National Assembly for Wales

Welcome to this hybrid meeting of the Petitions Committee. As a reminder, the meeting is being broadcast live on Senedd tv and the Record of Proceedings will be published as usual. There are no apologies. Vaughan Gething is joining us online. Do committee members have any declarations of interest that they would like to declare now? If not, they can do so at the relevant point during proceedings.

Moving to new petitions, P-06-1542, 'Commit to Support Ysgol Gymraeg Llundain's future'. 

'The Welsh Government has announced that it will be withdrawing its annual grant of £90,000 from March 2026. Without this funding the school will be forced to close, dismantling the most effective tool for promoting the Welsh language in London.'

This was submitted by Glenys Roberts with 1,837 signatures. Could I invite Rhys to discuss the petition and any actions you may wish the committee to take?

Sorry, Rhys. We're going to pause a minute, because I didn't check translation beforehand. Apologies. I'm just going to just check translation now. Diolch.

Is everyone in agreement? Thank you, Rhys, that was really interesting to hear about the school, the pupils and what they do, and interesting to read the report as well. I thank the petitioner. I think it was a really good campaign. And we'll close the petition. Thank you.

We move on now to P-06-1556, 'Childcare funding for working parents when their children are +9 months'. It says:

'Enable parents to return to work when their newborn children are +9 months. Currently there is no funding available until they are 3 years old.'

This was submitted by Kathryn Parry, with 2,142 signatures. This is one of a number of childcare-related petitions considered in this Senedd. We've had three petitions rejected as duplicates, so it's a hot topic. Could I invite Vaughan to discuss the petition, please, and any actions you wish the committee to take? Thank you.

The subject committee, the Equality and Social Justice Committee, has within this Senedd term published two reports on childcare, in 2022 and then in 2024 as well. So, there's been lots of consideration from the main subject committee. The petition highlights the difference in the roll-out of the childcare offer, both in terms of scale and eligibility.

The previous UK Government announced the roll-out of funded childcare to be implemented from September last year, providing 30 hours of Government-funded childcare for working parents for children from nine months old. In practical terms, that hasn't been fully delivered across the country. There's been a challenge about having a workforce plan and actually having staff in place. So, it's available in some parts of the country across the border, but not all.

In comparison, in Wales, there is a roll-out as part of the previous co-operation agreement to try to roll out childcare to two-year-olds and under, although that won't be fully delivered within this term. The Wales offer for three-year-olds is more generous than in England because there are 48 weeks of provision. So, there's a longer provision than exists in England, but not for the same age group.

So, there is a difference between Wales and England, and the petitioners, understandably, want to reduce the costs of childcare, and they also want to see a roll-out happen so that childcare is available for younger children. It's fair to say that, with an election coming up, every party will be looking at childcare in their manifesto. The Minister's response notes that. And this is a matter, given that we're voting on the budget tomorrow, where it's important to recognise that money will matter about not just how much can be afforded, but then actually being able to get all the staff in place as well.

In Wales, parents who are going to education and training are also eligible for the childcare offer. So, the eligibility about which parents are eligible, the number of weeks, and the age at which the offer is available in Wales will be part of what takes place in the election, I'm sure, and definitely in the next Senedd. I'd be surprised if there isn't at least one more report from the subject committee in the next Senedd term.

I don't think at this point that there is anything further that can be pursued with the Minister, not just on the basis of time. I think we should thank the petitioners for highlighting what will continue to be an important issue, not just in the run-up to May, but well beyond as well, important for parents and, indeed, the success of the economy here in Wales. My view is that we should close the petition, and it's a matter for political parties to make clear what their offer is and how they're going to fund it, and then whoever makes up the next Government to deliver the improvements that I'm sure right across parties in and outside the Senedd we'd all like to see.

Thank you, Vaughan. Would anybody else like to speak on this? I was a member of the Equality and Social Justice Committee when we looked at this. Recruitment is very difficult now for existing facilities here, and I am aware that it's an issue across the border as well, and actually provision of facilities. At the moment in Wales, Flying Start offers childcare for two-year-olds, and that's being extended as well. I just saw that the petition read it's offered from three years of age in Wales, but there are some childcare facilities now offering childcare from two years of age as well. As you said, it will be something now for manifestos going forward, and we'll close the petition. Is everybody in agreement? Thank you. 

