National Assembly for Wales

Okay, can I welcome everyone to this morning's meeting of the Public Accounts Committee? Can I also particularly welcome Llyr Gruffydd, who's joining us today as well to provide his input? Thanks for being with us. We've received one apology from Rhianon Passmore. Do Members have any declarations of interest they'd like to make at the start of the meeting? Great. I think you're all happy with the translation, and all the usual housekeeping rules apply.

So, item 2, and barriers to the successful implementation of the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015, and this is our fifth evidence session. So, can I welcome our witnesses? Thanks for being with us today. I know that circumstances at the moment aren't quite normal, so we're always grateful for you being able to join the committee to help us with our inquiry. Would you like to give your name and position for the Record of Proceedings? Who wants to start?

And Gethin.

Alun.

Alun Williams, corporate lead officer for policy, performance and public protection, Ceredigion County Council.

And Diana.

Great. Thanks for being with us, as I said, and we've got a number of questions for you, so I'll kick off with the opening questions. Briefly, what has been the biggest challenge for your organisation in implementing the Act? Who'd like to kick off?

Yes. Diolch.

Anyone else? Alun.

From Ceredigion's perspective, I think, obviously, COVID, the pandemic, certainly has changed the situation quite dramatically for us at the moment, and that means that other things are not having as much attention as we would like, because we're having to reflect COVID. The future, really, could well be impacted by that in terms of our resources and our future plans, as we have to recover from that. Recovery from that will be a huge resource implication for us.

In terms of the Act, it's a really important Act, and I think, as has been said, a lack of resources in terms of capacity is certainly a big challenge. So, I think that and all the things that have gone on in these last 12 months, I would see as quite a challenging future for us in implementing the Act even further. I don't know whether Diana wants to come in on that.

Great. Diolch. It's obviously a question, with the pandemic, of resources at the moment, as, Annwen, you said at the start. So, thank you for that. Okay, if we move on to some other Members now and Llyr Gruffydd.

Great, okay. Moving on, and Jenny Rathbone.

Thank you. Bore da. Thank you very much indeed for coming along. I just want to look at how resources are deployed to implement the Act. If I could start with asking how the public service boards are operating, because I know, Ynys Môn: you made a decision to amalgamate your public service board with your adjacent local authority in Gwynedd, so has that enabled you to deliver services more cost-effectively, or is it yet to reap the benefits of that?

Okay. So, obviously, Ceredigion made a decision to stick with the footprint that it occupies as a local authority, so do you feel that your public service board, which obviously brings in a lot of other public bodies in your area, has enabled you to deploy resources more efficiently and effectively?

Okay. Speaking of resources, both Diana and Annwen mentioned some excellent projects, but they're not the sort of big-ticket items that affect all of us, like, for example, obesity across Wales. We have the worst epidemic of obesity in the whole of western Europe. So, are you finding this a way of, if you like, being able to look at the wicked issues that affect us all, and enabling you to be tackling them as one rather than just as separate agencies?

Thank you very much. Specifically Ceredigion, you in your written evidence have said that Welsh Government grants are still delivered in silos, which deters innovative approaches to long-term preventative work. That's obviously a serious point, and one we will need to put to the Welsh Government, but I'm wondering if you can just elaborate on what you mean by that. Can you give us a specific example?

Alun, did you want to add anything? No. Okay. I want to press you all on, really, how you make decisions about—. Ynys Môn, you talked about how it's very difficult when you've got to make savings to deliver day-to-day services and to then be looking to the future and different ways of working. But, setting coronavirus to one side, the UK Government's austerity programme, as far as we're aware, isn't going to go away. So, how can you use the Act to ensure that whatever reductions in funding we may all experience will, nevertheless—. How will the Act help you deliver services differently, because salami-slicing really doesn't cut it after a certain point?

So, do you feel that you have the tools locally to really galvanise the resources you need to deliver your local priorities, in combination with other public, private and third sector organisations?

It goes without saying, if we're going to prioritise something, we're going to have to deprioritise another thing. Does Alun or Diana want to make any final comment on this resource issue?

Well, only in that the recovery stage is obviously going to be extremely difficult for all of us, as we have to prioritise things, and to get, particularly—. The economy, I think, is one of our main concerns—about the impact on the local economy. That is going to have to be one of our priorities in our strategic plans. We've always wanted to boost the economy. I think the PSB, as well, recognises that. That's why we're embarking on the Growing Mid Wales partnership, because we recognise that, as well as the brain drain we experience in Ceredigion, where we turn out quite a lot of educated individuals who go to work elsewhere in Wales and in the UK. To maintain them to work and stay in our communities is a huge ambition of ours. So, that would be part of it, of our ambition. But I think, on the resource element, the main resource we've got is our people. The grants help, but it's how we get people to think, their attitude, and the can-do attitude that we need, really, to deal with this crisis.

Thank you.

Great. Vikki Howells.

Thank you, Chair. I've got some questions around your practical involvement with the future generations commissioner and her office. Firstly, could you just give us an overview of how your organisation has interacted with the future generations commissioner and how effective you feel the support has been?

Thank you, all. My next question is: what barriers do you think the commissioner and her office face as they look to discharge their responsibilities under the Act?

Anyone else want to come in? Diana.

Thank you. And a final question from me: do you think that the role of the commissioner needs to change, moving forward? And, if so, how? 

Okay? 

Thank you, Chair. 

Are you done? Yes. Delyth Jewell. 

Thanks, Delyth. Gareth Bennett.

Thanks, Chair. I think my question areas have largely been covered, so it might be better if you go to the next person.

Thanks, Gareth. Angela Burns.

Thank you very much indeed. Again, rather like Gareth—because I wanted to talk about what you would like to see in the future—I think a lot of mine have been covered, because you sort of answered them. But I would like to just explore a little bit of the tensions, perhaps, between Annwen, who thinks that establishing the CJCs would be a good way forward—more guidance and more solution in the future, but that the partnership levels are working well—and Alun, who had a slightly different view, that although it's proven to be very useful during the pandemic, it can be—in short, we could be slightly overgoverned. We see the PSBs as really being the front line of a lot of these partnership boards. Do you think that, going forward, with the implementation of this Act—and it's one of my little favourite sayings I trot out at every single session on this: there's only three-and-a-bit million of us, and we've got an awful lot of layers—that there's any way of consolidating any of that? Would that be useful, or do you think, actually, it would fly against the ambitions of the future generations Act?

