Petitions Committee

That leads us on to updates to previous petitions, and takes us to 3.1, P-06-1500, 'Neath Port Talbot UNISON needs additional Funding for NPT Council'. This was submitted by Mark Fisher, with 355 signatures. Vaughan, I'm going to ask you—you wanted to declare an interest, and could you take us through this one?

Yes—

And could I also declare an interest—sorry, Vaughan—because there's reference made to the shared prosperity fund? Now there is a new post-EU fund coming forward called the local growth fund, and I chair the stakeholder group that is looking at that at the moment. So, I just want to put that on record. Okay. So, Vaughan, if you could just take us through this. Thank you.

Thank you. I've met Mark Fisher, and I draw Members' attention to my declaration of interest, confirming my membership of a range of trade unions, including Unison, the union, although not the Neath Port Talbot branch.

This petitioner has drawn to our attention some of the challenges of moving from the shared prosperity fund to any new funding framework, and the fact that there are now jobs that are dependent on what happens with that funding stream. The petitioner states that there are 67 jobs at risk if the SPF funding—if the council isn't able to move funds around for that. And there's been correspondence since we last considered the petition to seek an update on the shared prosperity fund allocation. The council have provided an update setting out their approach to allocation of both the community prosperity fund, the place prosperity fund and a business prosperity fund, and, as you've noted, Chair, there are now alternative funding arrangements that are in place that have not been fully worked through.

The petitioner has raised an issue about one local authority, but it applies to others, to a greater or lesser extent as well, because of how the shared prosperity fund was allocated. These are local matters for local authorities, their responsibility to the local population, but also matters that Members could and should, no doubt, take up with the new growth fund and with their local authorities, in relevant committees, and, of course, with anything the Government does. This will definitely be an issue for Members of the seventh Senedd and the future subject committee.

We did previously agree that, following a response from Neath Port Talbot Council, we would close the petition. I think we can do that, and recognise the ongoing concerns about how local funding allocations can and will affect local employment.

Thank you, Vaughan. I'm aware that the shared prosperity fund has been used to employ officers working on projects. And I know the First Minister has been making representations to the UK Government about it. There's going to be a transition phase, and there's a little bit of concern that the local growth fund will be capital—well, 70 per cent capital and 30 per cent revenue. Local authorities are aware of this and they are part of stakeholder groups as well.

So, we'll thank the petitioner and close the petition, going forward. Are we in agreement with that? Okay, thank you. Thank you, Vaughan.

I'm also a member of a union, but Unite the Union. So, I don't know if I need to declare that as well, just in case.

We'll move on now to P-06-1522, 'Convene a summit to accelerate sustainable and ethical investment by public sector pensions'. This was submitted by Heather Bolton, with 578 signatures. So, could I ask, Joel, to take us through this, and any actions you wish the committee to take?

Thank you, Chair. I know this petition has come before us a couple of times now, if I remember rightly, and I think the last time we were of mixed views, in the sense that it was getting to the point where it wasn't something that the committee really could do anything about, given a lot of it concerns matters still reserved to Westminster. I think, at the time, I was minded to close the petition then, and I really think that it's probably the same now. I think there's a lot that needs to be looked at in terms of local government pensions. I think it's a worry that they are becoming unsustainable, actually, in the long term, but I don't necessarily think—. This would then feed partly into that, I suppose, at a later date, but I don't think it's for this committee at the moment now. So, I'm mindful just to close it, if the rest of the committee is.

I know I was concerned because they are Welsh pensions, and in Wales we like to do things a little bit differently and ensure that we consider future generations' well-being. We're a member of the Beyond Gas and Oil Alliance. So, it's something that I'm concerned about, that our Welsh public pensions should be invested in ethical projects. So, Rhys and Lindsay. Rhys, would you like to come in first?

I think also Vaughan Gething has his hand up.

And Vaughan. Okay.

I think we probably should close it due to the limited time left in this Senedd, but I see no issue with the questions. We had a response back from the Welsh Local Government Association, the Cabinet Secretary and the Wales Pension Partnership. Following that, the petitioners raised a number of questions to the WPP. I see no reason why we cannot forward those questions to the WPP, and after doing that, close the petition; and when we receive an answer back, forward it on to the petitioner, and then it'll be a matter for the next Senedd to take this matter on. But we've had those questions, so I see no issue why we cannot forward those questions on.

Okay. I'll just bring in Vaughan and then Lindsay. Vaughan, do you want to come in first?

Yes. Look, I don't have a problem with forwarding the petitioner's comments on, but I do agree with Joel that we should close the petition. I think this is one of those issues where we need to recognise there's a straightforward disagreement between what the petitioner wants and how different bodies need to make choices. If you look at the way the Wales Pension Partnership has been drawn together, it's actually been drawn together to make pension funds more stable, better able to get better returns for the pensioners that they've got a duty to, and hopefully that will mean that they're investing more money in Wales in growing the economy, and doing that in a way that is sustainable within the wider policy framework we have.

