Children, Young People, and Education Committee

Good morning. James Owen. Chief executive of Medr.

Bore da. Giles Cutler. Chief financial officer of Medr.

You're very welcome this morning, and thank you for joining us. Members have a series of questions this morning, and I'd like to start with Cefin, please.

Good morning. Could I ask the first question in Welsh? Could you summarise Medr's main achievements and challenges over the past year in relation to funding and regulating the tertiary education and research sector in Wales?

Yes, of course. Thank you for the question. I think the first thing that I wanted to say was Medr supports around 330,000 learners right across our country, right across the breadth of education and training provision, and I think our No. 1 priority in the first 18 months of our operation was to ensure there was no disruption to their learning. It was absolutely vital, given the value of that learning to those learners, their experiences and the outcomes, that the creation of Medr didn't lead to any disruption to them. And I'm pleased to say that I think we managed that change seamlessly. We managed that in a way that really engaged with both Government in terms of the priorities that Government wanted to achieve over that period of time, but also working very closely with our sector, particularly our provider network, to ensure that there was no disruption. And, of course, that's really important, particularly when you think about our funding powers during this reporting period. In our annual report and accounts, you'll see that our budget over that period was close to £700 million, so making sure that we managed that was our No. 1 priority.

I think, secondly, it was also important that we wanted to set out, working with the sector and Government, a really ambitious vision for what tertiary education could look like in Wales in the future. I think our creation, our establishment, as a new organisation was an opportunity to signal that we were here to effect change and positive change for the people of Wales. We were really pleased in March to publish our first strategic plan, which set out a range of commitments we'd make over our transition years, our first two years, as we got up and running and ensure that we put the foundations in place for a successful organisation, to support our learners across Wales, but also, more than that, to really set an ambitious vision for what Medr could achieve, working with Government and the partners, both now and in the future. I think, for me, the really important part of that was the way that we went about developing our strategic plan. So, whilst it's Medr's plan, I think it's really been shaped by contributions from across the education sector in Wales, particularly learners who are involved in the development of it, and also, of course, the providers who we so rely upon to deliver those excellent opportunities for our learners.

I think, last but not least over the 18 months of our operation, it's been important to say that we've not just been about seamless transition and setting a direction, we've also tried to effect meaningful change. I'm pleased to say that I think we're already delivering for learners in Wales in a way that wasn't simply happening before, whether that's through an expanded junior apprenticeship provision that we've put in place; expanding into new areas of Wales and continuing to increase that; deploying things like our personal learning account scheme to support Tata steel workers with upskilling and reskilling; launching a strategic development fund, which was specifically designed to support collaboration between institutions and provide opportunities for better pathways for learners into education; or developing and consulting on a new regulatory system. We've done a huge amount of work in the first 18 months of our operation to set out not just our ambitions for the future, but also to start making a tangible difference.

Probably last but not least, in all of that it's been really dear to us across the course of our journey to do it in a way underpinned by the principle of cydweithio, working together and collaborating with learners, with the sector and, of course, with Government to make sure we are delivering on their priorities; that has been really important to us. I hope you get a sense from our annual report and accounts of how we've gone about that in a way that brings people together and sets an ambitious plan for what we and the sector can deliver in the future.

If I can just add a further question, you mentioned your regulatory responsibilities. We know that there are a significant number of regulations and commencement Orders as part of the Tertiary Education and Research (Wales) Act 2022, and they have to be completed by March, I believe. Are you on track to fulfil those regulatory commitments in time?

The Government is obviously responsible for taking forward the secondary legislation through the Senedd, and we have regular engagement with the Government on the commencement of the functions in the Act. They are telling us that everything is on track to be delivered in accordance with their legislative timetable. For us, we've been working to make sure, assuming that the secondary legislation is agreed by the Senedd, that we are ready to use those functions and powers, particularly around our new regulatory system. We've been working over the course of the last year to develop, consult and engage on a new regulatory system for Wales, which is based on the provisions of the Act. We have just concluded our second consultation and are looking at those responses now. Of course, subject to the legislation being passed, we will be ready to introduce our new regulatory system in August of this year.

Thank you. We now have some questions from Russell, please.

Bore da. Good morning. Thank you for being with us today. In preparation for today's meeting, I was looking at your website yesterday, and I was particularly looking for some background information. I was attempting to find your board meeting agendas and minutes. I couldn't find them at all, but I did see a note that those board meetings and agendas will be published online. I'm just wondering: was I looking in the wrong place, or have they not been published yet?

Apologies if they're not. I'll have to double-check, but I assume that they are published. If there is a problem with our website, that they haven't been uploaded or something, we will make sure we amend that. They are disclosable and, of course, we will publish the minutes of our meetings. So, apologies if you couldn't find them.

I had quite a good look, and I don't think that they are there.

Yes, okay.

But I noted that you had said that that's what your intention was, so thank you for that. Your strategic plan outlines eight long-term ambitions. Can you tell us how these ambitions will be measured and evaluated?

I always describe page 9 of our strategic plan, which sets out those eight ambitions, as probably the most important page for us, because it's our north star of what we've agreed with Government and the sector that we're working towards. Those ambitions will really make a difference to tertiary education in Wales and the experience and opportunities provided to learners.

In developing them, what we wanted to do was, first, to establish a baseline for where we are across all of the eight ambitions. For example, in terms of participation, what was the position as of Medr coming into being across all the different parts of the sector that we fund and regulate, and then some idea of where we might hope to get to. I think it's really important that we do that in a meaningful way, not just in a pure numbers way, but in a way that is looking at the key barometers of success. For example, we want to reduce the number of people not in education, employment or training as a result of those measures. So, in our strategic plan, we made a commitment to develop baseline measures and indicators across those eight factors. Over the medium to long term, those would be the things that we would expect to be judged upon, actually, in terms of how successful we are.

I think, just to say, of course, we're not responsible for all of the things that contribute to the delivery of those measures as well. So, for example, the problem of NEETS and people not in education isn't just something that Medr can solve on its own, but what we want to do is identify the levers we can pull to reduce the number of NEETS, for example, as a measure.

Thank you. And have all the activities in your operational plan, which had a completion date of December 2025, have they all been delivered on time?

Yes, we're on track. So, I think there are 124 commitments in the operational plan, from memory. There are two that we have deliberately decided, actually, that we are going to delay some work around, but they come into the next reporting year. So, the commitments we made in the first eight months of our operational plan have been delivered or the ones that are ongoing, of course, continue. Of the really big pieces of work that we've worked on, the development of a new regulatory system has been a key priority across the organisation, as well as the development of a new apprenticeship programme. So, yes, I'm pleased to report that we're on track to deliver on the commitments in the operational plan and, of course, next year we'll be publishing a detailed update on how we've gone about doing it.

