National Assembly for Wales

Bore da. Croeso. Good morning and welcome to the Petitions Committee—my first committee as the Chairman—and welcome to our Members.

Who you've served with for the last three years.

I have indeed, yes. Yes. Thank you.

We have two new petitions this morning. One is the 'Sepsis Public Awareness Campaign—Wales'. This petition was submitted by Siobhan Corria on behalf of Michelle Christopher, having collected 238 signatures on paper. The background to this is that we had an initial response to the petition from the Minister for Health and Social Services on 15 February. There is a research briefing on the petition, and related issues have been prepared for Members' information. You will also note in your pack that the petitioners have also provided further comments, so I invite Members to see how they would like to take this forward.

I think, like most people, I know somebody who's either died or been very seriously ill through sepsis. I think that the raising of public awareness would be useful, but really it's the medical professions who are missing it, and I think that I would like to go back to Public Health Wales and ask them what they're going to do about raising the profile amongst health professionals, because health professionals are missing it, and people are either losing limbs or dying because of it. So, I think it's great to increase the knowledge of the public, but really it's the health professionals, I think, that are the key, that they actually know about it. One of your colleagues can give you great detail of exactly how it works.

Yes, yes. Neil.

Yes, I agree there. I think it's a really important petition and I commend the petitioner and those campaigning on sepsis. Awareness must be raised, I think. As Mike said, it's a good call to write to Public Health Wales to see what they're doing in a professional capacity.

Okay. Leanne.

I would agree that we need to raise awareness of this. I'm surprised at how few people have signed this, actually, because I know it's something that does affect a lot of people. I agree with the points that have been made about training for the medical profession, but medical people are also members of the public. So, if there was a public awareness campaign, it would be at the forefront of everybody's minds, especially the medical professions, I would imagine. I'd like to see some sort of progress on this, so I think we should write back to the Minister to see if we can get more information about the specific merits of a public awareness campaign, and also to Public Health Wales for details as to what they're doing in terms of a sepsis register and also the public awareness from their perspective as well.

Okay. So, we'll do that, to take that forward.

So, then we move to this one. This is an interesting one, in Welsh. It's basically 'Make the "Cofiwch Dryweryn" Mural a designated Welsh landmark'. This petition was submitted by Joe Williams, having collected 1,016 signatures online. There's some background: an initial response to the petition was received from the Deputy Minister for Culture, Sport and Tourism on 7 March. We have a research briefing, and the petitioner was informed that the petition would be discussed, but there are no further comments. I would like to see what action you would like to take on this. Leanne.

I can see that the Deputy Minister's officials are meeting with the community council and the National Trust during this month to discuss what further options there may be. If listing isn't appropriate, then there must be something else. This is an important landmark now. I think it has become something that we're all aware of, and I know that there was outrage when it was defaced, including from Ministers here. So, if we could agree to await the views of the petitioner to find out what they think about the response of the Deputy Minister, and if we could find out what further action is being taken with the community council, then I would like us to revisit this again and not to allow it to be lost. 

Okay. Mike. 

I agree entirely with what Leanne said. Two additional points: after the community council raised £80,000—that's as good a way as I know to say, 'Nothing's going to happen.' But the second point is, we had a Banksy in Port Talbot and they spent a lot of time and money protecting it, and I'm not quite sure why they can't do exactly the same form of protection for this. Anybody at any time can go along there with a can of spray paint and spray it. 

So, Neil, you're happy to support that?

Yes. I'd like to see more murals of this all of over Wales, to be honest. Looking at the notes here from the Minister, it says that it doesn't meet the criteria for listing. Well, change the rules, because this should meet the criteria. We had this problem some years ago when Alun Ffred was culture Minister about the Vulcan pub in Cardiff. That couldn't be listed. I wanted the rules changed then. They weren't changed, clearly, and we lost the pub. So, I think, really, maybe we should write back to the Minister and possibly ask what could be done to change the rules, because if this isn't covered, then obviously the rules are not fit for purpose. This should be covered. So, I'd like to do that. 

Okay.

Can we also ask what can be done to physically protect it? Really, the rules could take a long time to change; physical protection could be put in within a week. 

Yes. Agreed.

