Health and Social Care Committee

Indeed. I'm Dawn Bowden, and I'm the Minister for Children and Social Care.

Alistair Davey, I'm deputy director in social services.

Denise Moultrie, I'm head of policy for unpaid carers.

Thank you so much, and welcome. We've obviously got some questions for you, and we'll go straight into those. In my short time with the committee, this has been one of the inquiries that have touched me most, because I think we've heard quite harrowing life stories from people who are carers and the people they care for, and how it feels really tough for them. Many times, they shared the desperation they were feeling. We heard from carers and carer charities that things were getting worse for carers, and carers themselves were using words like 'we have to fight', 'we have to beg' for the things that they should have. I just wondered if you could talk about whether you share their view, or what your assessment of the severity of the situation is for carers here in Wales.

Thank you for that question, Chair. Can I start by saying, and I want to put this on the record again—I've put this on the record many times—unpaid carers are absolutely the backbone of the social care system in the community? Without unpaid carers, the system would absolutely collapse, and we do recognise that, and we do recognise that, for many carers, it is a very difficult and quite often a traumatic thing for them to have to do. So, I don't underestimate, and I am not going to sit here this morning and pretend that I don't understand or that I underestimate the difficulties that some of our unpaid carers face. Supporting unpaid carers is absolutely the right thing to do. It's the right thing for them, it's the right thing for the people that they look after, and, as I just said, this is about safeguarding the resilience of our statutory services as well. Let's be absolutely clear about that. And that's why, from my point of view, I'm very keen that we move to support, or we continue to support, unpaid carers in every way that we can within the resources that the Government has to do that. And I think that is always the bottom line, isn't it? It is always about what we can do in the most effective way with the resources that are available to us.

Having said that, I am really pleased that, just this year, we've put an additional £13 million in to deliver support for unpaid carers in Wales, but I am not pretending that there isn't room for improvement. There clearly is—identification and early help, carers' needs assessments, respite provision. I've consistently said this. This is not something that's new to me, and I am on the record as having consistently said that we need to improve in these areas, and we do need to see local authorities delivering their statutory responsibilities in this area as a minimum, and I'm sure that we'll come on to and have a further conversation later in the morning about local authorities and what they're doing in this space, because we do see very good practice in a number of local authorities, and very good support in a number of local authorities. But this is about consistency, and this is about making sure that carers are getting the support that they need. It's been a long-standing concern of mine. I've been the Minister with responsibility for this for just 18 months, and this has been very high on my agenda in that entire time. So, I do absolutely understand the points being made here.

Thank you for that, and thank you for recognising the severity of the situation. I recognise that you haven't been in post for a long time, and I acknowledge the extra money and things that have gone in. But the reality is that those unpaid carers haven't indicated to us at all that things are getting better. They feel that it's getting worse. I would suggest that they probably believe the Government and all agencies are letting them down and have let them down. It's important for us to be their voice here today and articulate that strongly, because if we can't put the foundations down of change, who will?

So, one bit that emphasises that mismatch of pictures, if you like, is that we recently took evidence from the Welsh Local Government Association and the Association of Directors of Social Services, and they were presenting all their evidence. We had ADSS giving us assurances that they are meeting their statutory duty relating to carers, but the rest of the evidence we've received, and numerous other reviews, suggest this isn't the case. We were left concerned also that local authorities are not grasping the scale of the problem and the urgency required to deliver the improvements. It was this real mismatch, because the agencies who were supposed to be doing stuff didn't seem to recognise the severity of the problem on the ground, and that can't continue. I just wondered what your take on some of that was.

I think this is absolutely the same concern that I have, and why ADSS were commissioned to undertake a review specifically in this area. That was before my time as Minister, but the ongoing work sits with me. But we commissioned ADSS to undertake a review of how carers' needs were being met. That was in 2023, and they've been—. That review identified several areas for national improvement, all of which will be of no surprise to you. So, it was stuff like early information and advice services, and, of course, the delivery of carers' needs assessments. That's the one in particular that I've been looking to focus on. My officials, as part of that, undertook substantial engagement with unpaid carers and carers' organisations over the summer to inform the development of our new strategy. And, again, I know that you'll be aware that we're looking to deliver a revised strategy. It's due for publication this year. The consistent priorities that were identified by unpaid carers and their organisations were access to information, carers' assessments and the need for respite. So, we've known this for some considerable time.

What I'm trying to do is to drive the improvement agenda through my ministerial advisory group on unpaid carers. We've got a clear action plan that is being progressed through ADSS Cymru. As I said, that's on course to be completed now. That work will be completed by March of this year, and that will be focused on improving the response to carers at the front door, when they go into local authorities, improving their access to carers' needs assessments. I have provided additional funding to try to accelerate and deliver on those improvements.

The key intention from my perspective is to enable greater consistency in the approach to assessments. I'm pretty sure that we will touch on data at some point during the course of this morning, because I think that that may well be a key to some of the work that we need to do in this area. But I don't underestimate the scale of the challenge. I do note, however, tha the Carers Wales 'Track the Act' report does identify that those carers in receipt of respite care and carers' needs assessments has increased. It has increased from 17 per cent to 25 per cent. So, I don't think we should ignore the fact that there have been improvements in the number of carers that are actually getting the assessments that they need, but that's only 25 per cent, and so there's still an awful long way to go, but I would want to welcome the fact that we seem to be on the right trajectory. What we need to be doing now is making sure that those carers are identified early and offered the support they need early.

We'll come on to some of those points after, but, sadly, we didn't hear much evidence that those assessments were happening or, even if they got an assessment, that, afterwards, the commensurate actions were taking place. So, you know, you can tick the box 'had an assessment'—

Sure.

—but they weren't getting stuff, and that was a constant message we heard. I know you wrote to—. In November you told us again, you shared your concerns over these issues, and you've done that again, and I know you said you were going to write to local leaders to impress this on them. I'm assuming that that happened and I just wondered, perhaps, what responses you've had, or what are your next steps in making sure local authorities comply with their legal obligations.

To be absolutely clear, what I did was formally, in December, write to local authority leaders, but that wasn't the first contact I've ever had with local authorities about this issue, and you will appreciate that my officials are in regular contact with heads of service, with directors of social services, and this has been raised consistently with them, and my frustration came down to, in the end, 'Clearly, I need now to write to political leaders, because if we're not able to make progress through service delivery heads, then I need to have those political conversations.' And so I have now written to the leaders of every local authority. That happened in December, and I've given them until—I think it's about now, actually—Friday of this week to respond to me, setting out and outlining how they are meeting their statutory obligations in this regard, because I know that there are instances where those statutory obligations are not being met. So, I am asking those local authorities to report that back to me directly, so that I can see from them what they are saying they are doing to meet their statutory obligations. And we'll analyse those reports when they come back, and I'll be following that up with them, and with the regional partnership boards as required. And if I'm not satisfied with the responses that I receive, be absolutely clear that that is not the end of it from my point of view. I think Care Inspectorate Wales have a very important role to play in this. They're the body that is responsible for inspecting local authorities and for making sure that they're delivering their legal responsibilities. And I think the next step for me, if I am not satisfied that this is being dealt with in the way that I want to see this being dealt with, is there will be a clearer direction to Care Inspectorate Wales that this has to be a specific element of their inspection of local authorities, to make sure that that is being delivered.