Sure. So, all the commitments with a December 2025 date, you're satisfied have been completed.

Yes.

Yes. And then, the other ones that I think are early in this year, they're on track to be completed.

They are.

Apart from two, you said.

Yes. There are two that we're working on, and one of which, it's just not going to be possible to consult during the pre-election period. So, we're going to have to push a little bit to the right in terms of our ability to consult and engage on some proposals.

Sure. What was the other one? There were two, you said.

Yes, sorry. One is around developing a set of funding principles for the sector, and whilst we will do some engagement around those funding principles, we won't be able to consult on them until after the Senedd elections. I think that's the right time to do it, obviously working with the new Government about what their priorities will be as well. So, we've moved that, I think, in the context of the pre-election period.

The second one is around the development of our national plan for the Welsh language. We are working very closely with a wide range of stakeholders to prepare that plan. But in the context of the Welsh Language and Education (Wales) Act 2025, I think what we're looking to do now is consult on it this year, so consult on it over the autumn period, but actually it won't be delivered and ready until 2027. Again, I think that's probably the right approach. I think we were probably a little ambitious in what we were hoping to achieve without looking at perhaps the dependencies we had on the Welsh-medium education Act.

Okay. Thank you. I know you previously told the committee that you'd publish a measure evaluation framework, which will sit alongside the operational plan. I wonder if you could update us on that.

Yes. So, that's what our stats analysis team are working on at the moment. We want to do that against those baseline indicators that I think we've said in one of the commitments of the plan, so that we can be assessed not just on the kind of outputs, if you like, have we delivered against that specific thing, consulting or engaging on a particular product, but also on those kind of long-term benchmarks. So, we're making good progress on that. We'd hope again to be able to report on that after our second year of operation, if that makes sense. So, for our next annual reporting process.

And when would that be in place, then?

It will be in place by the autumn, so that we can report on it as part of our annual report next year.

Yes. Okay, thank you. Thanks, Chair.

Thank you. We now have some questions from Natasha, please.

Good morning, both. For the benefit of the committee, how would you describe your working relationship with Welsh Government?

Very constructive. In an arm's-length body, we've got a role to play to advocate and understand the pressures facing the sector at the moment, and the challenges and opportunities that they face, and then we've got a role to play in translating that, I think, at a sector level to Government. We have a really constructive and close working relationship with the sector, which we can then translate into arrangements for working with Government, particularly through regular accountability meetings with a variety of Welsh Government Ministers, and also then a close working relationship with Welsh Government officials. So, I'd describe it as very constructive.

That's good to hear. Have there been any challenges that you've faced whilst having to work between different portfolios and different Government Ministers, I should say?

I don't think particular challenges, but I think it's really important for us to understand that we don't just work into the education portfolio. Whilst the majority of our funding comes from education, some of the things that we do, particularly around the economy portfolio, research and innovation, they have a really broad reach out there in terms of what our sector is delivering. So, I think making sure we've got not just great relationships with officials and the Minister for Further and Higher Education, it's been important to work in different ways across the portfolio, so particularly, for example, with the Minister for Culture, Skills and Social Partnership, Jack Sargeant, and the funding and the support for apprenticeships that we deliver on behalf of Government.

Okay. Great. What's Medr's experience of operating under a phased approach of transferring powers within the Tertiary Education and Research (Wales) Act 2022? Do you feel that this approach has helped operations so far?

Yes, the transfer of powers has worked for us, I think, in terms of, as I've set out, it's given us the levers that we needed to put in place those foundations of the first 18 months of our operation, particularly around funding. I also think, if all of the powers had been commenced on our establishment, we wouldn't have been ready to exercise the full range of duties, if that makes sense. So, I think the phasing of the legislation over a period of time has not been unhelpful in that sense, in terms of establishing the organisation and putting the foundations in place. I think, as we're getting to the stage of 18 months—. We're still relatively new, but, getting to the stage of 18 months, we're almost a little impatient now to get on with it. So, our real challenge now is looking ahead, not backwards at the changes that we've been through. And, of course, we need the powers of the Act to be commenced in order for us to do that.

You mentioned the election to my colleague, Russell George, in one of your answers to him. So, obviously, an election is indeed upon us in May 2026. So, what plans are you, as Medr, going to be putting into place to ensure that there's a smooth transition to be able to work with the new Government, whoever that may be at the time?

Yes, so, a couple of things, I'd suggest. We've already got our strategic plan and our operational plan, which is published and out there. I think preparing to ensure that Medr, as an organisation, is responsive and agile to the priorities of a new Government is going to be important. We're already thinking about what that might look like when, of course, parties publish their manifestos, and we'll do some work to prepare data analysis and support for the incoming Government. And, of course, then, crucial for us over that period of time will be to establish, I think, hopefully, a very constructive relationship with that Government, and we want to be seen as that key delivery partner. We can really support the delivery of Government priorities through the investment of our funding and through the use of our regulatory powers.

I think probably the last thing to say there for us is to make sure that the organisation is ready as well; so, internally, that we can pivot to new priorities and that we can ensure that we have the resources in place to support the new Government over that transition period and then during the term of its government.

Okay. Have you got any contingency plans in place if, indeed, a new Government comes into place and the money that's been ring-fenced for Medr at the moment doesn't actually fit in or doesn't manage to cover all of the priorities that you have in future? How are you going to manage that?

I think we'd have to—. Obviously, we'd want to talk to the sector about the particular implications of that. And the way that we're funded at the moment—I think I said when I came to give evidence in November—I think we would be looking to evolve the relationship with Government about that funding and the way that we're funded for very specific lines of activity, for example. So, of course, it would depend on the new Government and its determination about whether it was looking at reducing certain lines of government or the overall envelope. But I think key for us would be working with the sector to understand the implications and then for us to kind of replay those back to Government in terms of the issues that would create.

I, of course, wrote to this committee just before Christmas, I think it was—no, just after Christmas, sorry—around the challenges of further education participation as an example of that, and we are expecting more students to enrol into FE next year, which wouldn't be fully funded under the current draft budget. So, our role, I think, there is to work with the sector to understand the implications of that. So, I think that's just one example of how we would deal with any pressures or funding challenges that came our way after the election.

Great. Thank you so much.

Thank you. We now have some questions from Carolyn Thomas, please.

The committee has heard about ongoing competition between sixth forms and further education colleges, despite legislation to promote collaboration being in place, and Welsh Government have said that there's no room for competition. So, what actions are Medr taking to address this, and how will any interventions, such as proposed incentivisation for collaboration, be measured and reported?