We move on now to petition P-06-1566, 'Welsh Government must legislate for full regard to Local Nature Reserves including Cosmeston LNR'. The petition reads:

'Although statutory, LNRs are hardly recognised in nature recovery plans and Wales’ biodiversity framework. Welsh Government must empower LNR friends’ and wildlife groups by strengthening duties on public authorities to take them into account within the provisions of the Environment (Principles, Governance and Biodiversity Targets) (Wales) Bill. Parts of Cosmeston LNR are SSSI, but neither NRW nor the Council have to review designated features, update designations, or produce a management plan.'

This was submitted by Max Wallis, with 312 signatures. Could I invite Joel to discuss the petition?

Chair—

Sorry, Vaughan. 

I would like to indicate that for this item I won't be taking part. I know the petitioner; I am also aware of some of the issues, particularly on Cosmeston, which is in my constituency. I've undertaken a range of casework on the issue, and I don't think it would be appropriate for me to take part in the debate or to potentially vote and attempt to decide the issue with the committee.

Thank you, Vaughan. We'll note your declaration of interest and that you're not going to participate in this or vote in it. Thank you. Joel.

Thank you, Chair. Just like Vaughan, I've had a number of constituents contact me about these specific issues, and obviously, although it's a wider ranging petition, there is mention of Cosmeston lakes. As you know, when we've discussed this previously, that's a decision I wasn't really supportive of. And again, I think the petitioner raises important points about the strength of local nature reserves, SSSIs and other statutory protections when it comes to developments that are not necessarily within its remit. We've all had planning applications for housing developments in our wards or constituencies where we thought there was pretty strong environmental protections and they have gone out the window when plans have been given. So, I support this petition, but what I note is that the Welsh Government is currently going through the stages of the environment Bill, and I think this is probably the best place for that. I think that's a good way for some of the issues raised in this petition to be brought into use if they were adopted by that environmental Bill. It might be a case where this is maybe sent over to the climate change and environment committee, so they can have an awareness of it while scrutinising that Bill.

Thank you, Joel. That's a recommendation. Would you say that we can now close the petition?

Yes.

Okay, because we're coming to the end of this Senedd term. Would anybody else like to speak? No? Thank you. I'm a member of the climate change and environment committee. The recommendation is to write to the committee regarding the petition, so that they consider local nature reserves when looking at the environment Bill going forward. We'll close the petition. Thank you.

We'll move on to petition P-06-1563, 'Abandon the plan to make Wales a "nation of sanctuary"'. The petition reads:

'The current climate regarding immigration is that it is completely out of control and in dire need of attention. The people of Wales deserve a parliament that speaks and acts for them and their best interests. More focus should be put on improving the nation for the people of Wales and put Welsh nationals first. Wales is one of the leading nations in the UK when it comes to poverty and homelessness, these issues should be addressed before we invite the world to our shores.'

This was submitted by Luke Thomas and has gathered 4,274 signatures. Could I invite Lindsay to discuss the petition and any action you wish us to take?

Thank you, Chair. Well, I just fought a by-election in Caerphilly, and I can tell you that a nation of sanctuary was probably the hottest topic on the doorstep and at any public debate. The people of Caerphilly made their choice, and I thought that it was a very good choice, that they would support a party that supports the nation of sanctuary. I think that a nation of sanctuary—Wales has always been a nation of sanctuary. It's been a nation of sanctuary all of my life. I went to school with children from across the world whose families have sought sanctuary here. I understand that this petition has been before this committee on two previous occasions, and the election is coming up and the public can make their choice as to which parties they will support. But the Welsh Government—and I will support the Welsh Government on this—has made their position clear. There have been no further comments. It's quite obvious that the vast majority of political parties in this Senedd support a nation of sanctuary, and I would suggest that we thank the petitioners and close it. Thank you.

Thank you, Lindsay. Joel, did you want to come in?

Yes, thank you, Chair. I just wanted to highlight a few issues here. As you know, for a short period of time, I was shadow Minister for social partnership, and so I shadowed, amongst others, policies of the nation of sanctuary. From my time shadowing that, some of the issues that I had at the time still remain, in the sense that I felt the nation of sanctuary policy was just that. So, when we were shadowing—so, going to see charities and speaking with refugees and asylum seekers, they were saying that the whole notion of the nation of sanctuary is, 'It's not devolved, but what is devolved we'll make sure works for those coming here in need and for aid.' And what I was finding at the time was that that wasn't happening. It was pretty pointless as a policy, actually. But what happened then was that we had the situation in Ukraine and then the nation of sanctuary policy, then, was shifted to spearhead the support that was being offered to Ukrainian refugees, hence why we had the amount of money that was spent then on helping Ukrainian refugees. So, I definitely think that there is a point here to look at the nation of sanctuary policy because it was pointless. It wasn't delivering, it was just there so that the Welsh Government could say, 'We're a nation of sanctuary.' That's what it was. It was completely pointless.