Well, that's welcome, and I hope you have some positive responses back from local authorities. Is there a way, then, that a more permanent, robust system can be put in place to make sure that the monitoring—? Or how will the ongoing monitoring happen? I mean, we're thinking now, as we'll have elections in May, there'll be a new Government probably. What can we anchor down to make sure that this is followed through?

Well, we do monitor in the regular discussions that we have with local authorities and through the regional partnership boards. Regional partnership boards have a significant part to play in all of this, and we have regular reports from them on what they're doing to meet their obligations, how they're spending their money, and so on. So, the monitoring systems are actually quite robust. What perhaps we need to think about more clearly is not just, actually, monitoring, but what we do as the follow up, if that monitoring shows that it's not delivering in the way that we want it to be delivered.

Yes, thank you for that. Lesley.

Is that monitoring showing that?

The monitoring, at the moment, is showing that we get the report and that money is being spent. I am not convinced yet that what that is showing is that we're—. Well, clearly, because the evidence shows us that we're not actually delivering everything that we need to deliver across this area of policy, and that's why I'm saying all the things I'm saying to you this morning. In the time that I've been Minister, I have given local authorities and regional partnership boards 18 months to deliver to me the requirements for unpaid carers. And if we get to the point that I think we're at now, where that is not happening sufficiently to my satisfaction, then I need to take a firmer action on it.

You might not be able to answer this question. So, you've written to the leaders, you're expecting responses from all 22 by tomorrow. Presumably, you've had some responses. Have they been looked at to see if—?

I don't know what—. What have we had in so far?

We've only had a few to date. I think we've had about six or seven. I have to say that we've not scrutinised them. We'll wait until we get them all in.

Okay. But presumably, as you say, the monitoring is showing that there is an issue, which is why you've written to the leaders.

Well, I mean, the issue is, basically, the evidence that you've had presented to you, to committee. I mean, that evidence, a lot of it is anecdotal, partly because we don't have robust enough data—and I'm happy to discuss that in a moment—but anecdotal evidence is still important, because it is the first-hand account of people that are in the system. So, we have to take account of that. And if local authorities are saying that, actually, that anecdotal evidence is not true, I need to get that evidence from them to say, 'Well, actually, if that's not true, what is happening? What are you doing?'

So, do you think you'll have the time to do that? The letters are in tomorrow. You've got to analyse them. As Peter said, we've got an election coming up. Is this going to be something that's going to have priority?

Well, inevitably, this is going to be an ongoing piece of work. I mean, I'm not going to resolve this in the next eight weeks, let's be quite frank about that. But what I can do is make sure that I give a very clear steer to any incoming Government about the work that still needs to be done in this area, and in advance of that, make it very, very clear to local authorities what my expectations are and what I think the expectations of any incoming Government are going to be in this area. I cannot believe that any Government of any colour is going to have a different view on the need to support unpaid carers.

Absolutely. Thank you.

Thanks, Lesley. A couple of final points from me: your evidence paper refers to an action plan led by the Association of Directors of Social Services, which is due to be completed, I think, in March this year. What can we expect to see published following this? And how can we and our successor committee track progress, basically?

Well, the improvement work and the action plan, as you said, is being led by ADSS Cymru, but it's being guided by a sub-group of my ministerial advisory group on unpaid carers. So, they're not working on this in isolation; this is actually being done directly with unpaid carers and their organisations. We're getting quarterly updates from the ministerial advisory group as a whole, and those minutes are published. So, you can see for yourself what is happening there. But I am happy to write to the committee to inform them of progress against the action plan as we get towards the end of March.

But part of that improvement agenda is, as I've said, regarding the early information and advice that involves local authorities taking a more consistent approach to how they deal with this issue. So, the new annual data collection on unpaid carers, which we've commissioned, I'm hoping will provide a better understanding of young and adult carers that are supported by local authorities. And I'm hoping that that will mean that we've got more reliable data. But we're not going to start seeing that, really, for about another year.

April 2027—

April 2027.

It's collecting data this year, but it will be published in April 2027.

So, we're moving to a different type of data collection and I'm quite happy for officials to explain that to you in a bit more detail. But we won't have that data published until April 2027.

Okay. Fine. One last point from me, before we talk in more depth about data. There are going to be a lot of carers or carers organisations watching today's session, so it's an opportunity for you to—. What assurances would you like to give to carers that they are being heard and that the struggles that they face are being taken seriously and acted upon, given the urgency of their messages to us for the change they need? I think that they'll be interested to hear what you say.

Well, I think I've set out very clearly, Chair, what my view is on this. This has been a priority for me since I've been Minister, to see this improve and to see the support for unpaid carers being delivered, and I think I've made that commitment, both financially and politically, in saying that I consider this to be a priority. We extended the funding for some of the key offers that we have for unpaid carers. I signed the covenant for young carers on behalf of Welsh Government. I've made all those public commitments, and what I want to see now is those actually being delivered. So, I give my absolute assurance to the committee and to unpaid carers that I am committed to doing whatever I can within my responsibility, and within the resources that I have available to me, because I'm not in complete control of that, as you will understand, to make sure that we deliver on this.

And are you confident that your colleagues within the Cabinet recognise the seriousness of this?

Absolutely, and this is very much a cross-Government approach. I regularly have conversations with my colleagues the Cabinet Secretary for Education, the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice and the Cabinet Secretary for Housing and Local Government. The housing and local government discussions are particularly important because the vast majority of the budget around social care and support for unpaid carers sits within the local government main expenditure group, of course, and not within the health and social care MEG. So, those conversations are taking place, and there is an absolute commitment right across Government on this, yes.

Thank you very much for that. I'm going to move us on, then. Can I invite Mabon in, please?

Good morning, and apologies once again that I can't be physically present with you down there. I just want to touch to start with, before I go on to my particular area of questioning, on the partners that you work with in order to deliver. You have mentioned the importance of these partners. Some of them have said that they are dissatisfied with the current funding arrangements, where they receive annual grants year to year in order to provide care and support for unpaid carers. Do you think that that system is acceptable, or do you think it would be better if you could give a multi-year budget to those partners?

Thank you, Mabon. Sorry, I missed the very first bit, but I got the gist of what you were saying. The carers organisations, in a sense, are no different to a number of third sector organisations that we speak to, who are very keen to see us deliver multi-year settlements, for all sorts of reasons, as you've outlined. And I think that that's something that we have to keep under review, certainly in terms of the way in which Welsh Government is funded, and that has been problematic in the past, because we can only allocate funding when we know what our funding is. And so when we only get a year-on-year indication of what our funding is likely to be, then there's very little we can do about making any assurances beyond that. But there are examples where we do do that. So, the sustainable social services grant, for instance, is a multi-year grant award, and we've just extended that.