Okay. 

The next item on the agenda is updates to previous petitions. This is, 'Revise TAN 1'. This is actually in my own constituency, and I suppose it's really about the extent that we're losing our greenfield sites. You can see the background: we last considered the petition on 5 June last year, and we agreed to discuss the possibility of inviting the Cabinet Secretary to give oral evidence on this. Then we decided to delay further consideration in light of actions announced by the Welsh Government. You'll be aware that 'Planning Policy Wales' 10 came out about Christmas time—just before Christmas—and there's strong feeling, I do know, within communities that that hasn't actually gone any way to protecting our fields and areas that technically shouldn't be in the local development plan, and are not in the LDP, but developers are coming along to—. So, we've really placed this on the agenda to provide an update on the current status of this issue. We have not had any further comments from the petitioner. So, I just invite Members to discuss what action they would like to take on this issue.

I think we need an update from the Minister, and maybe chase the petitioner, but I think the desecration of green spaces in Wales and the eating up of green spaces by corporate entities for huge, billions of pounds worth of profit, is one of the biggest hidden scandals, really, in Wales of these last few years, and also it's probably the biggest extraction of wealth from this country, Wales, in the last 100 years. Money is just flying out in terms of what is happening with the land. I think the site in Cardiff is worth billions, actually, in the west of the city. So, I'd like an update, and I hope we can take it forward after an update. 

I mean, one suggestion was to invite the Minister to the committee. I don't know if you have this issue in your communities, Mike. 

Well, I'm always torn by this because, yes, we do have developments, but I also see homeless people and I see desperate housing need as well, and I think there's a balance between the two. I think that if we are going to write to the Minister, can we hold it there, because we've got another planning one coming up, and I think if we invite the Minister—? We did come to a conclusion some time ago that we would try and get three or four issues to get the Minister in so we could talk to the Minister about—. It's the Minister for planning, housing and local government, so if we can get three or four planning, housing and local government ones together—and this could be one of them—we could see the Minister on those three or four. It seemed to work very well the time we did it before, when we dealt with a number of problems in one fell swoop when we talked to the Minister for environment.

Okay. Leanne, any comments?

I've got some sympathy with that point made about homelessness, but the point made here about greenfield sites is that they're often large corporate developers who are not building social housing, which is what we need to combat the homelessness problem. So, it would be useful to be able to interrogate the Minister on this and, in particular, on how they are going to use the planning system to protect greenfield sites but also to ensure there is enough housing provided so that we don't see the awful scenes that we see in the streets of Cardiff and other cities.

Absolutely. Okay.

Okay. So, just to clarify, we will write to the Minister to seek an update on the current review and the timescales for when that's going to be completed, because I'm not sure that those are in the public domain at this point. But, as Mike has said, when we come on to the next couple of petitions—they also concern planning issues—we can look at that option as to whether an evidence session would be beneficial.

I think it would, but I think we have to do the other ones first.

Okay. So, the next one is 'More Third party rights in planning appeals'. This is calling for legislation that will grant more rights for third parties to appeal on planning decisions. It was last considered on 29 January, when the committee agreed to accept the petitioner's offer of a further report on the reason why the law in this area needs to change. The petitioner has provided further comments and the paper produced by the Cardiff Environmental Law Foundation Clinic. So, how would Members like to take this forward?

I'd like to bring the Minister in, either after we have the petitioner or separate from it. I'd like to add this to what we just dealt with and actually bring the Minister in to discuss it. Whether we want to see the petitioner first, that's a matter on which I don't have any strong views one way or the other. So, I'll agree with what anybody says.

Well, I think it would be useful before we see the Minister—and I don't disagree with what you've just said—to have a response to the paper from the Minister so that we can be more informed when we do our scrutiny then.

Yes.

Okay. Neil, are you happy to go with that?

Yes, I'm happy with that.

Okay. So, in the first instance, we'll write to the Minister and seek that response before coming back and thinking about evidence.

Thank you. Next item: 'End Conflict of Interest in Local Authority Constitution'. This was first submitted by Emma Eynon and was first considered in 2018, in October, having collected 56 signatures. We last considered this on 11 December, and we agreed to write to the Public Services Ombudsman for Wales and the Royal Town Planning Institute to seek their reflections on the issues raised. We've got the responses from the RTPI and the public services ombudsman, and there's a further research brief provided in the meeting papers.