Where do you think that guidance—? You referred to guidance and more solutions. Do you see that coming from Welsh Government, from the future generations commissioner or a combination of all?

I don't know if anyone else wants to add in, but I just wanted to pick up, Diana, a comment that you made that I thought was really interesting, because, again, we're looking at the future and what can we do, and you made the comment that to embed the Act we need the future generations to be leading policy, and that sometimes it feels like an add-on. What do you think we could do—what recommendation do you think this committee could give that would perhaps try to address that, to make sure that the future generations Act is really embedded in all that policy development?

I think it is—.

That's useful. I must admit that I was really impressed when you talked about how the partnership boards—how you've tried to involve the university and the library and so on and so forth. We've had evidence from other stakeholders in previous sessions where there's definitely not been such a high level of integration throughout all the organisations, including the third sector, other non-governmental organisations, within a particular area. I just wondered: do you think that a way forward—is there any scope to be able to have a learning forum to bring other organisations in Wales up to the kind of levels that your two organisations have very well demonstrated today? Because I tell you, so far, you're quite rare in some of the stuff that we've heard, where organisations are simply not this embedded with the Act, or have the Act embedded within them. So, what we want to know is: how can we get that out to people? How can we get other organisations on board?

Who wants to take that? Annwen.

Do you fear that the amazing working together that's happened because of the pandemic may start to fall apart as we come out of it? Because it's something that has been expressed by a couple of health boards—how they embed and keep hold of that extraordinary working together that's been forced on us all.

Thank you. I just want to finish off by asking you—. As you answered other people's questions throughout this session, you've talked about now and you've talked about what you'd like to see, or how you think it can be improved. Is there anything that you think that you've left unsaid? Are there any particular points? This is about how we can make sure that going forward, the future generations Act and the barriers to the implementation of it are removed. Are there any particular key areas you would like to highlight again, or anything you feel you didn't have a chance to say in your answer to anybody else?

That very much brings us back around full circle to my opening question, so thanks, Angela. Obviously, this has been a huge piece of work for the Government and groundbreaking, but it's about making sure that things happen on the ground.

I didn't ask at the start, but in terms of the final question, we've obviously got the pandemic on our hands at the moment. In your view, is the future generations legislation providing a valuable tool as we go through the pandemic, or is it something that at the moment is going on the back burner, and old ways of working emerge because of an emergency situation? Who would like to—?

As I said earlier, there's a danger of it not being at the forefront of our minds as much, because of the day-to-day decisions we've got to make as regulations change every three weeks and new information comes on board, and the demands for new funding for things like test and trace, et cetera. It is a very, very busy time for us in local government. It's one decision after the other that has to be looked at, and to maintain the discipline of the five ways of working can be difficult, I'll be honest. But it is something that we must strive to do, and as Diana gave the example earlier, in terms of our town centres and the safe zones that we created to pedestrianise them, particularly in the tourism times when our streets are crowded—we had nearly 3 million visitors over the summer—that is really important, and we did talk to people, and we continue to discuss that because not everybody wants it, and we have to listen to the reasons why that is.

Annwen. 

We're out of time and I think that's a positive note to end on. So, can I thank our witnesses for being with us today? Diolch yn fawr. It's much appreciated given, as I said, the current circumstances. So, we'll send you a transcript of today's proceedings just for you to check for accuracy before that's formalised. Diolch yn fawr. 

I propose we take a 10-minute break, if Members are happy with that. Good. 

We've got our next evidence session now into the barriers to the successful implementation of the well-being of future generations Act. Would our witnesses like to give their name and position for the Record of Proceedings? 

Bore da. I'm Dr Caroline Turner. I'm chief executive of Powys County Council. 

Good morning. I'm Emma Palmer, head of transformation and communications at Powys County Council. 

Great. We have a fair number of questions for you, so feel free to be succinct in answers, and in the questions as well. I'll kick off with a general question. What do you feel has been the biggest challenge for your organisation in implementing the legislation?

I think, for me, one of the things I'm very aware of is just the scope of the Act and what it requires all of the organisations to do. When we are very focused on key things at a particular time, there's a lot to take into account. For me, one of the barriers is just so much information, so much guidance coming through, and a lot of it very, very broad and very detailed. So, for example, the report that was published in May last year had 299 recommendations for us to consider, and in the middle of dealing with COVID, we did it, and we went through them and we prioritised them, but when I first saw that document, it was pretty overwhelming thinking, 'How are we going to consider 299 recommendations at this particular time and get proper engagement to really understand them thoroughly?'

And, Emma, did you want to come in?

I think, for me, in relation to operationalising it, it's also considering the other Acts that the organisations have to comply with and, quite often, we need to think about the differing priorities within them and how we can align that with the requirements of our cabinet so that we can have one set of coherent priorities that the organisation can deliver, and then make an impact to society. 

Clearly, at the moment we're in the middle of the pandemic. How do you see the effect of the pandemic on the legislation? Has the legislation been a hindrance or has it been helpful?

It hasn't been a hindrance in any way and, of course, I don't think any of us thought last March that we would still be in the situation we're in now in terms of infection rates and in terms of so many people working from home and the restrictions. Our thinking early on was much more short term—how do we cope with what's going on on a daily basis. Now that we're into the beginning of 2021, we've got to start now thinking much, much longer term, not just about recovery—we've been doing some work on that—but also how we learn to work and conduct our everyday lives in a different way, and I think the principles of the Act are very suitable for that. There's nothing wrong with the Act, there's nothing wrong with the well-being goals and the ways of working. If anything, they're probably becoming more relevant now and enabling us to move faster, and helping us to have a framework that justifies planning to work and live our lives in a different way.

Emma, did you want to come in?

I think, with the pandemic, we have been very much in response and in the here and now, but as Dr Caroline has said, looking to the future, the pandemic has actually enabled us to work and deliver services in a very different way and to make changes rather rapidly because of the circumstances we find ourselves in. And so, I think there's some learning there, and working with our partners around meeting the requirements of the Act, and taking forward and delivering on the opportunities that now present to continue to work in a different way and at the required pace.

Diolch. Okay, I'll bring in other Members now, and Llyr Gruffydd. 