We have.

We've just extended that for a further year to cover the election period, knowing that that's going to be a period of uncertainty this year. So, we extended the funding for that. But I think that where we are in a position to at least give indications of multi-year funding, we would want to be able to do that. And I think, from the Welsh Government's point of view, the way in which the UK Government is now dealing with the allocation of funding to Wales, we have more than a year's indication of where that funding is going, so we can start to have those conversations, I think, about where we may be in a position to look at at least giving more than one year, or, if not an absolute guarantee, an indication of what might happen a year after. Alistair, do you want to say something about that?

That's right, Minister. We often do things like letters of comfort. We work very closely in co-production, particularly with the third sector, so we always try to be very reassuring to them. We understand some of the issues sometimes, about their funding and worries about having to issue notices of redundancy and things, so quite often we will do letters of comfort to them, and we maintain close working relationships, don't we, Denise?

Yes, I would say so. I would also say, on the local authorities, that we're trying to work with them, so when they commission third sector services, for those to be sustainable arrangements, recognising the third sector. So, the national framework for commissioning care and support is a code of practice that is really trying to help local authorities to commission services in a more sustainable way, looking at the quality of those services and not just the value, and there's a lot of work within our national office to review and build on that approach.

Could you explain a little bit what a 'letter of comfort' is?

Well, I'm sure how I might explain it and how a lawyer might explain it might be different, Chair, but it's a letter indicating that Welsh Government is going to provide funding without it being a guarantee as such. Really, it's something that quite often they use with their internal auditors and finance people to give them confidence that money is going [Correction: 'coming'], and we do that quite often with some of our organisations. Particularly on the children's side, for example, I know that we do that.

Okay, thank you for that. Sorry, Mabon.

Well, I'm pleased that the Minister referred there to the sustainable social services grant. As I understand it, that grant, in real terms, has been frozen since 2022 or 2023, which means that the sector—. And that grant does support unpaid carers; that's part of the purpose of that grant. But the sector therefore has received a cut in real terms over the past four or five years. Do you think that that is an acceptable situation?

You refer to the last four to five years, Mabon, and you will know only too well, because your party was in the co-operation agreement with us, some of the extremely challenging financial positions that we had in the early term of this Government. We had a budget that was worth £1 billion less in real-terms value, and then we had the Truss budget and the impact that that had on the value of any grants that were being issued to third sector organisations. We're well aware of the impact of all of that, but a lot of those things were outside of our control. We're now in a better position than we were, and so we're looking forward now rather than back, towards what we can do to improve the situation as we're going forward. But at any given point in time, you can only deal with the circumstances that are in front of you.

On that point, if I may, you have just said that you extended that grant for another year, and that is frozen. So, there's an opportunity there to have increased that in line with inflation—and we hear that inflation is going up—but it hasn't kept up with inflation. So, why, therefore, if we're in a better situation now and more money is coming down the M4 corridor from Westminster, according to what you've tried to suggest there, are we hearing that it hasn't increased?

I'm sorry, Chair, my interpretation keeps switching itself off for some reason, and if I could have a different set that would be—

Oh, let's get you another one.

I did get Mabon's question, but it keeps switching itself off.

Right, let's get you another one.

Thank you. Okay, right. So, what we did—. I think it's important to understand the context in which the social services sustainable grant was extended. It was extended just for one year. We are looking to develop a new grant to replace the sustainable social services grant. It was due to come to an end in March this year—

It was.

—and it was primarily an expedient decision that we took, Mabon, just to extend it by a year. So, there was no indication, no consideration, really, of having a full review of the grant and how much it was going to be; it was just kind of, 'Are we going to extend this for a year, so that we can have conversations with the sector about what is the most effective way to replace the sustainable social services grant?' So, there will be something that replaces it, and that will be a conversation—well, it is a conversation that we're currently having—with the sector about what that will look like. And I would expect that to reflect the issues that you've been raising, in terms of increases in the cost of living and the delivery of services and so on.

But we have done everything that we can to support the sector and to support the additional pressures that have come in around things like national insurance increases and the real living wage. You know what we've done about trying to support the real living wage in social care. So, it will be, really, the conversation that we have between now and when the new, replacement grant comes into place about what that will look like longer term.

Thank you. If I could go on to another element, which is data, you have touched on the issue of data, and you have given us one date. But further to that inconsistency in data collection, which has been central to the evidence that we've received during this powerful inquiry, we also understand that there are shortfalls and inconsistencies in collecting data in social care settings too. That is, it's very inconsistent. They collect that data in different ways, and they collect different elements of data. How is it possible to deal with this? Do you have any intention to enforce consistency in terms of data collection across Wales, in this case in particular, in the health sector?

So, as I said earlier on, what we've requested is a newer, fuller annual data collection, and a specific element of that is around unpaid carers. There's a whole new discussion about wider data collection in health, but I think let's focus on unpaid carers, because that's my particular concern and what I'm here to give evidence on today, and that's what I was talking about—

Could I, therefore, just interrupt you? Sorry.

That's okay.

Apologies if I didn't make myself clear there. The health sector does collect data on unpaid carers, or there is potential for them to collect data on unpaid carers. And it's in that area that I'm talking about, specifically, inconsistency.

Sure. Yes. Sorry. So, I have got responsibility for the data collection in social care, not in health. So, I'm happy to have those conversations with the Cabinet Secretary. But I don't know whether you, Denise, have got any information about how the data is being collected in health.

Only with regard to when the cared-for person is in hospital, and if there's an unpaid carer I know there's a lot of inconsistency and concern that perhaps we're not always—. That's an opportunity to record that person as an unpaid carer, which is really good in terms of involving them in discharge planning et cetera. That is part of some of the improvement work that's going on underneath the ministerial advisory group at the moment. We understand it's a complex area. Health boards have different systems and different ways of recording. We have got it as an action for us to look at more closely within our new national strategy that will be coming out. So, it is something that we're aware of and that we are looking at, and we'd like health boards to look at.

So, I think, going back to the point I was making a little earlier about the new data set that we're looking for for unpaid carers, certainly in local authorities, obviously it does take a bit of time to work that through, to ensure that the data being entered is consistent and is being—. You know, we have to go through a process of data validation. But it will mean that, for the first time, there's going to be a national data set on unpaid carers. It will give us a better in-depth understanding of what is actually out there, because I'm not sure that we really know the full extent of unpaid carers. I think we can take a best guess at it. But I think that there are all sorts of things that we could be doing that would give us a better understanding of the data set.