I don't think that means that we need to agree with the particular point of view that the petitioner represents, but there'll be an ongoing debate about that with the Wales Pension Partnership as it comes into being as a separate company, replacing the several different county pensions partnerships that currently exist. And I do agree that, in the next term, there'll be a future committee to look at that, but I'm certain there'll be an ongoing debate about how that new fund comes into being, the return it gets for pensioners who have a very direct interest—and, of course, the trustees have a duty to those people with pensions; there are probably people in the committee who may be receiving pensions from the now or in the future—but also if there's an opportunity to deliver a return for pensioners that meets that duty, and at the same time invests more money in growing the economy here in Wales. I actually think it's a really positive development.

Yes. I have a pension with the Clwyd pension fund—a very small one from when I was a councillor for a short time. So, I should declare an interest on that as well. Lindsay, could I bring you in?

Yes, Chair. As possibly the oldest person on this committee, maybe I should declare an interest too. I understand that it is the duty of pension funds to obviously obtain the best possible value for money and the best investment for the future of the members of that pension fund, but I, too, like your good self, have an issue with the ethical standards of companies. I do believe that every company needs to be investigated as to the ethics of their business in its very essence. I don't want a wonderful pension, if I'm to receive one, to be done on the back of slave labour or something of that sort. I'm relatively new to this committee, so I understand that three of the Members wish to perhaps close it, but I'm reluctant to say, simply, 'Close it.' I know there will be a new Senedd after May: that's obvious, regardless of the results of the election, because there are so many new Members and so many Members retiring. But what can we do as a Petitions Committee? I don't just simply want to ask the petitioners, 'Well, petition again next May.' Is there any way that we could perhaps forward this on for people to reconsider at that time?

We will be doing a legacy report of outstanding issues, really, that we've raised here, ready for the next Petitions Committee to take forward.

I'm wondering whether that legacy report could just include a sentence about this, because it's a very important issue, not only for the pensioners, but it's an important issue for exploitation and the end of exploitation, and that's what concerns me.

Okay. So, going forward, there are several questions here, but if we could forward those on behalf of the petitioner to the Wales Pension Partnership, we could close the petition, because we are coming to the end of the Senedd, but perhaps put a line in the legacy report, which will be there for the next Petitions Committee to take forward. Are we broadly in acceptance of that?

Yes, I'm happy for more than a line.

Okay. More than a line. Thank you. Thank you, everyone. If we move on now to petition P-06-1543, 'Keep weekend opening at Cardigan minor injuries unit'. This was submitted by Mark Gibbins, with 2,797 signatures. That's another health one, isn't it? Could I invite Lindsay to discuss the petition and any actions you wish the committee to take?

Thank you, Chair. I note that this was initially, perhaps, to talk about stroke victims as well, and I notice that, certainly, some action seems to have been taken by the health board to alleviate the position of people travelling and to try and perhaps—they've certainly made their business case—keep this particular service open. I think, perhaps, in the future, it looks as though it has been successful, and I believe—well, I hope—that the health board would certainly make note of the success of it and consider carrying on literally into the next number of years. I think this petition has probably achieved its aim; I certainly hope so. I think we should thank the petitioners and close it.

There was a suggestion of just forwarding the letter to the Health and Social Care Committee for awareness.

Sorry, I missed that as well. Yes, sorry.

Forwarding the letter will probably be useful because pilots can demonstrate solutions, if funding is in place, so it might be useful for them to see that.

Thank you.

It could be an invest-to-save in the end, couldn't it? You've got a pilot there that proves the case: invest-to-save, not just saving money, but saving lives as well. We'll close the petition. Thank you, Lindsay.

That takes us on to 3.4, which is petition P-06-1544, 'Take urgent action to improve the NHS in West Wales, and address the crisis at Glangwili hospital'. That was submitted by Christine Castle, with 1,304 signatures. Who have I got down for this one? Rhys, please can you take us through this? Thank you.

Diolch yn fawr, Gadeirydd. Yes, another health petition; we're no strangers to health petitions in this committee. Following on nicely from the last one, this is the second time we've considered this and, on the last occasion, we decided to keep the petition open for the comments to be shared with the health board. We've received a detailed response back, highlighting significant challenges, and that's been shared with the petitioner. We haven't received any further comments from the petitioner. So, I think, as agreed at the last meeting, we can now thank the petitioner again and close the petition.

Is everybody in agreement with that? Okay. Thank you. We'll thank the petitioner and then close the petition. Okay.

That moves us on to petition P-06-1545. It reads, 'Stop forcing school children to undress in front of staff/peers in "open" communal rooms'. This was submitted by Louise Phillips, and it gathered 1,281 signatures. Could I invite Vaughan to discuss the petition and any actions you suggest we could take?