Can I say that I do share concerns about this revolving-door question? For the Cabinet Secretary to say that there is no evidence to suggest that this creates a conflict of interest, well, if that was the case, what is preventing, say, teachers or other local authority employees standing for election in the county borough that they work in? So, there's obviously a conflict of interest there because that is prohibited. So, I don't see this substantial difference in principle with this to that example. Am I getting something wrong here?

No. I agree.

I just think that we ought to prevent planning officers and councillors from undertaking private consultancy work. I don't think it's appropriate. I think there are always dangers, even if they do it in a neighbouring authority, that they're dealing with people who they deal with professionally on a daily basis, and, consequently, they could have undue influence. I think that you're much cleaner, if you're working as a planning officer, if you can't act as a planning consultant in Wales. I don't think we could stop them outside of Wales, but it would at least stop any conflict. And the same should go for councillors. I've known councillors who act as planning consultants outside their area, but it's wrong, I think is the term, and I think that this is the third one that we can invite the Minister in to discuss.

Okay.

They'll have a long day. [Laughter.]

Well, I think it's an opportunity to get to the Minister on these issues rather—. We could keep on sending letters for a long time—in fact, we often do—but it would be nice to get the Minister in and actually ask these questions.

Neil.

Yes, I'd like the Minister in. Maybe because of the number of topics, make the meeting a bit longer in terms of length. It just smacks of sweeping things under the carpet, really. No evidence? Well, there are certainly complaints. I think if you have an off-the-record chat to any builder who does work for local authorities, then sometimes those conversations can be very enlightening.

Can I just say that I think half an hour on each of those should probably be enough? And if we want to bring the Minister back in again—. So, we could just have a day without any of these general items. That's my suggestion.

Just in relation to the timings for that, then, with the previous two petitions that we're thinking about grouping together for an evidence session, we're writing back to the Government in the first instance and we're awaiting their responses. Should we put this petition on hold until after that point, or do you want to take an action in the meantime?

Put it on hold. I mean, it would be strange to have the Minister in for this one and then wait, and perhaps two weeks later have her in for another one. Let's get the three of them together, in sequence.

Okay.

Okay. The next one is 'Review support for asylum seekers accessing further education'. This was submitted by Gulnar Sohail and was first considered by the committee in December 2017, having collected 78 signatures. Really, this is to allow for more asylum seekers to be able to participate in further education. We last considered it on 15 May and we agreed to await the outcome of a consultation on the refugee and asylum seeker plan before determining any further action on the petition.

I think this—. What are we expecting people who are asylum seekers to be doing with all their spare time when they're not allowed to work and they get no support to further their education? There is a plan to make a contingency fund and finance available, but it doesn't come in until September 2020. So, I think it would be useful to seek the views of the petitioner on the commitment made by the Welsh Government, but that just seems to me like you're kicking the can down the road, when there may be a good reason why it can't be started from today, but it would make sense to me to see if we can try to ask the Minister responsible to bring this forward and enact that financial support earlier. Otherwise, we've just got people who are arriving here and have nothing to do with their time at all, and that's not a good situation for anyone.

Neil.

Yes, I think we should write to the petitioner and see what the petitioner's views are.

Okay.

Do you want us to write to the Minister at the same time? These are commitments made in an action plan, so we could seek further detail in a letter to the Petitions Committee. 

Yes, that would be useful.

Okay.

Moving on. This one is 'Welsh should not be compulsory for Children with Dyslexia and Special Needs'. This was submitted by Jessica Fox and considered in May 2018, having collected 81 signatures.

Can I say on this that the Minister has indicated that there are existing powers for headteachers to temporarily disapply aspects of the national curriculum and we should allow that freedom to reside with the headteacher and close the petition?

Mike.

I tend to agree with that. I would have had more sympathy with the petition if they said about teaching a second language, because for some children in different parts of Wales, English is their second language.

Okay. Neil.