For example, what is known to the system is people who are receiving care services. So, anybody who is in receipt of social care is known to the system. Anybody who's in receipt of healthcare is known to the system. But particularly social care, if there is somebody who is known to the system, either because they have a care package or they are in receipt of other social services, then it is not a huge leap, is it, between knowing who that person is and having a conversation with the person who's caring for them, and saying to that person, 'We're doing the assessment for this individual. Is there anything you need, as the person who's caring for them?' I think that those simple processes are things that we need to see a step change in, and I think that will help us deliver the kind of data set that you're talking about, Mabon, because one of the things that we don't have any information on, for instance, is those carers that have made contact with local authorities for advice and assistance, and that's all that they have had. So, they've been signposted or directed, or they've just got some direct advice from social services, but none of that is recorded, so we don't know the full extent of the support and advice that is being made available to unpaid carers, because not all of them require full carers' needs assessments—not all of them want carers' needs assessments; they just want some advice and signposting to other services and support. And it's that cohort that we really have no information about at all. So, we do need to have a system whereby that is also recorded, so that we've got a better picture.

Thank you for that response, Minister, and thank you for your honesty there. I think it's amazing that we're in a situation where we don't know the data on unpaid carers. Would you agree, therefore, in the absence of accurate data, that we don't have good policies in place for unpaid carers? Because how is it possible to have a policy that is going to support unpaid carers if we don't know how many unpaid carers there are, where they are, and what their needs are. So, is the policy therefore not as good because of that?

No, I don't accept that. We've had legislation in place since 2014 that clearly sets out the requirement to support unpaid carers. So, I don't think it's the policy that is wrong, Mabon. It's putting policy into practice that is where we're seeing the gaps, and I'm very proud of the things that we've done over and above the statutory requirements. Again, I'm sure we're going to come on to talking about the short breaks scheme, and I'm sure that we'll talk about the carers support fund. Those are things that are not statutory obligations. Those are things that we've done as a Government over and above the statutory requirements to continue to support unpaid carers. The fact that we're able to deliver those things and that that can open the door to other support, I think that shouldn't be underestimated either. Something like half of the carers that access our short breaks scheme were unknown to services before they accessed the scheme. So, we were able to put further support in place by them accessing a non-statutory additional support that we've put in place. So, no, I don't accept the premise of your question, Mabon, that we don't have the policies, or that the policies are not effective. What we need to make sure is that the policies that we do have are effectively delivered.

Okay. So, how confident are you, given how few unpaid carers are assessed, and, in light of that, receive any kind of support, that the needs of unpaid carers are being met in the proper way in Wales at the moment, and that the delivery bodies regionally and on a national level are providing in accordance with the needs of the carers in Wales at the moment? Do you think that we're doing that?

Well, as I said, I think I answered that in a previous question. I've now written to every local authority leader in Wales to ask them to set out very clearly what they're doing to meet their statutory obligations in this respect, and, once I've had that assessment, I want to see how that actually sits with the kind of evidence that you've had in committee, because I'm not yet convinced that we are delivering everything that we need to be delivering in that space. I do believe that we've got the right policies. I think we've got the right legislation. I think we know the kind of support that is needed. The next challenge for me as the Minister, and for any Minister that comes behind me, is how we effectively reach all of those people that need that support. Now, if that was easy, Mabon, and if we had been able to do it, we would have done it by now. We're taking that forward, we're looking at how we can identify—more effectively identify—people that need this support, and how we more effectively record the support that we do deliver, even when that isn't necessarily a formal carer's need assessment or respite. There are lots of other forms of support that are available to unpaid carers that are being delivered that are not being recorded.

Thank you. So, if I could go on to the next steps, in the absence of responses from local authorities—and I accept that you're waiting for those—you do have experience in the field for over 18 months now of being the Minister, and you have mentioned that quite a prominent Act was passed, and it has existed for over 10 years, but there is what is called in Wales, unfortunately, that 'implementation gap', that is, the gap between the ambition of an Act and delivery on the ground. Why do you think that that Act has not managed to live up to the expectations in full so far? What is holding us back from delivering on unpaid carers' rights in accordance with what the Act expects at the moment?

Well, to an extent, Mabon, I think that is a question more for the local authorities, because they have the legal responsibility for delivering the provisions of the Act, and I think I've already set out very clearly what my intended actions are going to be, if I get information back from local authorities that I'm not satisfied with. I will have those conversations with Care Inspectorate Wales so that there is much more of a focus, that, when Care Inspectorate Wales are doing their inspections of local authorities, this is considered as part of the overall service delivery that we're expecting from a local authority, and the care inspectorate can actually have those conversations with local authorities and can direct improvement in those areas as well. They do have legal powers in that space. So, I'm not trying to dodge this question. I absolutely want to see all of this happening, but I don't yet have all that evidence in front of me, and, when I have and it's been analysed, I can take a clearer and informed decision about what is the most effective way to deal with this.

Local authorities would come back and would say, 'Well, it's almost impossible' or that it's unfair to expect them to deliver entirely on the requirements of the legislation because they're not funded sufficiently in order to do that. Do you sympathise with that argument?

Listen, I understand the pressures that local authorities are under—of course I do. Again, you will know that that has absolutely been a focus of the discussions that we've had with your party on the budget for this year. It's absolutely focusing on the need to put more funding into local authorities so that they can deliver on their obligations to do the kinds of things that we're talking about here today. It's important to remember, over the last the last two to three years, that local authorities have seen a significant uplift in their rate support grant from the Welsh Government, and I would hope that that will continue as we move forward into a more promising financial situation.

Let's be very, very clear as well that during the really, really difficult years at the beginning of this term—and, again, I remind you this was a term where we were in a co-operation agreement with your party, and you were also party to a lot of these decisions—we did protect the funding for local authorities to a much greater extent than local authority funding was protected in England, where it wasn't protected at all, in fact. So, I do still stand by the fact that we have good policies in place—good Welsh Government policies are in place—and there is an expectation on local authorities to deliver those policies. That doesn't mean that we don't appreciate the fact that they are under tremendous pressure, but this is one of their obligations. Delivering social care is one of the obligations of local authorities, and they have to determine how they use their funding to make sure that those legal obligations are delivered.

Can I bring Joyce in for a second?

Following on from their obligation, the one thing that would inform us about a local authority taking that obligation seriously is whether they've actually discussed it in any committee within a local authority during, maybe, the last year or even the year before. Is there a way of finding out whether local authorities have actually put it on their agendas, discussed it and what reports have come from those? And if we see that there are gaps in local authorities—it could be Gwynedd, could be Carmarthenshire, could be anywhere for that matter, it could be Pembrokeshire—does that not tell us something?

I think you're right, and I guess that council committee agendas are public knowledge, in the public domain. It wouldn't be difficult to do a little bit of research on that and find out when and where it's been discussed. Social care generally is one of the biggest pressures for local authorities. I have absolutely no doubt about that. I think 40 per cent of their budgets—. I think social care accounts for about 40 per cent of their budget. So, I don't underestimate the challenges, but I think constantly just to be saying to the Welsh Government, 'You've got to keep giving them more money, keep giving more money and keep giving more money', we can't keep giving more money that we don't have.