Yes. We have considered this petition previously. Since then, we wrote to the Cabinet Secretary for Education, and we've had a response back from her. Again, I think there's an element of disagreement between the Government and the petitioner, and there's a potential way forward with some of the points being made in the petitioner's response or comments. I think it is fair to say that the Welsh Government has outlined its position in response to a range of the comments made, but, in relation to the position on safeguarding, the Cabinet Secretary has indicated that they are now looking to review safeguarding arrangements, and she's asked officials to ensure that consideration is given to the issue that the petitioner raised as part of that work. They're also going to update the current 'Keeping learners safe' guidance, and, of course, the petitioner will have the opportunity to take part in that consideration, to raise their concerns as part of it.

I think that is actually a pretty decent outcome in terms of the issues the petitioner has raised. In fact, they've got across the Minister's desk on more than one occasion, and there's an ongoing consultation that directly addresses those issues. However, the petitioner takes a different view and wants to have clear and enforceable requirements to take place essentially now, or in the very near future. She's set out six areas of concern and she wants us to go back to the Cabinet Secretary. It isn't my view that we should do that. There's a suggestion that there are practical low-cost mitigations, in the petitioner's view. I think you'll find that some of them—staggered changing, screens, cubicles, clear device policies—. A clear device policy is a separate issue, but some of the other matters I don't think are necessarily low cost at all, and in terms of the impact on the school day as well. That's why I think, generally, there is a need to have a proper consultation on what is required.

Given that there are plans to consult on those safeguarding arrangements, I think we should share the petitioner's questions with the Government, and, as the Cabinet Secretary has indicated, the petitioner's concerns will be taken account of and they'll have an opportunity to do that. But I don't believe that we should carry on with the petition, given that there is going to be a whole public consultation process; in those circumstances, I don't think it's the Petitions Committee's job to be an advocate for one member of the public. It has, however, raised the issue. I don't believe there's more that the committee could achieve. My view is we should forward on her correspondence to the Minister, to take account of in the consultation that's ongoing, and we can close the petition at today's meeting.

Okay. Is everybody in agreement? Okay. Thank you for that, Vaughan. So, going forward, if we can share the petitioner's response with the Cabinet Secretary, and we'll close the petition. Thank you, Vaughan.

Okay. That then brings us on to 3.6, petition P-06-1561, 'Close the gender gap in Welsh women's football: fund a national equality plan'. This was submitted by Osamagbe Izevbigie, with 335 signatures. Could I invite Joel to discuss the petition?

Thank you, Chair. I'm sort of in two minds with this petition now, because I know we've discussed it a few times, and I think, as a committee, we're relatively satisfied with the direction that the Football Association of Wales is going in, in terms of improving access to women's football in Wales and almost giving it the same level of importance as the men's game. I know that the petitioner has raised a few more questions, and so this is where I'm mindful of it now. Looking at some of the questions, I know that the Football Association of Wales are committed to looking at, for example, age groups for women's football. I know they're looking into possibilities for establishing that. I know that's one of the follow-up questions that the petitioner has asked. So, I do think we're at a stage now where probably it's best to close the petition, but I'm just keen to know if my colleagues want to forward those questions on to the FAW for one final round, or to leave it as it is. I'm happy either way. Chair, I suspect you're keen for those questions to be forwarded on to the FAW, so I'm happy with that if the rest of the committee is.

Okay, thank you, Joel. Lindsay, do you want to come in?

Thank you, Chair. I'm the chair of the Aber Valley Heritage Group, and we were recently presented with a women's international cap from a lady who won that cap in 1967. And we approached the Football Association of Wales to take part in a nice little ceremony that we'd planned and, indeed, they turned up in force with Laura McAllister, alongside Gemma Grainger who was the then manager. And we packed the event out with young women, young girls, who were all exceptionally keen on football. I have to say, the Football Association of Wales seemed to be doing an absolutely superb job at promoting young girls to take part in football. I think that we should—. I'm loving the options that are available, and I think we should thank the Football Association of Wales for taking the issue forward as they have done. I think they're doing a far better job than, I'm ashamed to say, the Welsh Rugby Union.

I agree. Thank you, Lindsay. But Joel has just said as well about writing to the FAW with the further possible actions that have been put forward by the petitioner, further questions there. So, would you be minded for us to do that? Would that be okay?

Yes, I think that's fine; it would be brilliant.

Okay, great. So, if we could do that and then close the petition, and thank the petitioner for raising this important issue on behalf of women and girls and equality, which should be commended. Well done.

That moves us on then to papers to note. Is committee minded to note the papers? Okay.

That brings us on to item 5, which—. Well, we've concluded the public business, so under Standing Order 17.42, are the committee minded to resolve to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting? Okay, thank you. So, if we could move to the private session, please.