I think it's a really important question, that, because I think the whole ethos of Medr and the creation of a body responsible across the breadth of tertiary education is around collaboration and how we can ensure that learners have access to the right opportunity and experience, whatever their pathway may be. And in that context, we also really welcome the committee's report into pathways. I think it's really important that that collaborative, coherent system operates in support of our learners.

So, I think two particular things that Medr has done and is doing. First of all, I mentioned our strategic development fund that we launched earlier this year, and that was designed for two purposes, really. It was designed to promote and incentivise providers in Wales to collaborate to make a difference to those pathways. So, a relatively small amount of money in the scheme of our overall budget, £4.75 million, where we're looking for providers to work together to deliver specific interventions on a local, regional, or national level, which will incentivise collaboration, whether that's in our university sector, or whether that's across local authority-maintained sixth forms and colleges. What we wanted to do was to ask them to come up with some ideas about how we could incentivise collaboration. Two reasons for that, really: one because (a) it's a good thing, because we think that collaboration will make a difference to the coherence of the offer for learners, but, secondly, really, to test what works in areas of Wales that then may be scalable more broadly across Wales.

I think the second thing I'd point to is our funding. So, the way that we're funded at the moment and the methodologies that underpin the support we give to different parts of the sector are inherited. I think, as I said before Christmas in scrutiny, we want to work through the implications of that inherited funding system and funding different parts of the sector in the way that we currently are. We can take a cross-sector approach to that to drive collaboration in the way that we fund. I think that's going to be vitally important as we drive forward changes to our funding system, informed, if you like, by the work that we're doing around this strategic development fund.

So, are you looking to have a pupil-centred approach for pathways, so it's pupil based? Because we've been hearing—. Like you say, it's about funding, isn't it? So, schools fight for pupils to stay on at sixth form, and it's helped fund the rest of the school being sustainable, basically. So, that's been a huge issue. So, it's not been, basically, about pupils, but about sustaining the school.

Yes, absolutely, I think we want to make sure that our funding system does not incentivise competition. There are elements of our funding system at the moment that may be doing that, the inherited methodologies that we have. So, in reviewing those principles and looking at a tertiary approach, we want to remove that. And we want to look at opportunities for, as I say, promoting and incentivising collaboration through the funding levers we have.

Okay. So, with participation rates in sixth form falling, and growing for FE colleges, as you have just said, how is Medr going to balance the approach to encourage participation in both sectors? Do you think this trend creates challenges for applying a unified tertiary education strategy? If so, how are these being addressed? So, that pathway: school and sixth form into tertiary, if they go to FE—.

Yes, I think, again, it comes back maybe to some of the recommendations of this committee in the pathways report, ensuring that we can help every learner find their path by putting in place a coherent offer to them that is understandable and that they can navigate to find their—. You know, what they want to do at the age of 16 is really important. Of course, I mentioned earlier that expanding the junior apprenticeship programme, I think, is a really valuable route into that.

I think, for us, what we want to do—. The way that colleges and sixth forms are funded at the moment is the same methodology, essentially. But, where it is inadvertently incentivising competition perhaps at the moment, I think we want to look at how we would change that funding methodology to incentivise collaboration, because we know, with the demographic challenge that we've got around young people coming into the education system in the future, we need to look at a different delivery model for what that's going to look like over the next decade. So, making sure that our funding model supports that at age 16 and maybe even a bit before through things like junior apprenticeships and vocational qualifications, but also beyond into lifelong learning elements, is going to have to evolve and change.

So, we are really keen to look at that on a place-based approach, because what a solution might look like in Cardiff almost certainly won't be the right solution in other parts of Wales, for example. So, we want to take a place-based approach to that, but really understand what we can do to incentivise that collaboration, and help every learner find their path.

Do you work with regional skills partnerships—

Yes, we do.

—and the city growth regions that have been set up to see what skills are in the area—are needed, sorry—for those jobs?

Yes, we do. We have regular engagement with the regional skills partnerships and also, increasingly, with the CJCs, the corporate joint committees, to think about skills and the economic need. I think, again, going back to one of the challenges that we have, we are set up to respond to the skills priorities that are driven, I think, both by the public service workforce need, but also by economic development needs. I think one thing that would be really helpful for us in the next period would be to have a really clear steer, essentially, from Government about where it wants us to focus our attention, because then we can use the levers at our disposal, funding and working with providers, to ensure that we have the right provision in place in different parts of Wales to support that.

And—I'm sorry—I'm glad you mentioned the public service need, because public services are one of the biggest employers still in Wales. So, we very often discuss shortages in health and the foundational economy and often it gets overlooked.

Yes, and, absolutely, I think it's really important we're thinking about both of those, both the economic development need and the business skills need, but also the public service workforce need of the future. Things like the provision that is offered at higher education institutions is really important for that, so the Minister asked us last year to undertake a piece of mapping work about what that provision looks like across Wales, because that's really important to things like our education workforce in the future. So, I'm pleased to say we'll be reporting on that to the Minister imminently, and we'll be publishing that as part of the Minister's call for submissions in the next couple of months.

Okay, thank you. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you. Now back to Cefin, please.

Yes, diolch. Welsh Government have said that they don't want waiting lists for further education, because this might disengage learners from their education. But, in your letter to the committee, you said that five colleges across Wales are reporting waiting lists—Coleg Cambria, I think, with about 60 unplaced learners. So, can you tell us what impact could this have on the wider aim of encouraging post-16 participation?

Yes. So, at the start of the last academic year—or this academic year, sorry—five colleges were reporting the potential for waiting lists, but I'm pleased to say we were able to work with them, with the additional £21 million that we had around participation, to remove those pressures from the system. And there were some very tactical things we could do, working with some institutions around additional, for example, capacity—so, just physical buildings. For example, we could work with them to ensure they had capacity to accommodate all the learners that wanted to come to them.

Coleg Cambria we continue to work with very closely on their waiting lists. We want to ensure that those learners have opportunities made available to them, but we do recognise that there is some finite capacity in all colleges.

I think, as I flagged in my letter, our real concern now turns to next year and, with the enrolment figures that are being predicted, what that might mean in terms of waiting lists, particularly as we won't have that £21 million available to support participation in colleges. So, we've already started discussion with colleges about the kinds of options that may be available for us to look at, in terms of ensuring that we minimise and, hopefully, don't have any waiting lists for the next academic year, in anticipation of that increased number of learners.

Just on the back of that, there's been an increase in participation this year in FE, which is obviously good news—about 45,000 more people coming into the sector than planned. So, obviously that means that the sector's been delivering around £15 million to £20 million of unfunded delivery. Can you just explain how you've managed to support them, and have you supported them well enough?