What we do is we allocate our funding and we maximise the funding. I've been very clear, for the whole term of this Government, that local government and the NHS have been our two top priorities. Those have been the two budgets that have seen the greatest input from the Welsh Government. And the local government budget, as I say, is primarily the responsibility—. It covers the responsibilities for social care, but within my own budget—the health and social care budget—there is further support that goes to local authorities and to third sector organisations—£147 million through regional partnership boards. That's over and above the revenue support grant to local authorities. And there is a dedicated amount within the £147 million—5 per cent in actual fact—that is dedicated and ring-fenced specifically for unpaid carers.

Okay. Back to you, Mabon, sorry.

Thank you. This is my final question on this, because I don't want to take up too much of your time. When it comes to providing or living up to the ambition of the Act, every unpaid carer has the right to an assessment. If they receive an assessment, then they have the right, if the assessment says so, to receive respite care. But if every unpaid carer were to have an assessment and were to get that respite, then it stands to reason that we would need someone to step in to care for their loved ones while they go away for that day, the weekend or whatever it may be. Do you think that we have the necessary workforce in order to step in to do that caring work while unpaid carers receive what they deserve and are entitled to, and have that respite care?

Again, local authorities have to determine the workforce that they need. They have to undertake a population needs assessment every—. Three years?

Three years at the least. [Correction: 'Every five years.']

Three years, yes. Every three years, [Correction: Five years, yes. Every five years,'] they undertake a population needs assessment that sets out very clearly what the needs in their particular local authority area are. Now, I can't determine that from from a Government level. That is the needs on a local basis. So, the local authority on a local basis needs to determine what is needed in those circumstances.

Where I do agree with you is, absolutely, that all has to be informed by the data that they're able to gather. That does remain a key to what we're trying to do in this area—to have that better data to inform the population needs assessments that local authorities have to undertake, and inform what they need to know in terms of the adequate recruitment to cover the services that you've outlined.

Okay, Mabon?

Thank you for that.

Thank you for that. I just want to pick up on one point about it being fine having good policies in place and, actually, you can throw as much money as you want at something. That doesn't mean to say that that's right. Actually having the correct policies and the correct monitoring systems to create the performance management around all of these functions is fundamental, and that's where I'd say that the policies are weak, because of the monitoring. And that's not just in this area; it's across any area that has got a shortfall. So, we might convince ourselves we have good policies, but unless they can actually hold the people that they're governing to account, they're not going to be good policies.

Yes, and I think there is absolutely something in that, Chair. That was, I think, the basis of Lesley's question about what the monitoring is showing you. But I think we do have to be very clear that local authorities have their own democratic mandate to deliver on the things that they are elected to deliver. There is a limit to what we can force them to do. We can fund, but they determine how that funding is allocated and the most effective use of it. There are often calls on us to ring-fence funding for certain things. I've been lobbied long and hard about ring-fencing the money that we pay for the real living wage, but we have a very clear agreement with the WLGA that we don't do that, but that we pay it into the regional support grant. It is part of the calculation that determines what the RSG for local authorities will be, but, once they get it, much like the Barnett consequentials that come to us—we get consequentials that come to us, but we don't expect the UK Government to instruct us how we spend it—we can't instruct local authorities how they spend their revenue support grant. But we make it very clear what our expectation is and how their budget has been made up.

Yes, thank you for that. And it's important that they are held to account.

Sure. Sorry, Alistair wanted to say something on policy.

No problem. Obviously, as a good senior civil servant, I need to come in when I hear about policy. I think, as we get improved data sets, one of the things that makes good policy is that we will be better able to triangulate, because you're talking about two things here. You're talking about quantity and you're also talking about quality of the service. As the Minister was saying, the annual reports from regional partnership boards and their role around joint planning and commissioning, and we also have the annual reports of directors of social services. I think this will enable us—. It's always about triangulation, and I think that's something that we're very much looking at as we go forward. I think we're evolving—if we get more data, we're getting into this policy arena. So, we are really trying to drive improvement here, Chair.

Thank you for that, Alistair. Joyce, can I bring you in?

You can, and I'm going to talk about the pressure on unpaid carers and the fact that some carers are just saying they've got no choice but to care, and yet the law says that they must be willing and able. Those two things are clearly at odds, so what measures are being implemented to ensure that carers do have an active choice in the level and the nature of care and support that they can actually provide?

I think it's fundamental to any discussion with a carer, isn't it, to establish if they are willing and able. That should be the first question that is put to them and, as you indicated, that is a requirement of the 2014 Act. That is part of the assessment and that's part of what needs to be happening. So, I would expect that current improvement work regarding carers assessments is making that particular point on the importance of that question. I know that resources are being developed to illustrate the best practice for practitioners when they're going through this process, and there are information sheets for carers on what to expect from an assessment. So, I think there is something here about raising the awareness of the carers and what they're entitled to, and we can come on to that in a moment and say a bit more about that. But it's absolutely vital, isn't it, that both practitioners and unpaid carers know that that is a required area for discussion. Again, I would be very surprised if professionals in this field don't know that, because this is a fundamental part of the Act. When they're undertaking a carer assessment, if they don't know that they're supposed to be asking those questions, I would be very surprised. I think that's something we need to look at. That is fundamental to the process, Joyce, is basically what I'm saying to you.

When we took evidence, we heard quite distressing anecdotal evidence that people were being not listened to. They were trying to express the fact that they weren't able—not necessarily willing, but not able—to provide the care, only to find out the discharge had happened anyway. And, of course, immediately you've got people under stress and unsupported. So, I think there's, from that evidence, a real need that carers know their rights. That's the first—

Sorry, you're talking now about when a relative is discharged from hospital.

Yes, and also, that there's a flag put up if that patient's going to be discharged to home, probably, usually, where the carer already feels that they're not able, and yet we're hearing it's happening.

Well, there's something called the hospital discharge guidance, which sets out very clearly that this is something that they should be doing, that the carer should be identified. To go back to what I was saying earlier on, it's not a huge leap, is it, between somebody being in the system and somebody being admitted to hospital, and that first conversation is, 'How are you going to come out of hospital?' We have something called a 'home first' policy, and this is all part of the pathway of care delay stuff as well, about how you assess whether somebody can come home. The home first policy is about having that conversation with the family and the patient on the day they're admitted, not waiting until they're fit to be discharged and then having the conversation about how you get them out of hospital. So, that conversation needs to be happening on the day of admission, and that's what the home first policy is. That's exactly the kind of practice we've been talking about through the pathway of care delay initiatives. We've got a transformation grant that's been available to local authorities to help with delivering improved domiciliary care, reablement care and all of those kind of things. So, that, I am very clear, is a process that should be in place, and, again, it's about policy into practice. That is there, the discharge guidance is there, and that should be made available to relatives when somebody is admitted to hospital. A key element of that is that that conversation takes place with the family at a very early stage, and certainly prior to them getting that optimum fitness to be discharged.