This is really with my former language teacher hat on: there are lots of benefits for children with additional learning needs from studying other languages. I think it's a mistake linguistically and in terms of cognitive development to close down their opportunities. But that's just a personal opinion.

Okay. We've had a proposal to close this petition.

Yes, I would agree with closing it.

Okay. 'Ban plastic straws (when drinking milk) in our schools'. This is another one from last year. I think it collected 1,034 signatures. We last considered this on 25 September and we agreed to await further information from the Welsh Local Government Association following the planned meeting of local authority education cabinet members, and also to seek a further update from the Welsh Government in relation to ongoing work by officials and the trial taking place in Pembrokeshire in the future. We had a response then on 25 October, and a response was received from the WLGA on 28 February. The petitioners were informed that the petition would be discussed, but have not provided further comment. How would you like to take this forward?

I think we need further information on the outcome of the pilot exercise. I am very sympathetic to all attempts to try to reduce our use of plastic, but I do understand that for certain groups of people, particularly disabled people, there may be issues around this. So we'd need to look in detail, I think, at what the pilot showed before going ahead and supporting an outright ban. It may be that you could look at a partial ban and still provide for certain categories of people with needs, and so on, but I'd like to know what the outcome of that pilot was before taking any further action. 

I share the same concern as the WLGA says about unintended consequences for some people with disabilities. 

Okay, so if we write again to seek an update, yes? 

Yes.

Okay. Then, 'To Amend the School Admissions Code Relating to Summer-Born Children'. The background: the committee last considered this petition on 13 November, and we agreed to write to all local authorities to ask for details of their policies in relation to requests to defer admission for summer-born children. That covered the number of requests received, the number granted or refused, and where a deferral is agreed, which school year the pupil subsequently joins. To date, out of the 22 local authorities, we've received responses from 15. The petitioners have also provided further comments. So, how would you like to take this forward?

I think we've got to write to the seven remaining local authorities for the sake of completeness.

I should note at that point, Chair, that we had a further response yesterday, so there are six remaining local authorities. 

So, perhaps we need to go back to the six remaining local authorities.

Is this more a matter for local authorities than the Minister, would you say? 

The current situation is that there is a national school admissions code that provides guidance to local authorities around how they admit pupils to schools. Being in full-time education from the start of term after your fifth birthday is a legal requirement. Before that, it is to a degree a matter of policy for local authorities. All the local authorities who have responded say that they follow the details of the school admissions code, and that, at this stage, or the current version of the code, suggests to local authorities that it's at their discretion as to how they admit children, but does guide them. I think it's fair to say that admission outside of a child's chronological age group—so, a typical school entry year—should be in exceptional circumstances, and that seems to be the attitude that most local authorities take as a result.

It's worth noting that the Government is currently reviewing the school admissions code, and we understand that they have undertaken a similar exercise to the Petitions Committee in seeking views from local authorities as to their current policies and the numbers involved, and have collected similar data, one would assume. 

Can I ask, from the information that you've received so far from local authorities, if there are any local authorities doing anything differently to what everyone else does? Are there any that stand out, or are they all broadly doing the same thing?

There are some whose responses feel different in the tone that they're written. Some, for example, stress that they give headteachers more discretion, perhaps, than others who appear to guide schools, at least, that pupils should be admitted in their normal year. Some local authorities—the one that particularly springs to mind is Swansea—say that they are open to any request and will generally look favourably on them. Unfortunately, Swansea weren't able to provide the data for the last three years because they don't collect it in the same way as some of the other local authorities. So it's difficult to see what impact that has in practice.

What appeared to be the case from the responses received is that requests are very few and far between, particularly requests to defer a child's entry until they're five but then have them enter in the reception year, which is the main issue being raised by the petitioner. There aren't many requests. Of course, a low number of requests could be to do with parents not thinking that those requests would be granted. 

It's possible, yes.

So I think, at this point, it probably is sensible to look at the national level in relation to whether the Government sees cause to change the way the current code is written. 

So that would be a case of changing the guidance that the Minister issues to local authorities to ask for more flexibility or to exercise their discretion more widely, or something like that. 

Yes, that's certainly what the petitioners were looking for. 

Okay.

Okay? Neil.