Yes, so, we anticipated it, I think is the first thing to say. So, we anticipated that there was going to be a greater number of learners coming into the system for this academic year, and we were very pleased, therefore, with the £21 million that we received from Government to support that. We were also able to make a very clear commitment, in advance of that anticipated growth, to say that we would underwrite at least 5 per cent of that growth through our funding model to the institutions, so that they could plan that they would have the funding in place to support them.

And then, as I say, as we got those individual institutions, colleges, coming back to us with their waiting lists, we were able to work with them to understand what those challenges were and to give them the certainty they would want—with the exception, obviously, of Coleg Cambria and those 60 learners that I highlighted. So, I think, yes, we were anticipating it and we were able to use the funding at our disposal to do that.

I think the important thing, just to reinforce to the committee, is that that additional funding isn't currently there in the Welsh Government's draft budget proposals, and if those enrolment figures that we're anticipating for next year, therefore, come through, we're going to have to do something different and we're going to have to work with colleges to understand how they manage that pressure within the funding envelope that we all have to operate within.

Yes.

Sorry, Cefin, can I bring Vaughan in here, please?

There are two points I want to follow up. It's partly about funding, but also about, obviously, from a board point of view, that you've got legal duties about making provision for learners in further education, so I'm interested in how the waiting list challenge matches against the duty you've got as a board to make sure that that provision is available.

The second point comes back to the money, because, as you pointed out, in the draft budget, following the agreement that's been reached, there is some money available, but it doesn't match the pressures that you indicate in your letter to the committee.

So, if we already have a situation where, next year, you're anticipating waiting lists, but also next year not anticipating being able to fund those in the same way, does that mean that the waiting lists are going to continue, or not be resolved? And if that's the case, or, if you want those learners to come in, how, then, do colleges fund that? Because part of my concern will be that, if colleges don't have a standstill budget, then they'll have to make choices about provision and about staff numbers. In the conversations you're having with colleges, how far have you got and when will this committee hear when those colleges are going to have to start making choices? Because this does come from a conversation about the budget, your own duties, what you can do, but this directly affects learners and staff who are already in further education, and people who expect to be able to start further education in the next academic year.

That's a really important one for us to, as I've said, anticipate and start planning for. Obviously, with the Welsh Government's budget due to be published next week and then the Senedd's consideration of that, I think, towards the end of the month, that really will be the—we've already started the engagement—key for our own internal planning about what contingency measures we put in place.

Of course, we've got that, as you said, high statutory bar about ensuring that there is proper provision available to 16 to 19-year-olds, not just in FE, but across the full range of provision that we fund. And we'll have to consider our legal responsibilities in that respect, against, of course, the other funding that we provide to the tertiary education sector in Wales.

For example, I mentioned our strategic development fund a moment ago—£4.75 million, which we've invested to support collaboration. That's the kind of fund we're going to have to really consider hard about whether we could run that again next year in the context of the pressures facing colleges and the participation challenge to avoid that waiting list position.

I think it's also really important that we work with the colleges to identify a solution that works for them as well. So, understanding the level of autonomy that they may find beneficial to operate under through our funding mechanisms, as opposed to any direction that either we or the Government would like to place on how that funding is used, is going to be important.

I think it would be remiss of me to say that we've got a solution to that right now, but what I can assure the committee is that we're already working with the colleges to understand that pressure. Obviously, we've recognised that pressure and informed the Government about it in terms of their final budget considerations. And should we still have that identified, that funding gap, once the budget is approved, then we'll have to ramp up our work in terms of determining how we allocate the £1 billion of investment in the sector against that statutory provision that you talked about.

Your letter talked about a potential excess of 3,000 learners. So, it's not a small number.

It's over £30 million, yes.

What does that mean in terms of timescale and planning? Because there's a financial year, and then there's an academic year. At what point would colleges need to set out their proposals and what would that mean for learners and for staff? Are we talking about people having to issue notices in April if they need to make changes to provision for September? I'm trying to understand what that means for learners now.

From our perspective, once we have the final budget from Government approved by the Senedd, we have a board meeting on 19 March, where we will be finalising our allocations to institutions, and we will then inform them of those allocations. So, between now and 19 March, essentially, we'll be working with colleges to understand the options available, to inform the board discussion—our board's discussion—on the allocation of that funding. And then, after that meeting on 19 March, when we've considered our statutory duties around provision, considered the budget that we have available and the options available, I guess, in terms of redeployment to support that anticipated provision, we will communicate that after that.

I know Carolyn Thomas wants to come in.

I want to ask about Coleg Cambria. You might not have the details, but if you could write to us if you don't. Do you believe the 60 unplaced learners in Coleg Cambria could be because there's been rationalisation of sixth forms in the area? I know they've created a sixth-form hub, but there's been rationalisation. Or is it because of—? We've got Airbus in the area, and we've got Deeside industrial park, Wrexham industrial park. I'd like to know what type of courses they're looking for, and what's missing, basically, as well.

I think I'd have to write with the detail on that. As I set out in our letter, the information we've had from Coleg Cambria is that they're largely learners who are looking for level 1 provision, so the coleg are supporting them in looking at other pathways like Jobs Growth Wales+, for example. But certainly I can write with some more detail.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you. Back to Cefin.

The next question will be in Welsh. You've told us as a committee more than once that you are very eager to see improved collaboration and co-operation between educational establishments, and you've partially answered the question in response to a question asked earlier by Carolyn Thomas. How content are you in terms of the work that you're doing in terms of encouraging collaboration between institutions? And are you in a position to give us some examples of good practice, where organisations are starting to discuss and co-plan post-16 education provision together?

Yes, certainly. It's a process, not an event. This is requiring us to look at the way that we support the sector and individual providers, particularly in terms of our funding and how we use our funding to incentivise collaboration as opposed to competition. I mentioned our fund earlier as one example of that, where we deliberately said that we will look at projects that involve more than one provider. So, we're working together to provide a new initiative that will inherently provide a better, coherent system in their area.

One specific example I'd probably draw upon is the North Wales Tertiary Alliance. The memorandum of understanding for that was signed in the Eisteddfod last year, and that's a partnership between four providers, universities and colleges in north Wales, who are specifically looking at how they can provide a more coherent, joined-up system across north Wales and working together to look at opportunities to play to each others' strengths and to provide pathways through further education into higher education. I think that that's a really good example for us of the types of collaboration that we're talking about at a regional level in this context and institutions working together to deliver differently.