Moving on, we heard particularly from young carers about better access to mental health support, and young people told us that they're constantly worrying about the person they leave at home. We just wanted to know, whilst a lot of good work has happened in the area for young carers, what is the provision for their mental health and the levels of care that they have timely access to, because it's a double whammy. Their time is so restricted that even if the services are there—and they're questioning whether that's the case—their ability to access them to fit their own timetable between school and caring—and, I suppose, it's the same for anyone—has to be met as well.

Young carers in particular—you referenced young carers—are recognised as a vulnerable group for obvious reasons, and so their mental health and well-being is in our NEST self-assessment, which asks services across sectors to consider the needs of young carers when reflecting on, delivering and improving their service. So, regional partnership boards, through their children and young people sub-groups, are looking to improve the pathways, right the way across the sector, for mental health and well-being. They complete NEST self-assessments biannually, where they report on progress against the NEST principles of trusted adults and providing community-based mental health and well-being support.

We have produced an annual progress update on the NEST framework. That's published on our website. The new unpaid carers strategy will feature an action for regional partnership boards to consider young carers' support in the NEST planning and delivery framework. So, it is something that we are aware of, it is something that we are working on, and it is something we are seeking to approve. That timely and early access that you have referred to, Joyce, is absolutely something that we need to take seriously. That's our 10-year mental health and well-being strategy, published last April, how we are going to improve those mental health services as well.

But the proof of the pudding is always in the eating, isn't it? We can have those strategies in place, but we need to make sure that they deliver on the ground. But we will be focusing on children and young people, and that includes the consideration of population groups who face those additional barriers.

And if I can, finally—. Of course, some of the provision for young people isn't necessarily high level.

No.

It can just be peer support groups. It can be just having an out, away from—a little bit of respite, some back-filling. So, I wonder—and it's about delivery, isn't it—how that's being communicated down to those people who are closing some of those facilities, in terms of the importance of them. So, let's say, for example, in local government, when you're talking about giving people a space so that their mental health can be in a better place, sometimes it's just about having a couple of hours off. For older people, it might be a daycare centre, or a facility, to do whatever. How good, and how joined up, is that thinking?

I think that that is a good question, and it's partly to do with the answer that I gave to Mabon earlier. We're expecting regions to have those needs assessments—those population needs assessments—that would identify the kinds of things that they need to deliver, right the way across the piece. As you say, they might not be high-tech services. They might be the community hubs, for instance. Those have been a huge success in a lot of areas, performing multifunctional support for all age ranges.

So, those are the kinds of things that we want to see, and those are the kinds of things that, actually, within a carer's needs assessment, you might be able to identify. Not everything is necessarily about full-blown respite, where people go away, or the person that they are caring for is taken into a residential setting for a few days. It could be a whole range of things, and that's the kind of thing that we're expecting to be delivered. Sorry, did you want to say something?

Sorry, I was just going to pick up that I know that we're doing work with Carers Wales and Carers Trust Wales around, effectively, grass-roots campaigns out there, about what's going on in local communities, in shops, in places of worship, within the hub. So, it's getting a feel for what is going on in a community setting on a local basis. You can do national campaigns, but—. We've done this before on loneliness and isolation, for example, which I think is a really good example of getting a grass-roots approach to this.

That's fine.

Thank you, Joyce. Lesley.

Thank you. I'm looking at identification and awareness. I think that it's fair to say that the majority of carers—certainly those we've had evidence from in person—had self-identified, or somebody had suggested that they had become a carer, and they themselves then went out to seek support. Again, listening to the carers who gave us evidence, there seems to be a lack of public awareness and professional awareness—and 'professional' in a variety of settings. You just mentioned a national campaign, Alistair. Are there any plans to have some sort of national campaign? Let's focus on the public first, on public awareness.

Okay. We do fund Carers Wales and Carers Trust, actually. We give them over £300,000 a year to develop awareness campaigns, and they have done that. I mean, whether it's as successful as it needs to be given the question that you're asking—. And that is about raising public and professional awareness. So, that is something that is going on, and we've been doing that since 2022. As I say, currently, they get annual funding of over £300,000 from us to do that.

Sorry. Can I just stop you there? Are those campaigns monitored to see how successful they are?

Well, I think that's—. Do you want to—?

I'd say that up until now, between 2022-25 and now, there's been a lot of—. They tell us what they're delivering, absolutely. There has been a lot of focus on the training of health and social care professionals up to now within that, in order that they can identify or help carers self-identify. For the next financial year, we're asking them to change that slightly and to focus more on the community.

We've developed e-learning packages, so that social care and healthcare can continue to access that awareness-raising training. They're obviously in industries where there's a high staff turnover. So, it's important that that keeps going. But we're trying to pivot and have more awareness raising in the community. That's going to be quite hard to monitor. We can monitor activity, but that's always different from monitoring impact, isn't it? So, we do have to think about that. If I look at a poster in my doctor's surgery and I see it, nobody's really going to know that I've done that. But we can absolutely monitor activities. We're having those negotiations now in terms of, from April, what that's going to look like for the next year, but trying to get much more into community hubs, into the chemist, the pub, everywhere, really, so that there is information available, and to the people within that, so it might be not just your social worker that might help you self-identify, it might be other people in the community. So, we're trying to move very much into that space now.

I would say, if you've been giving that funding since 2022, maybe some of the things that they've been spending that money on haven't worked. Because certainly, I don't think—. I remember one carer saying that she would like to see posters in pharmacies, for instance, and she had never seen that. And I've taken a particular notice since and had a look in my local pharmacy, and there is nothing. So, I think it is really important, whilst I appreciate that it's hard to monitor, at the end of the day—

But what you're asking for is that that awareness is more publicly visible.

Yes.

And I think it would appear that some of the awareness raising has been primarily amongst professionals rather than the public, but I think that is the next phase that we've just been talking about. And we're also doing some work with Age Cymru, because unpaid carers amongst older people are quite significant as well, for obvious reasons, so we're trying to do a lot with them as well. So, I think that next phase of greater public awareness is probably key, and so we can come back and let you know how that's been going.

I think it's also important just to make you aware of the social media campaign. Now, I don't think there's anybody in this room who's aged between 13 and 24, so we may not have looked at it. It wouldn't have been targeted to us, so we wouldn't have seen it. But we did have a very successful social media campaign. It was through TikTok and Instagram, I think, very much targeted at those young carers, so the ages of 13 to 24, and we reckon that our monitoring of that estimated that we probably reached almost two thirds of the 13 to 24-year-olds in Wales. And that was about promoting the advice, the support that is available out there for young carers, and actually getting them to think about whether they are young carers, because one of the biggest barriers is actually people identifying themselves as carers.

