ever so much for coming in this afternoon. I just want to touch upon the social value of these facilities. I know we've heard from previous evidence sessions about that there's sort of a mixture of concerns of local authorities. One side says that they don't necessarily put as much emphasis on the social value of leisure centres or libraries, but, then, on the other side, we hear that, well, actually, they do. And I just wanted to get your opinion on that, really—whether or not it's your experience that local authorities do put that, or do take into account the social value when they're making these decisions.

I think the position is varied across Wales. I think there is a general understanding that library and leisure services do create a very useful social advantage—which I mentioned in my first contribution—about equalising and creating healthier and more equal communities. But the financial strains that councils have been placed under, over the last 10 to 15 years, has led to decisions based on budgetary need rather than social need. And so they're trying to balance maintaining these socially beneficial services whilst also cutting budgets. So, what you end up with is some councils not necessarily closing a library, but reducing the hours of opening of the library, substituting professional staff with volunteers, which retains the service, but, actually, reduces the social value of that service. And so I think there needs to be a conversation and a clear position taken on the value of local government services generally in terms of creating more equal and healthy communities, but, in particular, the library and leisure services, so we get a consensus on that.

So, at the moment, we have some statutory requirements of the vision of library services, which could mean quite extensive provision in one authority, but another interpretation could be that you could have just one library in a local authority and you're still fulfilling that statutory obligation. So, I think there needs to be a conversation around the consistency of that. And in terms of budgetary considerations at a Welsh Government level, but also at a Westminster level, the balance between a reactive service—which, unfortunately, our NHS is predominantly a reactive service—and a proactive service, which is mainly the local authority services, which create or improve people's health, which, hopefully, reduces their need to, actually, later on in life, or during their life, access the NHS service. So, it's a very complex position, but I think there is a mixed picture out there.

So, with regard to that, then—and taking on board Mabon's comments about the different models that are out there—do you think, then, that a move from a local authority-provided service to, say, a social enterprise, or an anchoring community hub type of thing, does that lower its social value, do you think? Do you think it has a higher social value being within the local authority?

And my second question, then, is: again, with your experience, do you see that there seems to be a drive from local authorities to move their provision on to these alternative models? You mentioned there about budgetary decisions. Do you see them then thinking, 'Well, this is a way that I can clear some money or offset the budget and all that, by setting up these social enterprises'?

And Dominic, I know these are difficult questions, but we have little time left, I'm afraid, so succinct answers would be appreciated.

Okay. I'll try and cover that quickly. I believe, when you're outsourcing to whatever model that we're talking about, the imperative for that outsourced body is to work within the budgetary constraints or the contractual constraints that have been established when the tendering process went ahead. And what we've seen from experience is that tends to affect our members', the staff that provide the services, pay and terms and conditions, which actually creates problems of retention. So, the quality of the staff providing the services, whether it's having a qualified librarian in a library, or whether you're having people who are well able to motivate a diverse community in a leisure centre to access those leisure services—those sorts of professionals are eroded. So, therefore, the social benefit, potentially, declines.

The drive to alternative models, I believe, is mainly financially driven. There is a tendency now for councils to see that they have outsourced responsibility, they've lost control, but they haven't transferred any of the risks associated with moving those services out of house. So, there is a tendency now in Wales, but also across the border in England, to move some of these services back in-house, so you actually have got that control, you can model your services holistically to link in with other services that the council provides, and I believe that is the way of retaining and enhancing social value.

Okay. Thanks, Dominic. Thanks, Joel. Carolyn Thomas.

Well, my questions are on increasing costs and exit strategies, and I think you've covered quite a lot of those already, really. I'm just looking at the implications of the high energy costs and the cost of living on people attending leisure services, and then also at the operational challenges and financial risks for local authorities where alternative delivery models have been set up and failed, which you've touched on already. Is there anything else you'd like to add?

I think I would hope that councils will learn the lessons from the experiences across councils in Wales and share those experiences. I'm sure some of that does go on. Because I think a lot of the assumed benefits for outsourcing services are very rarely realised, and, if they are realised, they're realised at a cost, usually to our members and the people who provide those services, which means that those benefits are not sustainably able to be delivered into the future for reasons around retention and career development, which I've touched on.

Okay—

In terms of the exit strategy, what we'd encourage councils to do is, before they do move towards outsourcing any services, that they consider comparing it with an in-house option, and do a proper options appraisal. Neath Port Talbot didn't originally do that when they were looking to retender the contract for Celtic Leisure. We commissioned APSE, the Association for Public Service Excellence, and the report is available—it's a link in the submission that we've made—which basically demonstrated that the benefits that they thought—the social benefits and the financial benefits they thought—they would gain from outsourcing were actually not realisable, and so there's a good critique in that report from APSE, which I'd commend you to read.