I think the situation is shambolic. I think the Minister needs to get a grip on something that is pretty basic, really. If you look at the responses: Cardiff, no policy; Bridgend, no policy. So, you're left there—if you make an application, you're left to the whim of the director, which doesn't seem right. It's not fair that children can be treated differently in different parts of Wales in terms of access to education. I'm appalled to learn that a parent in Cardiff had to opt for private education. I've actually spoken to the parent as well, and it wasn't something they actually wanted to do, but felt they had no option. That's absolutely disgraceful. 

It has been raised in my constituency, yes. 

And I'm getting fed up of people not replying. So what I'd like to do is write to the—. I'd ask the committee to write to the authorities that have not replied, find out which director is responsible and make a formal corporate complaint, because there are timelines within which they have to respond to inquiries. Just go through the complaints process, and if we don't get any joy, take them to the ombudsman. That's what he's there for.

Mike.

I think that might be pushing it a little bit far at this stage. I think we ought to write to the six authorities. If they still continue to fail to reply, I think then we decide what we're going to do next. 

My own authority apparently hasn't responded, but I do know that their director of education is on maternity leave, so there could be reasons, maybe, why that hasn't happened. We've got an interim one, but I think we should write—. They should respond to correspondence. 

Can I just say that we're elected here? This is the National Assembly for Wales, and replying to this committee is optional. I think it's absolutely unacceptable. 

So if we write one more time, maybe, and see, and then we can go down the road, if they—. But they may well all respond. 

I'll complain individually. Because I'm just—

Can I just say, if the committee is going to write to local authorities and make any threats, then I don't want my name to be associated with any of it?

No, I meant we'd write just to ask them for a response. 

All we're doing is writing to them saying that they haven't responded to the first letter, et cetera.

It's disappointing that they haven't responded and we need this information for our work. 

I think we can ask for the information, but we can do it without making threats—

Can I clarify? Listen, there's a level of professionalism that we should all adhere to, both in local authorities and here in this Assembly, so I think we're well within our rights to complain if we don't get answers—well within our rights. 

We might be within our rights, but I don't think it's the right thing to do, and I'm with Leanne. 

I think if we, first off, write and ask again, I think it may well be that they start flooding back in. Schools and people have got a lot going on, haven't they, in local authorities at the moment. I think they've all been trying to balance their books, so I think if we write another time, then we'll know when this comes up again where we're going. 

Yes.

Okay.

'Make curriculum for life lessons compulsory'. This was submitted by Emily Jones and was first considered in January 2019, having collected 286 signatures. These are being grouped together. So, the next one is, 'Make political education a compulsory element of the new national curriculum'. So, those two petitions are being considered together. It says:

'Despite the vast advances that have been made by social media and fast-paced news cycles, young people often view politics as a taboo subject, seen as something that is not for the likes of them'.

And they

'believe that young people should leave education with a comprehensive understanding of political institutions within the United Kingdom.'

Leanne.  

I think this is imperative, and I've said a number of times in a number of different forums that 2022 is way too late to start implementing this. Not only do we need for people to be very aware of the political world that they're operating in, particularly in these dangerous political times, but also there needs to be much greater awareness of personal relationships politics around consent and sex education, and all of those issues, as well as safe use of substances, which is not covered adequately in schools from a harm-reduction perspective, in my view. And I just don't think we can afford to keep waiting for this, so if there's anything that we can do to press the Minister to, first of all, agree in principle that this is something that all school pupils should have to cover but, secondly, that we bring it forward and introduce a comprehensive package of resources for schools, so that this information can be passed on to young people—. 

Okay. We need the views of the petitioners as well, don't we? 

Yes. So, this is the second time that these petitions have come to committee. I think the first time around, we had additional views from one of the two petitioners and, since then, we've asked them whether they wish to comment on the latest letter back from the Minister. So, we can follow that up again and give them some further time. It might be worth noting that in the papers here, we've referred to the Minister saying that schools do have the flexibility to design these lessons, they don't have to wait for the new curriculum before these things start. She— 

But that's going to make them really unlikely to do it, isn't it? If you've got no centrally produced resources or anything to draw upon, it's going to rely upon local leadership. And I'm sure there are some great things going on in individual schools, but I see such a need for this now, particularly in the light of growing mental health problems. There are things and resources that young people can be given to be able to cope better with these problems right across the range of politics, substances, mental health, sex education, the lot. They're life skills that kids are not given adequate protection for at the moment, I think.   