More locally, I guess, we're also really aware of some fantastic work going on in north-east Wales around Wrexham University and Coleg Cambria, in terms of their memorandum of understanding and seeing how they can deliver for north-east Wales and the priorities of that area as well. So, I think that what we're seeing are examples starting to come up at a local and a regional level of collaboration already, and part of that, I think, is driven by the messaging that we're giving that we want to see providers working together to provide more coherence in the system.

Okay. And schools and colleges, where—

That's work in progress. I think that's fair to say. There are already good examples of collaboration, for example around things like the junior apprenticeship scheme that we operate, where pupils are coming in to college and having experiences like that. We want to make sure that that's supported and enhanced, and I'm very pleased that we've been able to expand that offer. So, we're seeing some examples of that. I think that it goes back to that position, and obviously this committee looked at it in their report, that we want to make sure that there is better collaboration on a place-based approach to what that provision looks like for learners. I think where we're not seeing that, then that's where Medr would want to consider how we can incentivise again, through our funding mechanism, better collaboration. So, I think there's work to do there.

Okay.

Thank you. Over to Natasha, please.

Thank you very much, Chair. I'm going to ask a bit about higher education institutions, if that's okay. We're seeing higher education institutions managing their financial challenges in different ways across Wales. Some are seeing a decline in international students, some in domestic students, inflationary pressures—we all hear it on a regular basis. Many have similar issues, but while most are looking at a decline, as I said, in those areas, I wanted to know what conversations has, specifically, Medr had with various HEIs across Wales, as well as the Welsh Government, because I know you work closely together, regarding the outside threats to the HEI sector that I've just listed. What support has been promised to these institutions by Medr and the Welsh Government to go forward?

One of the benefits, I think, of us as a regulator of the HE system in Wales is that we can work very closely with our eight institutions, and of course the Open University, to understand those pressures in some detail at an individual level. And the pressures affecting different institutions will be different to each of them, but we can work with them to understand that. You're absolutely right that those pressures that you mentioned apply across the sector, not just in Wales but of course across the UK as well. Our first role, I think, is understanding what those pressures are and to communicate them effectively to Government so that they can understand what that might lead to in terms of the provision, the offering and what it might mean, too, in terms of the national picture in Wales.

From a regulatory perspective, though, we obviously have a very important role to play in protecting public money, and so from a regulatory perspective, us understanding those pressures, having those conversations with their finance directors and the vice-chancellors of those institutions to understand their plans to mitigate and manage and ensure that those institutions are sustainable, not just in the short to medium term, has been really important to us, and never more so than in the first 18 months of our operation. It's really been at the forefront of our minds. So, we have those conversations.

We've been able to support universities through the additional funding that was made available by the Welsh Government this financial year. That was £8.5 million capital, and then a further £10 million revenue that went into it. Of course, the additional fees, which is the majority of the income that HEIs in Wales receive—they increased the fees. Difficult decision as it is in terms of increasing fees and the cost to learners, in recognising the financial sustainability challenge, it's been really important that those fees have increased and provide additional income from learners.

I think our role is really interesting in that space, if you like, between individual institutions and Government, and recognising those pressures of those individual institutions and communicating them effectively to Government to enable them to make decisions, for example around additional funding.

I appreciate that. I really do. As a team, I'd like to get a bit more of an understanding. If you're meeting with various universities—if you could just explain to us here on the committee—how often do you meet with the universities? Is it a regular thing? Have you committed to a once-a-year catch-up with them to find out their financial situations? And then I'll follow up with what I was going to ask you about the Welsh—

We meet every finance team of each institution either every month or every two months, depending on the institution and the level of engagement that we need with them, based on their individual financial position. We receive regular reports on their outturns, their forecasts, and all the detail, as you'd imagine. I'm pleased here to report today that for all the eight institutions in Wales, their financial statements will be published before the end of this month, and they're all reporting a clean audit opinion on that, which is a really important point of assurance that we draw from the work that we've been doing. So, at a finance level, we meet them in that way.

From my perspective, I meet and speak with vice-chancellors very regularly, so perhaps not every month, but pretty much every other month I'd be meeting either individually or over the phone with one of the vice-chancellors of Wales, to understand the pressures they're facing, but also their response to it. These are autonomous institutions who are responsible for managing the challenging situation that we've just set out. So, it's really important for us that we don't just understand the challenges, but we also understand their response.

And just for my understanding again now, the fact that you're meeting twice a month, or your teams are, with those financial heads, you're getting your reports on a regular basis—is that something that was set up by yourselves, or was that agreed by the universities to be able to give—? I'm asking if this is something that you've set up and said, 'We want this to happen', or is it something that they've had to sign up to, or just that it's been forced on them to have to do this?

We've inherited this, essentially, from the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales. They had a procedure set out in their financial management code, which is an agreement with the institutions about how they would discharge their regulatory functions. We've continued to operate under that, as I mentioned at the start, to ensure that there was a seamless transition.

But we are moving to a new regulatory system, and that will change the way that we engage with our institutions, and we've been working very closely with them to understand what that will look like for them and from our perspective. But I think, from an assurance point of view, particularly in the climate that we're currently operating in, it would be remiss of us as a regulator if we weren't having that kind of level of engagement and understanding.

Just finally, I think the committee would be interested to know that we intend to publish a report shortly on the financial sustainability of the sector, so obviously not at an institutional level. We provided evidence last year at a committee meeting and a short update then, and we'll be providing our next update in advance of the election, so that there's transparency as well, at a sector level, of some of those pressures and challenges.

Good. I think that would be very welcome by everyone here, as well as beyond.

I will keep my next question, or my sub-question, quite short. I know we've talked a lot about financial sustainability, and I know you've mentioned the issues with regard to budgets and all of that, but I just wanted to know—. I appreciate that each individual university has its own individual circumstances and situations that they're dealing with, but I wanted to know what best practices you've managed to gather from your own findings, from the meetings that you're having, to assist with their financial stability.

I appreciate that you have a regulatory role, but to be able to feed that back to Government, I'd like to know (a) how it's been received by the Government, because you're privy to information that perhaps they may not be on a day-to-day basis, but (b), in relation to financial sustainability going forward, I know you said previously that you're very confident that HEIs are very safe and nothing's going to happen to them, that they're fine for the time being, but just to make sure that that is going to continue to be the case, what assurances can you give us right now?

It does really depend on the institution. They're very different institutions—all eight in Wales. They serve a different purpose and place in their communities, but they are, all of them, anchor institutions in those communities. So, the conversations, for example, we'd have with Cardiff University might look quite different to the conversations we'd have with University of Wales Trinity Saint David, as an example.