I'm with you. I'm really sorry about that earlier.

Welcome back, Karen.

I was wondering whether you wanted to add something in relation to sharing best practice across public sector organisations in this context, but also maybe more generally about cascading down a deeper understanding beyond the upper echelons of local authorities, around the Act and its implications.

Okay. In terms of sharing good practice, I think we do that really, really well in north Wales, and we do it not just across our local authorities, but across our public services board partners as well. We do an awful lot of work within our public services boards, so, just for example, the Flintshire and Wrexham public services boards have recently joined together specifically for community recovery. So, following the pandemic, obviously, we're flexing in and out of response and recovery, but we're doing a lot of work to prepare our communities and support our communities, coming out of community recovery. So, the Act is embedded in everything we do. We might not be doing it consciously, but certainly, in terms of longer term planning, whether that be capital investments in our assets, we're also looking at different ways of working that involve our partners, the voluntary sector and other partners, to ensure that we are providing the best possible service, not just for now, but for the longer term. So, I think there's a lot of really good stuff that we can talk about in terms of how our capital longer term asset planning supports future generations, and how we ensure that the best model that we have in place for those buildings and structures is in such a way that it supports longer term service delivery and collaboration with our communities.

Okay. And you say in your evidence that there's been a steady and growing awareness of the Act and its implications. Could you just expand on what more needs to be done to accelerate that?

I think there was quite a lot of work initially when the Act first came out, and we've embedded it in the council within our governance structures. So, certainly at a senior level, the Act is referred to and becomes part of what we do. As for further extending the knowledge, I think a lot of that comes down—as I almost intimated earlier—to working with our partners, because it's our partners who are working with our staff at lower levels as well. So, they are delivering the services and, as we change our ways of working, the Act gets talked about more and more and it just becomes a natural way of working.

Okay. Just finally from me, then, to the three of you, we've had evidence that points to a perceived disconnect between the Auditor General for Wales, the Welsh Government and the future generations commissioner, and that's illustrated by a lack of unified message and approach to expectations. So, I don't know whether you've picked that up or whether you agree that there might be an element of disconnect—that each of them is looking for something different, or trying to measure something different or are giving out slightly different messages. Is that something that's apparent to you?

From my perspective, I see it reasonably simply—but, then, maybe I'm a simple person—in that it's Audit Wales that are looking at our processes and it's the future generations commissioner that's looking at the outcomes. So, to me, they are two quite distinct pieces of work that do go on, and we are aware that they do obviously have strong relationships anyway. And I think that distinction between the two types of work will become more and more obvious as we get into different programmes from the auditor general and different reports or requirements that are needed from the future generations commissioner.

So, are you content that that's joined up enough, in that if one is looking at processes and the other's looking at outcomes, that they're actually looking—

That's the way I see it, and that's what we've experienced as an authority, yes.  

Okay. And is that similar for Powys?

I wouldn't say that there's necessarily a disconnect. I did hear some of the earlier evidence session, but I didn't listen in to all of it, so I'm not sure what the context was there. I wouldn't necessarily say there's a disconnect, and I have seen the auditor general and the future generations commissioner working across and working together, so the report that was published in May last year, for example. Audit Wales also looked at the way we implement the future generations Act last year, as well.

I do see in, not just the auditor general, but in the work that we've been doing with Estyn and Care Inspectorate Wales, there's a consistency. I would say that all are looking and measuring to see are we planning long term, and everything I see there is then consistent with the Act. We're looking at what shall we do differently today, whether it's early intervention or prevention in terms of social services or the work we do in our schools. What is the long-term impact of that on our children, our young people and our families? So, I wouldn't say necessarily there's a disconnect. What I would say is there's a different emphasis at different times from different organisations.

What I would like to mention is, simply, there is so much legislation that creates the framework for the workings of local government. If you're in the police, if you're in the national park, if you're in the health board, you have a much more limited focus in terms of the work. But with local government our services are so wide, we are subject to so much legislation, some of it coming from Wales and some of it coming from England and Wales, and sometimes the different legislation requires different partnership arrangements, they bring with them different governance, they bring different funding pots and, often, will have different lead organisations, and so, for me, that is where some of the complexity and disconnect tends to come in.

So, for example, I think there have been some missed opportunities many years ago in terms of—. We had the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014 and the future generations Act broadly being developed at a similar time, yet they've created different partnerships, different funding regimes, and a slightly different emphasis. There are similarities as well, but there are differences of emphasis. I'll give you another example: safeguarding. A vital responsibility for local authorities and others, led mainly by local authorities and social services. On the other hand, you have community safety, and that is led more from police legislation and, therefore, England and Wales, and so, different partnerships, different funding regimes, different governance. But, ultimately, we're talking about a similar set of people that need support and need guidance, and so the complexity comes in, I think, in terms of different legislation from different places being developed at different times, and I do think that, moving forward with the work of the future generations Act, there's absolutely nothing wrong with the legislation at all. I must say as well that the current commissioner has done brilliant work in terms of raising awareness, developing the toolkits and the frameworks, but I think my suggestion would be, in the future, working closer with Welsh Government and UK Government as well, so that when new legislation is formulated, the elements are built in at that level rather than at the end of the legislation in the implementation by partner organisations.

Karen wants to come in as well, I think. 

Yes, if I could just add to those comments, I agree with Dr Caroline Turner. I think one of the issues that local authorities are left to do is to make sense of all those different sets of legislation. So, for example, Dr Caroline was talking about safeguarding. What we've done, in order to bring all of those aspects together, whether it be community safety or safeguarding per se, is form a corporate safeguarding board. So, we've had to do that. We've had to make sense of the different levels and timing of different legislation practices, in order to help us steer a way through it and make sure that we've got the right people round the table discussing similar sorts of aspects, and that we're not duplicating.

Thanks, Llyr. Jenny Rathbone.

Thank you very much, and good morning to all of you. I want to look at how we deploy resources to meet the objectives of the Act, and obviously the context is that we're in the middle of three tsunamis: the pandemic, climate change and all the changes that result from Brexit. So, the challenges may change, but obviously there are huge challenges ahead for all of us. 

Dr Turner, in terms of talking about resources in the local authority's written paper, you say that resources are often raised as an issue and a barrier at meetings, but the resource for co-ordinating the public services boards' activities often falls to local authorities, and that makes other bodies think that local authorities are therefore dominating the agenda. But all 46 bodies are obviously required to implement the Act. So, how do you think we can get around that? Because that's quite a complex challenge, I would have thought.