And we were talking about this earlier, sometimes it's the terminology we use. Maybe if we call people 'carers', they don't see themselves as carers, but if you said, 'Somebody you look after', then actually that might resonate a little bit more, 'Yes, I look after my mum. Of course I look after my mum.' Well, if you look after your mum, then you're a carer. So, there's stuff around the terminology that we use as well, so we're looking at trying to do that as well.

Going back to professional awareness, it was just last week, we had health board representatives in, and I think, again, from the carers, we've heard that there are opportunities that are being missed by primarily GPs, I would say, but also consultants, and that there needs to be far more awareness. Maybe a champion on a ward, for instance, or in a department. We also heard about how the incentives for GPs to raise awareness have now been removed and they felt that there had been decline since the repeal of the Carers Strategies (Wales) Measure 2010. You said in an earlier answer, I think it was to Mabon, that you felt that the legislation that was currently in place was the correct legislation. So, on the back of that, do you still feel that we've got the correct legislation in place?

Generally, yes, I absolutely do, but I do recognise the concerns about the inconsistency of approach within GP practices. I'm not sure that that necessarily needs legislation. It should be almost like a given, shouldn't it, if a GP is having to deal with his or her patients, then part of the conversation that a GP has with their patients should be—that all of that sort of stuff comes out in the conversation. Certainly, I know when I've gone to GP appointments with my mum, the GP has said that to me, and I'm not a full-time carer for my mum. She's 87 and she lives a little way away, but the GP did say to me, 'Everything all right with you then? Blah, blah, blah.' So, again, it's not a difficult conversation to have, is it? I think there's something in that because they are key professionals in this and, on the basis of the feedback that we're getting, I would like to have a conversation with the Cabinet Secretary for health about what more we could do to encourage GPs to be more proactive in this space, because it is an obvious place for this identification to take place, and signposting and direction made. So, that's something I'm happy to take away from here.

Okay. I've got a couple of questions around young carers now, and I think Peter said at the beginning how distressing this inquiry has been. For me, the session with—well, we had a couple of sessions with young carers, and they were probably the most distressing. You put in your evidence paper—I'm trying to find it now—that you'd obviously worked with Carers Trust Wales to develop the young carer identification card. Local authorities have got those card schemes in place from 2023, but, again, we've been told that when the funding that was started for implementation came to an end, a lot of local authorities deprioritised delivery. I'm just wondering if that's something that you have asked in your question to local authority leaders, that specific question around young carers identification cards—how many of those local authorities are still delivering them? So, I was just wondering if that was a question that you'd asked and that you will know when you get all the 22 responses.

I don't think it was specifically in that letter, but we're having regular conversations with local authorities about the use of the ID card. I'll ask Denise just to say a little bit about those conversations, then I'll come back to some of the wider issues that I've got with that.

We have asked them and we got some information back quite a few months ago now. There is a variety in terms of how active—. Some local authorities are incredibly active with the young carer ID cards, because they're separate local authority schemes, they've added concessions, so young people get money off at various places or there's an app. But other local authorities far less so, where the card schemes exist, but perhaps their young carers would perceive there are barriers in the way to them getting them, or they're not being renewed very quickly. So, we have engaged in local authority conversations about what those barriers are, and I think there's probably time to reflect that back to the Minister in terms of having a look at that.

So, when you say what the barriers are, is one of them money?

Money and people.

Frankly, the money involved in this is pennies.

I agree.

Money should not be the barrier to this, and so I want a better understanding, and this is the conversation I've had with officials, because we know that there are some local authorities and some schools that are doing this, and they're doing it very well and there's really good practice. I've got some in my own constituency where I know that they're doing it, and I also know that there are schools in my constituency that haven't even heard of it. And I was really shocked to find that out, but as Minister, I've visited schools that are doing this and doing it very effectively, and it makes such a difference to the young person that they don't have to keep telling their story over and over again to people, that they can show a card, and they can get the support.

I often hear people say, and schools will say, 'Well, you know, unless the young person identifies themself.' I take the view that the signs will be there, much like we've talked in other areas about how you—. Somebody is not necessarily going to come and disclose that they're being sexually abused, for instance, but signs are there that there's something that's not right. I would say the same would be for young carers, that there will be signs that there may be something not quite right in that young person's life and a conversation with them might help to identify.

It is then down to them to decide whether they want an ID card, whether they want to be identified, whether they want to be treated any differently to anybody else, but they have to be given the option. I think where this works well, this is an excellent scheme, and we've seen where it works well and it really does help. I've had those conversations with young carers that hold the ID card, and they tell me the difference it's made to them in their school life: the fact that they can have a little bit more latitude with their homework, for instance; if they might be looking at their phone, there's a reason for that, they're concerned about what's happening at home, and all those kind of things. It can just make life a lot easier.

That is something that we're looking at—again, across Government. I've had conversations with the Cabinet Secretary for Education about this, because this is very much something about identifying schools, and teachers being aware and knowing how to spot and so on. So, I absolutely agree with you; I cannot believe, for the amount of money that is involved in this—. I cannot believe that this is just about money. And if it is, if this very small amount of money is the only barrier, then I'm quite happy to go back and have a look and see whether we can find a bit more money, because it really is a relatively small amount.

Just picking up on what you just said about you've had a conversation with the Cabinet Secretary for Education, because it was very clear from the young carers: we had one young carer who had had the same, I think, form teacher for three years, so he'd been very well supported, because this teacher recognised and knew that he was a young carer, and then when he moved to a different class, we start again. I sit on the Local Government and Housing Committee and we're looking at a new piece of legislation around homelessness, and it became apparent during scrutiny of that that teachers don't seem to be asking—going back to what you were saying about there's something wrong—if a child is made homeless, they're not picking it up perhaps early enough, and is that because teachers don't have time to do that. So, I'm wondering what conversation you've had with the Cabinet Secretary for Education, if this is something that teachers are saying, 'We don't have time to ask this', or is it something that you think—. Again, there's probably a varied picture across Wales, but for me it's really important that a young carer is identified in a school if they haven't self-identified.

Inevitably, I guess, schools will say there are resource issues. We know that we're seeing schools not having as many teaching assistants—learning support assistants they're called now—as they used to have, and quite often they have a significant role with these children. So, I wouldn't dispute that there are resource challenges, but generally, people being aware—. We've talked about—and the Cabinet Secretary for Education is a great advocate for this—the whole-school approach to a whole range of things, whether it's mental health and well-being and whatever, and this kind of sits within that, so that whole-school approach so that everybody in the school understands what they're looking for. If everybody understands that and everybody's doing that, then that shouldn't be a particularly onerous thing for one person to do, because everybody will be aware of what they're doing. So, we're looking at the stuff now through the school health research survey, aren't we? Do you want to say a bit about that? That may help answer this as well.