I think one of the things that we're keen to do is understand what the different institutions are doing to manage that position. Some of that is looking at other opportunities, whether that be looking at different provision and playing to their strengths in that provision. Some of it may be looking at opportunities around research and links to economic development. Some of it may be looking at widening the participation agenda, in terms of thinking about level 4 or 5 qualifications, for example.

I think where we are uniquely placed is to understand what different institutions are doing, and then to try and inform institutions' own decision making about whether that’s going to lead to a more collaborative and coherent system, or a more competitive system. And that’s where we would report to Government as well, of course, in ensuring that we’re not aware of information that is inadvertently going to lead to more pressures down the line.

Okay, thank you. Regarding the mapping of subject demand and provision across HE, to what extent would any interventions on individual subjects, such as incentivising and supporting institutions, be the responsibility of Medr, and/or the Welsh Government, and what potential outcomes of this activity are envisaged by yourselves?

So, as I said, the report will be published shortly. So, as part of the Minister's call for evidence, we're just about to submit it to the Minister now. I think what we’ve tried to do is identify areas where both the sector and individual institutions, and the Government, might want to consider further action in that report. So, it’s a factual report, which sets out what that provision looks like now.

I think if there are particular pinch points in that, the way that we would go about incentivising institutions on a place-based approach to increase or enhance provision would be through funding levers. We already have a premium in place for high-cost subject provision that we support institutions with. So, if there were areas where they were feeling that the cost of the provision was prohibitive, we’d look to Government to fund that, if it was a priority of Government.

But, of course, we think it’s also useful for the sector to see what’s available in Wales, and to think about how they play to their strengths. So, I think it’s a combination of both. It will be a useful resource for the sector to understand what the position looks like in Wales, and where they may see and identify opportunities for themselves, but also for the Government against any skills priorities.

Okay. A final question from me. Previously, it was suggested that Medr may encourage institutions to, and I quote,

'play to their strengths',

which aligns with the approach set out by the UK Government's White Paper on post-16 education and skills. So, how will this work in practice, in your view?

We're—. For me, I think that particularly affects areas like research and innovation for our universities. And one of the things that we've been doing is working closely with UK Research and Innovation on the funding that's available across higher education research councils in the UK, as one of the four funding bodies, to ensure that the priorities of that UKRI funding are translated into the local and regional priorities of institutions here. And what we want to make sure is that we have sufficient capacity in our universities to maximise, if you like, that UK funding in the research system.

So, that's one example of where we've been trying to kind of translate, if you like, the proposals of the UK Government into the devolved area, in a meaningful way that will support our institutions.

Brilliant. Thank you so much.

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

Before I move on to the next questions, I just want to run through part of the issues in higher education, and, in particular, the point that Natasha raised around the pressures that exist in the sector—they're sector-wide—and in particular for those high-cost courses. So, every institution has pressures. A number of institutions have high-cost courses. And I want to highlight a point that was in our budget scrutiny report, and it's about the strikingly unusual treatment of the college of music and drama, and the allocation of nearly £2 million direct to them. I'd like to understand from Medr why that direct award was made, because, objectively, every institution has pressures, and, as I say, a number of institutions have high-cost courses. So, why has the college been treated so differently to the rest of the sector?

So, the college submitted a case around ensuring that Wales had world-class conservatoire provision for the future to the Government. The Government asked us to consider that case and to work with the college to understand what those pressures were. And then, obviously, it was a Government decision around allocating additional funding to ensure that that world-class conservatoire provision remained in Wales. It's a ring-fenced budget that the Government have decided to allocate and we are the delivery vehicle for that.

Our role in that, really, is to determine how that funding is provided, and so setting the terms and conditions around what that might look like in terms of both the core funding, but also the specific aspects of funding, for example around widening participation in conservatoire provision.

So, it was a decision by Government to ring-fence funding in the way that it did for that particular provision. Our role in that, then, is to allocate it and ensure that they're meeting the terms and conditions of the funding.

So, it's not quite arm's length in this instance, because it's a direct award from the Government.

It's a ring-fenced budget, yes.

And actually, the message for the rest of the sector about how that's come about I think is a difficult one. I appreciate this may be beyond your remit in Medr, but there is a real issue about one institution being able to make the case. And it's not gone through the education sector either, it's gone through the economy side, as opposed to the education ministry, which does have an overview of the whole sector. We've heard in, for example, our routes into post-16 and teacher training, there are significant pressures in not just those areas, but a range of others. So, just to be clear, there was a Government choice, which we understand didn't come from education, and it's one that you've essentially been told, 'This is what's going to happen. You deal with the terms around it, but this is where the money's going.'

It's a ring-fenced allocation, yes, absolutely. So, it can only be spent on world-class conservatoire provision. I should just say there are other examples in our funding that recognise the cost of high-cost subject premium, often around science, technology, engineering and mathematics subjects. So, there is provision that we fund, through Medr, from previous cases that have been made around the cost of that provision, to support institutions. And, of course, the Government also made a decision this year to support the cost of teacher placements. So, there was also £2.5 million allocated to Medr to support universities with the cost of education placements in schools. So, whilst this one particularly, as you've said, comes from a different part of Government funding, from a different expenditure group, and is ring-fenced for that sole purpose, it's not the only case, I guess, of Government deciding to take action or intervene and support funding in a different way.

I think the difference is there's a great deal more clarity about those other areas. There's a strategic case for them being made, being made publicly alongside policy, and not surfacing during a budget in this way. So, it is still strikingly unusual.

Can I go on to apprenticeships? In your annual report, you highlight some of the work you're already doing, looking at the new apprenticeship programme that will be delivered from August 2027. So, in that work, what have you learnt so far on the work that's already taken place? What pointers does that give you about what may take place in the new framework from 2027 onwards?

I think the overwhelming feedback that we've had around the current apprenticeship programme is that we need to develop something that is more responsive and flexible to changing economic and skills needs. The way that the current programme works was as a commercially procured model seven years ago, and the ability, I guess, to respond more quickly through that programme has been a challenge. So, I think the overriding feedback we've had from all the engagement we've done with employers, from providers and, of course, from learners, was to make sure that the new programme and the mechanisms we put in place in the new programme could be more responsive to that need, as it changes and evolves, particularly on a local and regional level. Again, with investment coming in in different economic places in different areas, we needed to make sure that that provision was available to support that local need. So, I think that would be the overriding message.

I think the second point would be about making sure that it was across the full range of our provision. So, extending that to all-age apprenticeship programmes across and including degree apprenticeships, as an example, as a good example, of where we can then start to plot pathways through different apprenticeship provision to support attainment. So, I think those are the major points of learning for us. That has definitely informed the delivery model that we're proposing to put in place from 2027, to ensure that we can respond quicker to that need.