In my experience, both in Powys and when I worked in north Wales as well, it tends to be the local authorities that provide the secretariat and do all the co-ordination, and it does tend to be—. It's quite difficult to have resource located in one organisation that supports a whole range of partners. Whether the resource is based with the police or the health board or the local authority, there tends to be a perception that whoever hosts leads, and it's quite difficult to get beyond that sometimes. It is possible to do, but there is a natural tendency, I think, for organisations to see one organisation as a lead body.

I think that the key as well is in the implementation. So, for example, at Powys public services board, we have 12 areas where we're co-operating with other organisations. They are all integrated, they are all multi-agency in every one of those different elements. So, there is that very strong co-ordination in reality when it comes to working on specific projects and delivering them. That partnership is seamless and it's just natural. But I think some of the comments in our submission were talking more about the co-ordination and the corporate role. It certainly seems, in terms of co-ordinating everything to do with the board's work, whether it's arranging meetings or arranging the annual report, that does tend to fall on the local authorities, and because of that, I think it's sometimes down to perception more than reality—that the responsibility for the Act does fall to local authorities and that it tends to be in the corporate centre.

Okay. Do you think a rotating chair and secretariat might overcome that, so everybody would get a turn and a responsibility?

Possibly. There are various ways of doing it. Of course, the PSB is one of many partnerships that we have. As well, we've got the regional partnership board, so we are rotating the chair there. There are others as well: the regional safeguarding board and community safety partnerships. So, there are many, many different partnerships. We can't just look at the PSB in isolation. We need to see the PSB as one of many aspects of quite a complex partnership arrangement across many partners across Wales.

Thank you for that.

I don't know whether Emma has anything to add to that.

Karen, in your submission, you've said that the Act encourages public bodies to behave in an ideal world, with multi-year budget settlements et cetera and perfect partnership arrangements, but that that is not the reality at the moment. So, what do you think the solution is? We can't have central Government micromanaging local bodies because you then wouldn't own your solutions.

No, indeed. I think, in terms of resources, when the PSBs were first set up, they were definitely seen very much as a local authority responsibility, and it is our responsibility to provide the co-ordination and pull the annual report together. However, what we've done differently with the new Flintshire and Wrexham board that we've set up around community recovery is that we've very much established a really strong partnership role across health, the Department for Work and Pensions, the police, health boards and various services within the council. I think what we've done is very much give each of our areas of focus—we've got four themes, and each of those is led by a non-local-authority lead.

We are, in effect, as a local authority, providing programme-management support and research support, looking across the piece and joining bits of the jigsaw together. But, what we've done is very much left it with each of those leads from other bodies to give us a different perspective of what they are doing and how they work, and how we can all work together better. We've found that we're coming up with so many more ideas around community recovery than we would have done just through the PSB as it was, because we are all concentrating on the same end, i.e. community recovery. I think it's brought a lot of enthusiasm and real, heartfelt concern about how we want to not just return to what we were but make it better and improve, and that's really come out strongly.

So, how has that collaborative approach with your adjacent local authority area enabled you to deploy resources more effectively to meet the needs of your communities?

I think the main rationale I'd put around that is that a lot of the people who sit on those boards are the same people. So, they'd sit on a Flintshire board, they'd sit on a Wrexham board and they'd sit on a Conwy, Denbighshire and Anglesey board, and they were just getting—. So, fire and rescue, police et cetera—they are regional bodies, especially Natural Resources Wales. They're going to all of these different boards, saying the same thing, so we thought, 'Let's bring it together'. That's certainly been a strong positive that we've had fed back from the other public bodies and the voluntary sector as well, which we've involved very strongly in the work. 

Okay, so, how strongly do you think that message is getting across to other local authorities that have chosen to just have a single unitary approach in their local authority? Dr Turner, do you see the merits of having combined PSBs?

I think it varies from area to area. So, for example, I worked in Anglesey until two years ago, and I know you've taken evidence this morning from Annwen Morgen. Of course, there's been a long-standing joint PSB there between Anglesey and Gwynedd, and I can certainly see the value of that between Flintshire and Wrexham—they're so close, geographically, they're both urban areas, they've got a lot in common. But when it comes to Powys, we have 13 neighbours—the counties along our borders—and two of those are in England, and are therefore working under different legislation. We certainly work collaboratively with most of those. So, for example, we work with Hereford on things to do with planning and with the River Wye in particular. We do work with Shropshire on certain things as well, for example in terms of the road network. We work with Wrexham as well, in terms of certain things to do with the countryside and the area of natural beauty that we share. We work very closely with Ceredigion, in terms of not just the mid Wales growth deal, but other elements as well. But, of course, we just need to bear in mind, there's a mountain range between us—we're not 10 minutes away as it is between Flint and Wrexham. Ystradgynlais then—their natural partners are Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council. Crickhowell—neighbouring authorities there are very different. So, the size of Powys means that we've got to look outwards. If we were required to work with one neighbour only, that would constrain us. The one thing we do value at the moment is that we have the freedom and the flexibility to work with multiple neighbouring local authorities, depending on what the circumstances are, depending on what the issues are that we jointly need to address in different areas.

And to both of you: to what extent do you think your budget arrangements affect your ability to implement the Act effectively?

I'm sure this has been mentioned before—annual budgets do not help with long-term planning, do they? You're always on that annual cycle, and although there's relative stability, year to year, we are extremely hampered by short-term grant regimes that come out at the very last minute. We've almost got to have a whole portfolio of projects, potentially waiting to go, in case some money comes up with which we can undertake those.

The other issue is that sometimes projects that are grant funded are then—. Where does the budget come from in order to ensure that that is a longer term and regular part of the services that we deliver? Quite often things have just started, do some really good work, money runs out, stop. And it's down to the local authority to try and put that funding in place, if they see the value for the communities, which then detracts from funding in other areas.  

Clearly, if we're going to prioritise one thing, we're going to have to de-prioritise another thing—that is the challenge for all of us, isn't it?

It is.

Dr Turner, do you want to add to what Karen Armstrong said?