Okay, thanks, Dominic. Thanks, Carolyn. Jayne Bryant.

Diolch, Cadeirydd. Thank you very much for your evidence so far. It's just around statutory frameworks and how you feel the extent of the Public Libraries and Museums Act 1964 provides the required statutory protection for public libraries in Wales. Do you think it's still fit for purpose?

I touched on this earlier, that I think that it's—. Well, in practice, it's clearly open to interpretation, and within that interpretation you have very varied quality of provision and a very varied amount of provision to service communities. And so, the most stark assessment, which Unison has made, is that you could actually fulfil your statutory obligations by just having one library providing services in your council. It's an extreme case, which we don't yet experience in Wales, but we believe that it's so vague that that is the potential. So, I think—and this is what I touched on—there needs to be much more conversation to create a much more consistent appreciation of and a consistency of approach to the delivery of services that have a clear role in creating more equal and healthy societies. So, I think it's something that it would be useful to relook at, yes.

Jayne.

Thank you, Chair. Just following on from that and the points that you've already made around that need for legislation to safeguard library provision, and if you think that should extend to leisure services being a statutory requirement in Wales. What do you feel that would achieve?

So, there is a tendency, I think, to go for legislation as a response to a developing crisis. The crisis is mainly driven by a funding crisis. Local councils are accountable to their populations, and their populations want good-quality public services, including and especially library and leisure services. So, there's clearly a demand for these services that, I believe, if councils had sufficient funding, we wouldn't be sitting here discussing these services in the terms that we are discussing them, and then we wouldn't be necessarily looking to see whether we need to legislate to bring councils into order around this.

So, I think it is a bit of a chicken-and-egg situation; I think the lack of funding has meant that we've got a disparagement and a completely varied provision in terms of quality and quantity. So, essentially, it's, 'How can we get consistency clearly?' Well, I think we get consistency by improving funding to local government. But I think there is a role for clarification and tightening up on legislation. But I'm not one who supports over-prescriptiveness for councils, because I believe councils are responsible to their communities, and within a framework, they work well if properly and adequately funded.

Okay.

Diolch, Cadeirydd.

Thanks, Jayne. Thanks, Dominic. Sam Rowlands.

Thanks, Chair. You've probably answered the questions that I was going to ask, actually, Dominic, in relation to the balance between trying to find those financial savings and ensuring that the fair work and those community-centred outcomes take place. But I'm just interested in some of your comments in the evidence you provided. I think you stated that

'Removing a library or sports centre from local council control and democratic accountability, means people have no say whatsoever about the quality of the service.'

That seems different to some of the evidence we've received so far, where particularly those trusts that have been set up say that they have an even better relationship with their communities and perhaps even better accountability, even to the staff, especially the example of a trust where all the staff were shareholders within that trust, and they feel they have that better, direct link. So, are they wrong in what they say?

I think if you give an opportunity for a provider to pitch for a service, they will be able to provide you with very glossy presentations and lots of claims to win that contract. The evidence that we've picked up on the ground is that where we have people, in a sense, having a stake in those community mutuals or in those social provision bodies, they are minimal. The engagement with the recognised trade unions, where the membership in those bodies would be the majority of the staff, is poor, and often they set up alternative ways of engaging with the staff to bypass the organised, recognised trade unions. So, the evidence of it in practice is not good.

In terms of the engagement with communities, some of them do that well, but no better than services that are provided directly by councils. Having said that, I'm aware that some councils probably don't deliver the quality of services that they could deliver, and better engagement with their communities and with their workforce would enhance that. But the key thing is that the responsibility is on the council. You outsource that to another body and let them get on with it, but the complaints and the issues get raised with the council, and so, you create this third party and a complex matrix that citizens are supposed to negotiate in terms of influencing the services they provide, and I think our experience on the ground is that that doesn't work well.

Okay, Sam?

Yes.

Okay. Dominic, thank you very much. Thank you for coming in to give evidence to committee. You will be sent a transcript to check for factual accuracy. Diolch yn fawr.

Thank you. Thank you, everybody.

Okay, then. Our next item is the one paper we have to note under item 5, which is a letter from Propertymark, in relation to the feasibility of devolution of local housing allowance and broad rental market areas to the Welsh Government. Is committee content to note that paper? Yes. Okay, thank you very much.

Our next item, then, is a motion under Standing Order 17.42 to resolve to exclude the public from the remainder of the meeting. Is committee content to do so? Yes. We will move into private session.