So, it might be useful to give an example of whether you're able to do some of that in the courses as they're being delivered now, but also what that might mean. So, fabulous news yesterday that Awel y Môr and Erebus have got approval in the allocation round 7, so to be able to think about how that's planned, and the skills needs from things we might think are relatively traditional, like welders, but also, with the changing nature of the economy and the greater emphasis on a range of technology skills, in a range of areas that people of my age—and I know some people are younger than me—might not have necessarily thought would exist, but that world is here, and it's going to be more apparent. So, I'm interested in how you actually look at that in the frameworks of apprenticeships, and making sure they're generally fit for purpose for the learner and their experience, but also for the sectors they want to go into, so people don't have an apprenticeship that a business says, 'Actually, it's not as useful as you think it is.'

I think our engagement with employers is absolutely critical to that and, as I said, before we even consulted, we did wide-ranging engagement with employers, to understand how we could better reflect that. And we need to do that as well as, I think—and I go back to my previous point—reflecting the priorities of Government around the public sector workforce and the economy. So, we need to balance that approach.

I think the one thing we're looking at, obviously, alongside the change to the programme, and what that will look like from 2027, is reviewing the current frameworks that we have, i.e. are they fit for purpose, or do we need to introduce or adapt things that we're doing? An example of that is we've heard from the construction sector about the need for level 2 construction apprenticeships to be reintroduced. We've been working closely with Qualifications Wales and Welsh Government around proposals to reintroduce that, because that's responding quite quickly to a need that had been identified in a sector. So, I think, I guess what I'm trying to say here is, whilst at the same time we're looking to introduce a new programme, that hasn't stopped the work that we were already doing around looking at the frameworks and are they fit for purpose for the skills needs of the here and now.

That might be something for a future Senedd to want to look at: what that new programme looks like and the needs of the economy that are being anticipated as well as exist at that point in time as well, because we're, as ever, living through a period of significant change.

Absolutely.

I want to come on to the numbers and the scale of the provision. Now, obviously, we've had real challenges within this Senedd term with the budget that's been available. We're now in a position where I think we're on track to deliver 100,000 starts; there'll be no reduction in the scale. But in our report, 'Routes into post-16 education and training', one of the striking statistics was the significant number of people who want to do an apprenticeship, and this thing is eight or nine times the size, as their first choice, compared to the actual numbers who get to do it. So, there's always an issue for whoever is in Government about funding something, and about Medr being able to fund a larger programme, but we recommend that the Government undertake an analysis about why those proportions are so disproportionate. So, I'm interested in Medr's view, given that you're undertaking the review on apprenticeships as well, on why is there that significant difference of people who say, 'My first choice would be an apprenticeship', and why is that eight to nine times higher than people who actually go into an apprenticeship? Is it about provision, is it about awareness, or is there something else? And then how does that come back to the first point, about the designs of the frameworks themselves?

I suspect it's a combination of those factors, and that's obviously part of the evidence gathering we've done in designing and looking at the new framework, about the reasons for individual learner choice, against economic need, and also in terms of availability of provision. I suspect it's a number of the factors that you've pointed to. I think we really—. As I said, we really welcome the committee's report, and we accept the recommendations about using that information to better inform the design of the new programme. We're currently in the process of doing that now, and we will shortly be responding and publishing our response to the first consultation. I think I'd have to go back to the team and just get a little bit more information about precisely the point that you made there about the root cause, or the root causes, if you like, of that difference between learner choice and then what is available. So, if the committee's happy, I'd write to you in a bit more detail.

I think that would be helpful. And just finally, there's this point about apprenticeships and a course of study over a period of time, and the flexibility to go into the world of work and be part of that as well. That's really attractive for a number of people—and a range of skills as well, including degree equivalent. But I'm interested also in the fact that, to skill people for the world that's coming, you can't necessarily take time out. So, for some people, it's the shorter course of study, and when looking not just at the apprenticeship framework, but at other work-based learning options, what that looks like. If you work at Airbus, or if you work in a small company in west Wales—all the stuff about marine environment, the really big opportunities there—you probably can't afford to take a year or two years off, or to change your ability to work. So, I'm interested in, when Medr looks at this strategically, when it looks at the apprenticeship challenges, how those frameworks are fit for purpose. How do you look at and value the shorter courses of study—that, if you're 30, or 50, and you've got a long way of your working life still ahead of you—? I'm 51, and I'd like to think I still have some work ahead of me. But the world will be different in 10 years' time, and you're still going to be in work. How are you equipping people to do that? And then how would this committee, or a future committee, be able to see that that work is being done and is appropriate for the learner and for the employer?

I think that's a really important point. Thinking about this as the provision of work-based learning opportunities rather than just apprenticeships I think is important for us, to think about how we invest not just the apprenticeship budget in the delivery of apprenticeships to people, but also the part-time further education budget. I mentioned things like our personal learning accounts earlier, and how we invest in things like that. What we want to do is make sure that we understand exactly where our funding goes. So, there's an adage around following the money here. So, on a local and regional basis, what are we funding in colleges, what are we funding in terms of apprenticeships, what are we funding in terms of the overall offer of provision, and is that matching that need of learners, particularly those who perhaps are looking to upskill or reskill later in life, to have the ability to access that learning opportunity as well.

I talked previously about the real game-changer in that for us will be the commencement of the duties in the tertiary education Act around lifelong learning and what that will look like, so working with Government to understand what that will mean in terms of the work-based learning offer, beyond apprenticeships, into those types of things that I've just mentioned, is going to be really important. I think that will be a really interesting thing. Obviously, as those powers get commenced, how we understand what that pressure might look like, and how we design a work-based learning offer, of which apprenticeships will be a really integral part, that recognises that people will want to learn in different ways at different points of their life.

Right. I'll pause there, Chair, and I think there are other people who ought to ask questions.

Can I ask further to Vaughan's original question? You mentioned that the college had put a case forward to Welsh Government for extra funding, for the extra £2 million. Could every college or university do that, if they specialise in one particular subject and were struggling, or is this unique? Has this happened before?

As I said, we meet with every institution in Wales—colleges, universities and groups of sixth forms, of course—to try and reflect the pressures that they are facing. This was a particularly acute one, obviously, in a specific area that, as I understand it, the board felt they needed to inform the Government about. I don't think it's unique in that position. I gave the example earlier of teacher training placements. The additional funding that the Minister was able to agree for that was as a direct consequence of being informed about the pressures that universities were facing in meeting the cost of placing their teachers. So, I don't think it's a unique position. I think it's just a reflection of the Government trying to understand the pressures that different parts of the sector are facing.