So, do you want to simply await the views of the petitioners at this point? 

Yes, I think we need to do that, and then do what we can to urge the Minister to act quicker in terms of ensuring that those classroom resources are provided. 

Right, now we turn to the environment, and we've got 'Support for the Control of Dogs (Wales) Bill'. This was first considered in April 2013, having collected 1,119 signatures. We last considered this in July 2018, where Members agreed to a request by the petitioner to defer consideration of the petition until after he had met with the Minister responsible. Now, since then, we've received no further update from the petitioner. The Chair at the time, David, wrote to the Minister for Environment, Energy and Rural Affairs to seek an update, and we then received a response on 7 March. The petitioner was informed that the petition would be discussed, but has not provided any further comments. However, a request has been received from the petitioner's constituency AM, Julie Morgan, for the committee to defer consideration of the petition for another six months. So, really, it's what would you like us as Members—how do you want to take this forward? Is there any merit in deferring this petition? It's been on our books now for six years.    

I'm generally never a fan of deferring. You've had a specific request from Julie Morgan for it to be deferred for six months, and you've got discussion between the Minister and the people concerned. Defer it for six months and, at that stage, we either end it or do something.  

That's fine, I'm happy with that.

It's a new Minister—cut her a bit of slack, really.

And we'll chase a response from the petitioner.

Okay. One thing the Minister says, in her latest letter, is that discussions are ongoing between officials and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, and she has offered a further update to the committee. So, that might be the trigger from which the petitioner comes back.

Okay. Fair enough.

'Introduce a licence to manage land for game bird shooting in an attempt to end raptor persecution'. This has collected 119 signatures, submitted by Anthony Britner, first considered in December 2018. And they want to

'call upon the Welsh Government to introduce a licensing scheme for game bird shooting. In order to prevent the persecution of raptors which is commonly associated with this activity.' 

So, we last considered this on 15 January; we agreed to provide correspondence from the petitioner to the Minister for environment and rural affairs, seek her opinion on the matters raised, and request a copy of the report, 'A Review of the Prevention and Investigation of Wildlife Crimes in Wales 2017'. We then got a response on 14 February from the Minister. The petitioner was informed that the petition would be discussed, but has not provided further comment. It would help this committee a lot if petitioners would provide comments.

I think we just need to chase them up, don't we?

Yes, I think so.

I think, at one stage, we gave them two gos—we wrote to them to give them a second chance. But if at the end of being asked twice they didn't reply, I think we generally took it that they didn't want to pursue it.

For information, when it says that the petitioner was provided the opportunity to comment but hasn't, we provide people with a week, when we send them a copy of the correspondence the committee has received, and give them a week, up until we're publishing the papers for this meeting. So in reality, I suppose, that's a bit more than a week, but it's a week window we give people. So, there might well be valid reasons as to why.

Do you often get people responding after a week, or usually they're quite quick?

No, people do sometimes go a bit further. It just means that, at the time the petition comes to this meeting, we haven't always had those responses. So, sometimes, it's sensible to wait longer—there can be very valid reasons why that week was very bad timing for individuals.

Yes, of course.

So, you go back to them and they will have had three weeks then. That gives them plenty of time to respond.

Okay.

Even if it's just a holding response, saying, 'We're not happy—we'll send you details later.'

And if people do request that they need more time, then we would take the petition off the agenda for the meeting, technically.

Okay.

So the next one is 'Ban the sale of puppies by pet shops and all commercial third-party dealers in Wales (Lucy's Law)'. This was submitted by C.A.R.I.A.D., and was first considered in January of this year, having collected 11,195 signatures.

I'm not surprised there's strong feeling on this at all. It's useful to know that there's a public consultation already under way, and it closes on 17 May. I think it'd be useful for us to wait until the consultation closes and the Minister responds, but to keep a close eye on this petition, because, clearly, so many people feel very strongly about it.

Including members of this committee.

Yes. Neil.

[Inaudible.]—keep an eye on this one.