I agree with everything that Karen has just said there. That's our experience as well. But, of course, the other thing to bear in mind in terms of Powys and many of the rural local authorities—we had a positive settlement for our RSG for this financial year, and we're expecting to have the same for next year. So, that is so welcome for us, given the current context. But we need to remember that, over the previous 10 years, we had cuts in our revenue budgets year on year, and that has meant that our revenue budget is now in the region of about £275 million for next year. We've had to cut £100 million from our budget, and therefore our services, in the previous 10 years. So, when you're then thinking about how you're going to implement new legislation, unless that legislation comes with money behind it, as, for example, the social services and well-being Act has brought in additional money in terms of the integrated care fund and other transformation money, it means then you've got something to focus on and there's money to develop something. It's very difficult. At a time when we've had 10 years of budget cuts, we've had to change the way we provide services, but there was so much we've had to cut year on year. We're now at a place where our budgets are beginning to stabilise, and it enables us to plan longer term. But it's quite difficult, on the one hand—and it has been in previous years—to plan for the long term when you're also firefighting constantly in terms of choosing some very difficult decisions on what services to stop running, and it hardly gives you time, then, to think about, 'So, what services do we want to deliver differently?' So, funding certainly makes a big difference, but it's very difficult when you've got constant budget cuts.

Sorry, Caroline, to interrupt, but I think, Emma, did you want to add to that?

Yes, please.

Sorry, Nick, I didn't hear what you said.

Sorry. I just saw Emma—. Emma was—

Oh, okay. Thank you.

Thanks. I agree with both my colleagues, but I also need to demonstrate, particularly from a Powys partnership perspective. The public services board and the regional partnership board have worked extremely closely on two of the steps that are within our longer term plan and have successfully put forward and drawn down grant moneys from Welsh Government to support a programme of work around providing services back in county and new models of care for integrated health and social care. What that means is, whilst we've got the initial funding, to look at something innovative and creative that will make a difference to people locally, what we then have to do is look at our revenue budgets longer term and how that will then change to support and sustain the implementation of that innovation. And so, it's picking up on Karen's point about the annual budget. It becomes quite a challenge, because there's a significant amount of public money being invested in the creative element with uncertainty about the longer term sustainability, and also that transition, because you almost run things in parallel. So, sometimes you need to fund things almost twice for a period of time to transition across to the new way of doing things. But we have been very fortunate to access the funding from Welsh Government's transformation fund, through that joint working and collaboration between the two partnerships, and that has seen the involvement of not just the local authority and health board but the third sector being a major player in that also.

I would never want any of us to underestimate the challenges ahead, both financially and in terms of public health and everything else, but I wondered if I could just put to you the idea that, actually, change never happens in times of plenty because you certainly haven't got the drivers; but transformation occurs because we have to do things differently, because we have fewer resources to do it. I wonder if you'd just finally comment on that.

I think there's a lot of truth in that, and this is why I mentioned earlier on that COVID has forced us, really, to work in very different ways, deliver services in very different ways. And I think the challenge for all of us now is how, out of a very bad year that we've had in terms of public health and the economy, how do we capture some of the things that we've been doing differently, whether it's working from home, delivering services and trying to maintain services by using digital and click and collect, providing services in a very different way. How do we capture those and build them into the future? The same for the health system as well. Virtual GP appointments would have taken years to introduce, but we've all got used to that over the past 10 months. How do we capture that now so that we can bank those benefits, in particular financial benefits and benefits to the environment long term, so that we don't revert to the old ways of doing things that are more costly and more damaging to the environment? So, the challenge for all of us, I think, is to reflect on how we're currently living our lives and working. How can we maintain that long term but bearing in mind the need for human contact, as well, and some face-to-face contact once the pandemic is in a better place? But if we all go back to the way everything was being done before, then we will lose lots of the benefits that we've gained. But I would agree with what you said there, Jenny, in terms of sometimes needing a crisis to force change, and certainly the changes we've seen have happened much, much quicker than had we planned them over a number of years.

I saw you nodding, Karen. Is there anything you want to add to that?

Yes, thank you. I totally agree that—. Certainly, budget reductions—drastic budget reductions—and then COVID on top of that, have been major, major drivers in terms of how we do look at things differently and deliver services in a different way. One of the examples we've got is that we had a very old, dilapidated asset and service provision in terms of our day centres for older people, and what we've done is done a really innovative rebuild of that area, and we've also gone into partnership with a third sector body, called HFT, to actually deliver the services and provide so much more than we could ever have done. So, it's basically a commissioning-type role, but because of their experience in ensuring that people with learning difficulties have got the opportunities to grow, expand, find work et cetera, it's far, far improved and really widened the service offer for those people.

Thank you. Thank you, Nick.

Thanks, Jenny. Vikki Howells.

Thank you, Chair. I've got some practical questions about how you've engaged with the
future generations commissioner's office. So, could you just talk us through how you've found that contact to be and how effective you have perceived it?

I heard Annwen Morgan's evidence earlier about the way the commissioner had worked with Anglesey council in terms of plans for Wylfa Newydd. I worked in Anglesey at the time, and I would agree with Annwen that the links that were created then and the support given was invaluable, but I think that was because of a particular, very large strategic project in one part of Wales. The experience in Powys is different; we haven't got the same types of examples that have needed that focus on a particular development. And so I think there have been fewer direct contacts with the commissioner's office. Preparing for this as well has certainly made me think maybe we need to be more proactive with the commissioner's office, maybe we need to invite the commissioner over to attend some of our meetings, whether they're PSB or council meetings. I think of the way we deal with other regulators, for example. I know the commissioner isn't a regulator in the same way, but we have designated officers that work with us in terms of education, social services, Audit Wales as well. And we get to know the people, they get to know us, and they're able to come on the improvement journey with us. And I don't think we've quite got to that level with the commissioner's office, and I think that is something where there's responsibility on both sides. I don't know whether the commissioner's office has the resources to do that, to be honest with you. But the experience of two local authorities is quite different because the circumstances have differed. But it is Emma's team that deal with the commissioner's office on a more regular basis in terms of looking at the guidance, looking at the new tools that come out, and then we prepare our annual report as well. So, maybe Emma would have more to report than I would in terms of the nature of the support we've had so far, and how that could be improved.