Okay, that makes sense. Okay, thank you. Right, over to Carolyn, please.

Just to go back to adult community learning now. How are Medr addressing the issue of what Estyn identified as a pattern of provision of adult community learning across Wales?

It's a small but really important part of our overall funding envelope, adult community learning. The majority of that funding is via local authorities at the moment. There is one part in Wales where it goes directly to a college. Unfortunately, we've not been able to increase the budget that is available for that because of the constraints on the overall envelope. That will have an effect on the provision that is available.

It is, though, one area that I'm very keen that we as Medr start to look at: how we fund and what we're funding as well. I think there are opportunities there, going back to Vaughan's question about thinking about the work-based learning elements of that, and how they interplay with the provision that is available at a local and regional level more generally. So, we are doing some mapping work about what that provision looks like, and we will have a look again at what that funding model looks like as part of reviewing our funding principles.

We heard that, post COVID, a lot of 50-year-olds left employment and could retrain into other things. We heard about the recruitment of teachers and lecturers, people that are skilled but might want to go into teaching. If they could train without having to give up work and maybe lose that income, they still have to pay the mortgage and the bills but would like to retrain, that is so important.

Yes. I'd just go back to our personal learning accounts. They're a really good intervention there for part-time learning, for reskilling and upskilling, as an example. It enables the learner to identify the training and upskilling that would be right for them as well. So, there is a range of offering there. I think we do have a role to play in making that a bit more understandable to people, working with the providers so that they can see that there are different avenues that they can pursue, whether that is through ACL, adult community learning provision, or through a PLA, a personal learning account provision.

And you mentioned that funding was provided directly to one provision, Bridgend community college for adult learning. What decision making has taken place to provide funding to this specific institution?

That was a request, actually, from the local authority and the college for us to fund the college directly, rather than through the local authority. The college was delivering the provision and they reached an agreement where they felt they were the best place in Bridgend to deliver that, so we were happy to agree to that.

Okay. Medr's annual report indicates that over 1,000 Tata Steel employees have been supported through public skills funding, which we're really pleased to hear. However, there's little information regarding the outcomes for these learners. So, is data available to indicate how many of these learners went on to secure employment or progress to other positive routes on completion of their learning?

We've obviously highlighted in our annual report some of the case studies around the individuals who were happy to share their stories and experience around how they accessed the personal learning accounts and then moved into new employment through that reskilling programme, but I would have to write you on the detail of the 1,000 interventions.

That's fine. Can I just ask a tiny supplementary? Transport is always raised with us as an issue. Is it raised with you?

Yes, absolutely. I think, particularly in that 16 to 19 category, and particularly in more rural parts of Wales, it is often the first issue that is raised as a barrier to participation in further education or sixth-form colleges. We’re pleased to be part of the solution here in terms of the overall response and understanding that that is a barrier. We don’t hold the funding levers for transport, so it’s not something that we fund directly, but I think our role is to really support the learners in making that case for how that can be addressed in meaningful ways, whether that’s through further investment in things like the bus scheme, obviously—the £1 bus scheme from the Government—or in other ways through funded provision, which would come through other routes. I think it is our job to make the case for the learners, who are identifying that as a significant barrier to their participation.

Some FE colleges have funded it themselves, haven’t they, in the past, and some are struggling to continue to do that.

Indeed.

So, hopefully, they will be talking to Transport for Wales, who are mapping out areas where transport is needed in regions. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you. How has Medr been involved in discussions surrounding the research excellence framework 2029? And was Wales fairly represented when deciding upon the changes to the process following the pause in criteria setting?

We are one of the four funding bodies across the UK for the research excellence framework. We’ve been engaged with Research England and UKRI in the lead-up to the pause and reset. We understand the reasons, particularly the UK Government's view that it needed a little bit more thinking before it moved forward. We were also involved in the redrafting of the framework, the principles and the guidance that will support that, which enabled, obviously, the announcement in December that we would move forward with the framework, and that we wouldn’t lose any significant time, I think crucially for us, in terms of that revised guidance.

So, yes, we are one of the four funding bodies. We have been involved in that throughout. We have a really constructive relationship, as I mentioned earlier, with UKRI and Research England, particularly around the framework. We are looking forward now to translating that revised guidance into reality.

Thank you. Medr has previously stated it will engage with other UK funding bodies to explore joint approaches regarding research funding and future approaches to research assessment. Have such joint approaches been identified, and to what extent do you expect Wales to be affected by the work being conducted by Research England?

Again, it is really important that we have those relationships with those UK bodies to understand, if you like, the priorities from the UK's industrial strategy and how they therefore intend to invest the UKRI funding that comes through for research and innovation. Our role there is often to translate that in a meaningful way to our institutions and obviously to places like the CJCs, which have an opportunity to look at economic development as well. We’ve got a well-established relationship with UKRI. I was pleased to meet the new chief executive just a couple of months ago to talk about how we could strengthen and work on that relationship. I also meet the chief executive of Research England as one of those four funding bodies regularly, to engage with them on the direction of travel of that funding, so that we can make sure that that comes to institutions in Wales in the best way we possibly can.

Last but not least on research, it’s really important that we look at all of the benefits of the research that our institutions are doing. I was at a fantastic event, for example, on Monday, where we looked at the difference that research and innovation was making in community-led projects. Through our work on civic engagement and mission, the relatively small amounts of money that were supporting projects across Wales to deliver community benefits was fantastic. Of course, there are some really significant investments and spin-outs that come from research, but I would never want us to lose sight of the real value that our institutions provide through those small amounts of money to really meaningful community initiatives as well.

Okay, thank you. What are Medr's priorities and key concerns in the coming year, and have these been impacted at all by the change in chief executive?

In terms of research, or—? Yes. So, no. We have to follow, obviously, the UK Government's steer around its industrial strategy and how it's intending to invest its funding in research over the period of the spending review. Our job, I think, has been to understand how the UK Government intend to use that funding across all of the research in England and Wales, and then, as I've said, to make sure that institutions are well placed in Wales to do that.

When I was here last time, I think one of our concerns overall was to make sure that we have enough standing research capacity in our institutions to maximise their ability to draw in that investment from UK Government funding. I think that remains a concern, if I'm honest. I think it is an area that, if we could strengthen our research capacity in our institutions, does open up other avenues for attracting more inward investment to Wales.

Okay. Thank you. Is everybody—? Yes, okay. Thank you for joining us this morning. We really do appreciate your time. You will be sent a transcript for checking in due course. Thank you very much. We are well ahead of time, which is unheard of for this committee.

Diolch yn fawr.

Thank you.

Diolch.