Great. Okay.

Health and social services. 'Provide child houses in Wales for victims of child sexual abuse'. Two hundred and twenty-seven signatures, submitted by Mayameen Meftahi, and it was first considered in January 2019. And this is learning from best practice

'from the USA and Scandinavia. Recognising the vulnerability of the child victim and the harm caused to the child by multiple interviews, the child house uses a child-friendly response to child sexual abuse'.

At the time when it came, in January, we agreed to write to the Children's Commissioner for Wales and the Minister for Health and Social Services to seek an update on whether the review of advice services set up by the previous First Minister is still ongoing. Quite a lot has come back. She's really wanting to know what your further actions are. 

'The advice services review no longer appears to be ongoing',

what does that mean? So, they announced previously a review and now it's been stopped, since there's been a change of First Minister—is that right?

To be honest, we found it difficult to track down specific information. They have been taking some action in the last couple of years around tendering for different advice services, but as far as we could tell, any substantive review of advice in this area went back actually quite a number of years. So, it may be that we weren't looking in the right place, but I spoke to the Research Service and we're not aware of any ongoing work on this, and certainly not anything that was specific to the issues contained in this petition around the sexual abuse of children.

Is this since we've had a new social services Minister that we've had this correspondence or does it all relate to before the change of social services Minister? 

This petition all relates to since the reshuffle and the new Government back in December.

I'm encouraged to hear that there's a pilot going on and that's the information provided by the children's commissioner. It would be useful to have the petitioner's views on that and to wait for the outcome of that. It's clear to me, and it's been clear to me since I was practising as a probation officer and a Women's Aid worker 20 years ago, that this whole area is inadequate for both children and adult survivors of child sexual abuse. And there's much more that's needed than safe houses actually, but I'm really glad that this petitioner has taken the time to put this petition to us.

My understanding was that the previous First Minister had announced a review of all services that looked at creating a safe place for women to operate within Wales. Now, I would be really concerned if there's any rowing back on that previous commission by the previous First Minister in the light of the change of First Minister, because it's an area that we desperately need to shine a light on and up our game on in Wales, and this petitioner and her story highlight exactly why we need to do that.

Okay. Neil.

Yes, I think it's an excellent petition. I'd say to Leanne that boys get abused as well—to take away the single gender aspect of things. And—

Where does it mention 'single gender'?

You spoke about—. You mentioned one specific gender in your last comments. I was just picking you up on that, Leanne. I think we should look at these things holistically, for both genders.

I think I quoted what the First Minister had said, didn't I, in terms of the review?

Look, my point is that I'm a firm believer in equality and treating both genders as they deserve to be treated. So, I think what we should do is write back to the petitioner, see what their views are and then hopefully take the petition forward.

Okay. Mike.

I'm happy with that. I think there are other things we can do in the meantime as individual Assembly Members.

Okay.

And then the final one for today is 'Gender Pay Gap Reporting'. This petition was submitted by Estelle Hart, and was first considered by the committee in October 2018, having collected 56 signatures. 

The background: the committee last considered the petition on 12 February and agreed to await a response from the petitioner to the latest information provided by the Deputy Minister. A response from the petitioner was received on 13 March and the potential actions are that we could write back to the Deputy Minister, noting the commitment that she's expressed to gender equality and increased openness, but also requesting a clearer indication of the timescales for reaching decisions in relation to future reporting requirements for public bodies.

I'm happy with that, and perhaps I ought to say that I know Estelle Hart.

Okay. Are all Members happy with that?

Yes.

Yes.

Okay. So, our next meeting will be held on 2 April, when the committee will be taking evidence from the Minister for Education. Now, on this one, I would just ask all Members to be here for 9.00 a.m., if possible, because we're doing the actual evidence session at the beginning of the meeting.

Can you write to Transport for Wales—[Inaudible.]

I know. I know the difficulties there.

So, with that, I'll close the meeting, and, in closing the meeting, after my first chairing of this session, I would like to take this opportunity to thank our colleague David Rowlands AM for his time he's been in this chair, since mid-2017. I'm sure that you'll want me to pass on our thanks to him for doing that.

Thank you to everybody. Thank you.