Yes, if I can come in there, now, Vikki, as well, I certainly agree about a sort of relationship manager-type position who could work with us, and, as Dr Turner stated there, about actually understanding what we're doing and how we're doing things and provide practical and research support. We don't have the finances to do research, we don't have the capacity, and I feel sometimes that there's a lot of expectation that we do have that. We make the best of the guidance that the future generations commissioner provides, but there's an awful lot of it. There are pages and pages of recommendations, and trying to get your head around all of those is sometimes just too much, and I think if things were streamlined, prioritised and agreed and worked with us—with us as public bodies—about what the priorities are and how we can all work together towards those similar priorities, we'd have far more impact than we do at the moment.

Emma, was there anything you wanted to add from your experience?

Yes, I agree with both. Certainly, on the reams of recommendations that we received from the commissioner in the current context, that was a challenge in itself to understand across a complex organisation in a very dynamic situation. We have had little interaction with the commissioner's office themselves from a Powys perspective. However, we have utilised the frameworks that have been made available to us, and we've actually tried to incorporate those frameworks and any good practice examples into our ordinary corporate improvement plan, and so we take forward things like the journey checker year on year, so we can see if we're making progress. We've taken the seven corporate approaches, we identify which goals our objectives are meeting, and we also make sure that we weave in the sustainable principles. We've also got all of that within our impact assessments as well.

But I agree with Caroline—I think, with the resource that the commissioner has, maybe we could have greater support or network arrangements with our public services board, and maybe specific themes that we can focus on, tailored to our own longer term plan that would assist us, and also maybe draw examples, picking up on what Karen was saying around the research that's available to us to help us on certain areas of our plans, and the delivery of those, which is the most important component.

Thank you, all. So, my next question is what barriers you think the commissioner and her office face as they look to discharge their responsibilities under the Act.

I'm not sure what the commissioner's resources are. I don't know what her budget is. It's not something I've looked at in detail, but, certainly, as Karen, Emma and I have all said, having more regular direct engagement with us would be helpful. I don't know whether there's resource to do that, but, of course, working in the way we are now, working remotely from home, certainly, the barrier of travel isn't there anymore, and so it might be easier in future for the commissioner to maybe designate some officers to work with certain regions, or certain types of local authorities.

That would remove one of the barriers, I think, because when we receive reports from the auditor general or from some of the other inspectorates, we know that they're on the way—we've worked with them on the content, we've been interviewed, we've had meetings with them, they've been observing our work. We don't have that to the same extent with the commissioner. So, the commissioner's work is a bit more distanced from us, and the perception then is, when the reports arrive, the first reaction is, 'Great, but how are we going to deal with this?' There is so much in there, and often they come with very little advance notice, and there hasn't been meaningful engagement maybe in advance. There may have been some workshops with some of the officers specifically working on PSB work for us. For a lot of us, when they arrive, you think, 'Oh, okay, this is a really chunky document that we've now got to digest.' That's why we've hard-wired so much of the requirements of the Act into our processes. So, the processes are there, and we can demonstrate clearly in everything we do that we do take the Act into consideration. We consider the well-being goals, the ways of working, we do use the simple-changes documents, the journey checker—there are so many things that we do use, but it is Emma and the team beavering away in the centre that put those in the documents. Whether, then, all of the services and the managers are aware of where they came from and what the requirement is, I'm not so sure. At the higher level, the more senior level, they would be, but when it comes to the service managers and the team managers, they'd certainly be familiar with the terminology and the requirements, but I'm not sure that they would know where the requirements came from originally. And I think having that more of a contact with the commissioner's office, with the commissioner and her staff, would make that type of thing more meaningful, so we would be on the journey with them, rather than looking at the website and receiving links to documents. The documents are really good, but it's difficult to digest them when you haven't been involved in the development work with them.

Okay. I'm mindful, everyone, that we've only got about 20 minutes left, and we've still got quite a few questions for Members to get through. So, Vikki, are you okay if I move things on at this point?

Yes, that's fine.

Okay, thanks for that. So, I ask if Members could be succinct, then, and witnesses as well. Delyth Jewell.

Diolch, Dr Turner. Karen, talking about what Dr Turner was just saying there about the disconnect that can sometimes come about from the Welsh Government in terms of a different piece of legislation, you mentioned earlier that there were some new practices that you've had to put in place in order to avoid duplication. Are there any other issues that you'd like to raise, either in relation to the Welsh Government's policies in keeping with the Act, or in terms of, as Caroline Turner was just saying there, inadvertent, I'm sure, duplication between or disconnects between different pieces of legislation?

We certainly still come across the various departments in Welsh Government that do not seem to work across each other, so still very much siloed within their own business area, and it's something that we at Flintshire have strived to overcome by working collaboratively across the authority. So, we do work very, very strongly together. We're not just in different departments, but we look at how the implications of one policy might affect other parts of the business. So, for example, we're working on a food poverty strategy, which we have actually got in place, but that's not just about delivering food to vulnerable old people, it's also about how we might be looking in the future at using our assets as community gardens, as increasing allotment space, as providing stores for people in that sort of area. So, we're constantly looking at a multifunctional way of delivering a service, and I think Welsh Government might just be too big a body to do that—I don't know—but we don't see them working collaboratively as much as we are in the authority.

Can I just mention one other specific example of the disconnect as well? There is a requirement in the future generations Act for—I think it's every five years or so—a public-needs assessment. There's a similar requirement in the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014, for a well-being assessment—either that or maybe the other way around. But I do remember when those requirements first came in, about three or four years ago, we were all working on both of those at more or less the same time in parallel. That is an example where—there is a different emphasis between them—it would be so much easier if we could bring those elements together and do them once. So, what I'm wondering is are there ways for the commissioner to influence other things rather than coming up with stand-alone requirements. Annual reporting is another element. We've tried to incorporate as many elements as possible into our annual report rather than having separate ones, but it's not always possible. But the more alignment we're allowed, the easier it is for us then to engage meaningfully.

Thank you for that. I'm aware that Emma and Karen have both indicated that they want to come in on this, so what I'll do is, if we've got time to listen to both of them, I'll leave the questions about public services boards, because I know Angela was also interested in that. So, if we've got time, Emma and Karen, you both wanted to come in on this.

I was going to pick up on the annul reporting, but Caroline's already covered that, so thank you.

Okay, thanks. Karen.