And the thing is now, we can also argue here, with Ukrainian refugees—that money would have just come from other sources, really, but they thought, 'Well, we are a nation of sanctuary, so that's where that money comes from.' But, again, what frustrates me is that there's no analysis of the effectiveness of that. The Welsh Government says, 'We've spent £63.87 million on this'—well, that's a lot of money, but spent that on what? I think that there are questions to be asked here, really, on the effectiveness of this. This is not a criticism of the Welsh Government, it's a criticism of all Governments, I think—they judge the effectiveness of the policy by how much is spent on it, rather than the outcomes, if that makes sense. I've said it before, but we talk about a nation of sanctuary, but it should be a nation of sanctuary for everyone. If we look at the statistics, it's white working-class boys who are the most deprived in Wales and have the fewest opportunities. But the Welsh Government then says, 'Well, the levers of power that we have for them we're not turbocharging to make sure that they work for them', because maybe it doesn't create the soundbite. I don't know. That's the issue that I have with it as a policy. It's virtue signalling in the extreme, I think, because ultimately it just didn't deliver until there was a need for it to deliver, when there was that humanitarian crisis we had with the Ukrainian refugees coming in. And so that's my view on it.

Okay, thanks, Joel. There seems to be a lot of misinformation out there as well, I feel. Immigration and asylum policy is reserved to UK Government. Asylum seekers don't have the same rights as a refugee or a British citizen. They can't work or claim benefits. So, I know people are concerned that money is spent on them, but they can't work and they can't claim benefits.

You mentioned about the amount of funding that was spent on Ukrainian refugees. In the report, it does actually say: 91 per cent was spent on the Ukraine response. And that figure you mentioned was over several years, from 2019 to 2025, and it represents 0.05 per cent of the Welsh Government's budget. And then as part of the letter, the nation of sanctuary is about

'promoting inclusive communities where everyone can contribute meaningfully to society.'

So, it's supposed to be aimed at bringing people together—those that have the right to stay here—and not having divisive communities, which unfortunately seems to be happening at the moment. I know of a Ukrainian person who was living here when refugees came over, and she was really pleased to act as an interpreter, and some of this funding was put in place to help and to make people feel settled escaping war. A lot of good work has been done, and I think the funding was used for community liaison officers as well, at the time, and for making sure that they were settled and could contribute as well to their communities, which has been really important.

We've heard a lot from Yuliia as well—. Is Yuliia in Caerphilly as well? She's doing a magnificent job promoting the benefits. So, we'll thank the petitioner and close the petition.

The question is, then, outside of Ukrainian refugees, how successful has the nation of sanctuary policy been? That's the issue that I've always had with it. It's just been pointless.

Well, that's something you can carry on questioning the Government on. I feel quite satisfied myself, but it's something you could question the Government on, and I'm sure you will continue to do so. But we'd like to just thank the petitioner and close the petition. Okay, thank you.

If we move on now to petition P-06-1567, 'Condemn and investigate far-right group "White Vanguard" in Wales', the petition reads:

'We call on the Welsh Government to condemn and take action against White Vanguard, whose members have joined weekly demonstrations outside the Holiday Inn Express in Rhoose, which is housing Afghan families who are here legally under a Government resettlement scheme. The group displays antisemitic slogans, performs Nazi salutes, and spreads racist conspiracy theories, threatening community safety and cohesion.'

This was submitted by the Vale for Palestine, with 519 signatures. Could I invite Rhys to discuss the petition, please?

Diolch yn fawr, Gadeirydd. I'm sure most Members are aware of the background to this and the protests that have happened. As the Cabinet Secretary highlighted, this involves a largely reserved matter, which is beyond the scope of the power of the Welsh Government. However, in response, the Cabinet Secretary does make clear that whilst the Welsh Government supports peaceful protest, she condemns any hate in Wales and says that we cannot tolerate any hate in Wales towards others. The Cabinet Secretary highlighted in her response the uplift with regard to funding to social cohesion in Wales, with regard to local communities. Therefore, on that basis, the basis that the Welsh Government does condemn any hate shown, that they have spent more money on social cohesion and that it is certainly a largely reserved matter, I'd like to thank the petitioner and close it. Diolch.

Thank you. Is everybody in agreement with that? Thank you. So, we'll just thank the petitioner and close the petition now, going forward.

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.