Yes, absolutely. First of all, just to say that we we have worked with Carers Trust Wales to develop resources for teaching staff in schools to raise their awareness of young carers, and we've provided example lesson plans that they can run with their classes in order to really promote that sort of awareness and self-identification. Those resources are available now to them via the Carers Trust Wales website.

And are they being well used?

They're fairly new—they're a refreshed version of what there was previously. The new versions are currently available on the Carers Trust Wales website. They need to get loaded onto the school platform thing and they're not quite there yet, but that's just about to happen. And so, we will, after that, be able to absolutely find out if they've been used.

In terms of the school health research network that the Minister mentioned, this is an existing survey that young people fill in in school. It has always had a couple of questions asking young people whether they're young carers. Ultimately, we're taking some of that data now, with researchers, to analyse that in terms of what young carers have said. Not all young people fill it in, but there are well-being questionnaires and things embedded in that, and so we're doing some research to pull together what we can find out, really, in terms of the previous years—what young carers have said. We can compare that with young people who aren't carers in terms of their well-being, and does that look different. Going forward, there are plans to do more with that, but I don't know whether there might be a specific question on that.

I'm conscious of time moving on. Do you want to—?

Just one thing I would say as well, Lesley, is that this is being done in parallel with virtual schools as well, so it isn't just in the physical school setting—this will be the virtual schools as well. FootnoteLink

Thank you for that. Thank you, Lesley. Can I bring John Griffiths in?

Diolch, Gadeirydd. Minister, we've already discussed the very significant gaps in the needs that carers have and the provision that's made. And you're quite clear that you expect local authorities to deliver on their statutory obligations and commit necessary funding and so on. We know that, within all of that, respite care and breaks are such an important issue for carers, aren't they? They're absolutely vital to their ability to be resilient and to carry on. Within that general picture that you've described, I just wonder whether you might consider doing anything particular additional on respite care and short breaks in terms of urgent measures or targeted funding.

On respite care, that is one of the key things that I've asked in my letter to political leaders of local authorities: to set out not just what they're doing generally around unpaid carers, but specifically their respite provision. And not every carer's need assessment and not every unpaid carer necessarily wants respite—there could be all sorts of other things that they want.

But specifically on respite, I've very clearly asked for an update on the provision that local authorities are making for those carers identified as needing respite care. So, I'll be able to give the committee more information about that once I've been able to see all those responses and analyse that. I'll give an undertaking that I will write to you about that.

Just to go back to the short breaks scheme, you'll be aware that I have announced funding and that that will continue for another three years. And to be very clear, our investment in short breaks has not been insignificant over the course of this term of Government. As I say, we've just extended it for a further three years. But to be very clear, and I've said this earlier on, but just to reiterate it: that is not the statutory provision; that is something that is there to enhance the statutory provision.

It is over and above, it is tailored to the individual need of the carer, and it could be anything: it might just be something as simple as having a night out in a theatre, where somebody just has the opportunity to get out and have a night out on their own and do something they want to do. It might be the opportunity for them to pursue a hobby. There are all sorts of things. It's absolutely very different to respite care, and just gives them a different type of break to meet their needs.

I will get back to the committee when I have a clearer idea from local authorities of exactly what is happening on the respite situation, but I'm very clear about the need for us to continue that short breaks scheme support, because that is also important to enhance.

Yes, absolutely. We did hear evidence, Minister, that the short breaks scheme may have resulted in some local authorities rolling back the support that they provide. Obviously, you've made it clear what your expectations are, but are you able to monitor that, or will you be able to monitor that through this further engagement that you're having with local authorities?

It's certainly something I will make inquiries about, John, because I've seen no evidence that that is the case. As far as I'm concerned, it remains a statutory obligation of the local authority. I will reiterate that the short breaks scheme is not a replacement for statutory respite, it is an additional enhanced scheme to provide further support for carers. I will certainly make inquiries of local authorities about that, but I have no evidence that that is happening.

Minister, one thing that we also heard was, as you're very well aware, that the local authorities are heavily reliant on the third sector to deliver services, and, as always, there are concerns about long-term funding and the adequacy of funding, and you've touched on those matters already. Is there anything further you could tell us in terms of improvements for longer term commissioning beyond the introduction of the national commissioning framework?

I think that the national commissioning framework is key to that, because that is about how commissioners commission the services that they need, whether it is support for unpaid carers or whether it is the wider social care provision of residential care and so on. It's a relatively new framework and we have yet to be able to evaluate it, because it's only been in place—. It’s not a year yet, is it? Or only just over a year. So we haven't had the opportunity really to evaluate its effectiveness yet, but if we get feedback that it is not delivering in the way that we want it to deliver, then of course it can be strengthened and it can be amended. These things are quite dynamic, aren't they? They have to respond. Commissioning care and support is about considering the sustainability and the context of the contract value. It is about making sure that we're commissioning services, that it's not about the most expensive, it's not about the cheapest, it's about the quality of the care that's being commissioned and the true cost of the care that's being commissioned. We've provided lots of information, toolkits and training for commissioners in local authorities, and, as I say, we need to take some time now to evaluate how effective that is.

Could I go on, Minister, just to ask you again about that balance between the local authorities, their own democratic mandates and statutory responsibilities, and your role as Minister? Have you considered providing more national direction on particular provision, given the patchiness that you mentioned between local authorities? For example. Carers Trust Wales told us that there are some crucial services that will always be needed, for example a young carer support service in every local authority.

I think you touched on that, John, in the question. It's that dilemma between having a national policy as a Government that you want to see delivered and then how a local authority delivers that in accordance with the needs of their local population. I don't think that we can dictate that from a Government level. We can set out the expectation about what we want to see in terms of support for any cohort of the population, but it has to be down to the local authority, through their population needs assessments, to identify what is appropriate and what is needed in their local population area.

Does that mean, Minister, that you wouldn't, for example, countenance ring-fencing funding for respite care, even if the interaction that you're having now and the communication with local authority leaders resulted in you taking a view that something considerably more directed needs to happen if respite care is going to reach the numbers of unpaid carers that it should?

Well, as I said in a response to an earlier question, I get many calls being asked to ring-fence certain elements of funding to local authorities, but we have a very clear agreement with the WLGA that we don't do that, that local authorities have their own democratic mandate and they determine how their funding is spent. We set out very clearly our expectations, whether that is in legislation or whether that is in policy, and we set out very clearly how local authority funding is made up and what the expectations are of that. And I use the real living wage as another example of where I've had calls on me to ring-fence the funding for the real living wage. But it is absolutely the right approach, I think, that we calculate what the funding for local authorities should be, based on what we believe needs to be delivered, and then it's local authorities that have to deliver that within their own democratic mandate.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, John. Thank you very much. Well, that brings us to the end of our session—just over. So, can I thank you very much, Minister, for coming along, and your officials for attending today, what is a really important session for us in closing our inquiry and formulating our final steps within it? There will be a transcript available, as always, for you to check. And just once again, many thanks.

Thank you. Thank you very much.