The only thing I wanted to mention was that perhaps there's a greater role in Welsh Government to bring together all the other commissioners so that they can work together to look at the long-term impact of what they want to achieve, and then you're not getting different advice from different commissioners. Just a more joined-up approach would be significantly helpful for us.

Okay. Diolch yn fawr. Thank you, all.

Diolch, Delyth. Gareth Bennett.

Thanks, Chair. A couple of the panellists were talking about how they interact with the future generations commissioner and that perhaps there could be more engagement rather than just receiving massive reports. Do you have any thoughts on your relationship with Audit Wales and what role Audit Wales should play in implementing the Act? Is there anything that needs to be said there? I don't know who wants to go first.

I think they're still finding their way. It's quite a significant change to the role in terms of looking at a service, how it's been delivered, how it's failed and where the improvements need to be. I think the approach that they're taking at the moment, as Dr Turner stated, is about developing a scope that's local, that means something and we know as an authority we're going to get something out of it. So, the way that they are working in that kind of mode has certainly helped us, rather than just coming in as a more inspectorate-type body, and we definitely got more out of those kinds of stronger relationships with Audit Wales than we've had before.

Okay, that's good. Did anyone have anything to add to that, or shall I move on to the next question?

From a Powys perspective, we've got excellent links with Audit Wales. They've got clearly designated officers working on different elements of the work with us. We're in regular contact with them, and their work certainly is effective and adds value. From what I've seen, they are acting within the spirit of the well-being Act as well.

Okay, thanks for that. We have already spoken about PSBs, to some extent. I don't know if there is anything to add, but I'll ask the question: how successful are the PSBs in facilitating collaboration between organisations, and also in engaging with the general public in terms of the Act?

I think the key thing is people—people and organisations seeing what they've got in common and collaborating. You can impose structures, but that does not mean that you will get collaboration necessarily. Certainly, everywhere I've worked, whether it's in Anglesey or whether it's in Powys, I've seen good collaboration between organisations, not just across the public sector but wider, involving the third sector as well and with the private sector. And it's people that made that work, rather than structures.

I think, in your earlier session, a colleague from Ceredigion mentioned the LSBs before that. Certainly, I felt, going back about 10 years, that structures were being imposed uniformly across Wales where they weren't always necessary. I've worked in north Wales on and off over the past 30 years. There's always been collaboration there, and all the LSB did was try and formalise that where, in fact, it was already very effective. My experience in mid Wales is more recent, but the collaboration there is appropriate and effective as well, but different because, for example, in mid Wales there are two health boards, unlike north Wales that has one very large one. So, there's got to be some variation from area to area but, ultimately, for me, it's people that make collaboration work, not structures. 

So, flowing from that idea that it's not the structure, is the PSB actually necessary as something that needs to be there, or would you have that collaboration anyway even without the PSB?

I think it would vary from area to area. Some areas will collaborate naturally, but that doesn't mean that it would happen naturally everywhere. 

Okay, thanks for that. Does anyone have anything to add or any thoughts of their own on that question?

I think Emma would like to add to that.

From a Powys perspective, the health board and the local authority are coterminous, so we are different to some of the other regions. Obviously, we have a public services board and a regional partnership board, many of whom are the same people that sit around the partnership table, other than the fact that the public services board brings in the additional partners such as the fire service, as an example. I think there's an opportunity—. I personally don't think we need to service two boards. I think we could meet the requirements of both Acts and report once, meeting the elements of that in that partnership arrangement. And I think what we would do is take out some of the bureaucracy, and the focus would be more on delivery.

I think the other component there is the significant amount of resources aligned to the regional partnership board and assisting working in that integrated way. And with the public services board, it's a little more difficult because you're dependent on the organisations' baseline budgets, and those organisations in their sovereign body right are not only meeting their own organisation's priorities but are then having to identify funding to put into the public services board if they wanted to service the collaborative element there. 

So, I do believe that, from our perspective, we don't need two boards. I think we could become one and we could deliver against one plan, and we could resource that plan, and I think we would have less bureaucracy. 

Okay, thanks very much for that answer. Thanks, Chair. 

Thanks, Gareth. Angela Burns.

Thank you, and thank you very much indeed for the evidence session that you've given us today, because it's been very pragmatic and fed back from the ground. You've answered these questions a lot. I want to talk about the future. I want to talk about what you think we need to do differently going forward to make sure that the barriers to the implementation of the future generations Act are removed, and that it's able to become stronger and far more of a central tenet. Of course, I've heard a lot of the responses. I think, Emma, you've just been very clear in some of your response just then and, Caroline, earlier you talked about everything being developed at the same time but with different funding regimes, different partnerships. So, I think I'd just like, first of all, to ask you whether you think we have too many boards, because we've got not just the partnership boards but we've got the regional, the area, and we're getting these new joint corporate committees. And if we could simplify it and you could wave a magic wand, how would you simplify it, and would you hope that the money from those boards would then all go towards the delivery mechanism, and I'm going to assume, not just because you are representatives of councils but because, actually, the councils are the people on the ground, that that funding will then go towards the partnership boards?

I certainly think there's room for simplification in future—simplifying the structures and the requirements, as Emma just outlined. Just some other elements, to bring in some of what we've already said, really, moving forward into the future, would be simplification of structures and governance and reporting requirements, and the commissioner possibly influencing Welsh Government at the policy formulation stage and working with and through those to see what could be built into existing structures, rather than creating new requirements. A third element, then, for me, would be a link officer between the commissioner's office and the different local authorities, different regions and different partnerships. And the fourth element for me, then, is, if we're really going to make this work effectively, aligning the funding. I'm not naive enough necessarily to say we need more funding—that is what we will always all ask for—but the alignment and the simplification of funding to make it less bureaucratic.

Yes, I would endorse everything that Dr Turner has stated there from Powys's point of view. I think that absolutely applies across Flintshire as well. I think there's certainly something—I mentioned before—about the commissioners, all the different commissioners, working together, and definitely having that relationship-type management post for us in local authorities is really important. I think one of our key areas of barriers is really about the limited forward planning that's undertaken by Government, such as within finance and service planning—so, things like sustainable care models for the future, working together to make sure that that is what we've got in place across health, across social care, rather than having to battle our way through to find funding to deliver something that we know makes a difference and improves the services. It's not really a criticism; it's an observation. Obviously, we know that we all have to be realistic, especially in troubled times anyway, but I really think that, given strong collaboration and relationships across north Wales in particular, we've got a really strong base from which we can work together without duplication of different boards and different structures.

Could I just come in? I think, for the future, one of the things that I would like to see is for Welsh Government to assist us. Rather than have annual budgeting, it would be much better even if we had three-year budgeting, because what that allows us to do with some certainty is identify areas where we could invest in collaborations to do things differently. We all know how quickly 12 months go by, and I just think that we would be able to do better planning and have greater impact if we had more certainty and understanding over the financial envelope that's available to us for a longer period of time.

You speak to my heart, because I have advocated since the minute I came here that there should be three-year funding cycles, and it's in every organisation, if you look across the UK—the successful ones. They can have that because they know where they're going, so I totally buy into that. I'm not going to ask you which organisations should perhaps be disbanded and amalgamated, but I would perhaps ask you whether you think that a useful body of work could be undertaken by, perhaps, the Welsh Government—I think it would have to come from them—to go through all of the recent legislation, such as the future generations Act, the social services and well-being Act, et cetera, to look at how it could all be knitted together and reframed, even if it needs tidying up legislation to enact it, and whether that particular exercise would, in the long run, make a significant contribution to simplifying it and streamlining it and ensuring that funding goes to the right places going forward.

Absolutely. From my perspective, if I think, even just from the annual reporting, so coming at it from slightly the other end, we have to do our annual performance report; we have to do a public services board annual performance report; we have to do a regional partnership board annual report; the director of social services has to do an annual council reporting framework report; we do an annual governance statement and there are others. And in each of those reports, there is absolute alignment, and quite often you're saying not exactly the same, but something very similar. And if you think about the amount of time that that takes in terms of administrative resource—. And when you start on these cycles, the well-being assessment, the population assessment, if you did one assessment that you could align the public services to, one delivery plan and one set of reporting, with that, in itself, you'd have alignment of resource to a set of priorities that everyone could sign up to and deliver. That, in itself, simplifies the whole landscape for public services.

Yes—

I'd totally support—. Sorry, Angela.

No, no, go for it.

I totally support everything Emma said there—absolutely. If we could just have one simplified version that brings the important elements of all those Acts together and just provides us with the opportunity to focus, rather than, as Emma said, trying to put all that good work into different phrases because it has to meet different governance expectation. Yes, absolutely, that would be fabulous. Do you want to lead it? [Laughter.]

Well, I'm very anti-red tape and duplication; it's part of my core soul to get rid of that kind of stuff, so I will definitely lead it if anybody were to ask me—Mark, if you happen to be listening. [Laughter.] Karen, can I just ask you very quickly, again, looking to the future, you mentioned that you felt that the Government is still quite siloed in how they implement the Act themselves and handle it. Is there anything that would be worth us, as a committee, taking on board, about what we could say to the Government about how they should change their business processes to try to eradicate some of that siloing, because that must have such a difficult outcome for you guys?

Sure. It is difficult, and it's something that we've worked hard at in Flintshire, as I said earlier, about having really good relationships across the organisation and across the different services. And so, we have that joined-upness at the senior corporate management team level, but then we also, at our senior management level, meet in what's called 'Academi'—senior management academy—and we meet maybe three or four times a year. So, for example, our senior managers have pulled together our council plan for this next year. We've set the framework for it, but they're the ones who have pulled together in different groups from different services to ensure that things aren't being duplicated, or things aren't being missed out. It's a way of working, isn't it? It's a way of working that has those pillars that are joined together so that things don't fall down the gaps between the pillars and also things don't get duplicated.

Okay. We are totally out of time on this now, but we've had a lot of information, so that's been really helpful, so thanks, Members for your questions, and thanks to our witnesses. We'll send you a copy of today's proceedings for you to check before it's formalised, but diolch yn fawr. Thanks for being with us today.

Diolch yn fawr.

Thank you.

So, I move 17.42 to—oh no, I don't, because we've got papers to note, which we do in public. So, yes, item 4 and a number of papers to note, which you can see in your packs. The auditor general wrote to me and Dai Lloyd, Chair of the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee, to update us on the work that Audit Wales is carrying out looking at the procurement supply of PPE. Adrian, did you want to comment on this paper?

Thank you, Nick, yes. Hopefully, self-explanatory; as the letter explains, we're in the middle of undertaking some work in this area. I'm sure Members will have seen some similar reports that the National Audit Office at a UK level has produced already in respect of England. So, I wanted to keep PAC and the health committee informed of our progress and share with you just a few high-level initial observations that we see. We'll hopefully be concluding this work this side of the Senedd elections, if at all possible, so that we can feed in to this committee. But, at this stage, I'm afraid, I'm unable to say precisely when we'll bring this to a head. And just one other point to assure Members on, I've been speaking with my peers in Scotland and Northern Ireland and England so that we, as far as possible, co-ordinate our work on this area, because clearly it's of interest to us all. So, we'll try and build that into our report as well.

Great, thanks. Are Members happy with that? Okay. So, we'll note that. Moving on, and Clare Pillman, the chief executive of Natural Resources Wales, wrote to me on 21 December with an update on the timber sales governance progress, following the recommendations of the Grant Thornton review. So, it looks as though progress has been made there. Adrian, did you want to comment on this at all?

Just to say, Nick, that the letter from Clare Pillman, certainly I've recognised that and that the position she describes coincides with our own observations of the progress that NRW has been making.

Okay. Are Members happy to note that letter? Yes. Okay. And, then, going back to the barriers to the successful implementation of the well-being of future generations legislation, as part of the engagement work of the inquiry, I wrote to over 70 educational institutions and youth groups last October to ask for their support, particularly in the light of the COVID-19 pandemic. We didn't actually receive that many responses unfortunately, but we have received some excellent views from those who did respond, and I've accepted an invitation to discuss virtually with one of the colleges that submitted their views. So, I think that's a good way to proceed. We did discuss the engagement paper with Rhayna Mann in the private session. So, unless Members have anything else they'd like to add to that previous discussion, then I propose that I proceed with the virtual discussion with colleges. Happy with that? Good, okay.

Item 5, the motion under Standing Order 17.42, which I tried to move prematurely before, so I shall do that now. So, we meet in private now for the rest of the session—item 6.