Okay. Well, with regard to immigration, clearly, this is something, at the moment, that is out of our hands, and I have to say, it hasn't got off to a great start when initially the post-study work visas were issued just for a number of institutions in the south-east of England, with no consultation with us and I don't believe with the Scottish Government either. So, we have campaigned, pushed, cajoled, lobbied, and I was very glad that in December last year, the Home Office did then make that scheme available to Cardiff and to Trinity Saint David. We continue to press the point that we do not believe that, first of all, international students should be included in any immigration targets. I think all the evidence suggests that the British public don't regard international students as immigrants, and therefore we do need to make sure that they are taken out of the targets and we can continue to press that message with the UK Government. At the moment, you'll be aware that Welsh Government has looked at a specific piece of work on whether there was any scope for specific immigration policy for Wales, although I must say that was mostly in the field of actually the workforce rather than students. You'll be aware that this week the Government's migration advisory committee—there are so many committees these days—have said that they don't believe that there is a case for a separate provision for EU students, as opposed to international students. But we want an immigration system that makes it as easy as possible for those students who want to benefit from education in Wales, and indeed the UK, to be able to do so.

So, what are we doing from now on in then? Are we just waiting to see or are we continuing to push?

No—gosh—Llyr, we continue to push the case at the official level, and at the moment, I'm trying to convene a quadrilateral, if it can be quadrilateral in the sense that Northern Ireland aren't up and running—but certainly with officials from Northern Ireland. We're trying to arrange another quadrilateral between myself, the HE Minister for England and the new HE Minister for Scotland. If I can speak candidly, I don't believe that there's any difference between our view, with regard to the status of international students, and the views of English Ministers within the department in England. It is convincing the Home Office of that case. So, I don't think we need to persuade Sam Gyimah about the importance of this. Jo Johnson got, I think the current Minister gets it—it's a question of whether we can persuade the Home Office of that particular case.


So, what are we doing from now on in then? Are we just waiting to see or are we continuing to push?

No—gosh—Llyr, we continue to push the case at the official level, and at the moment, I'm trying to convene a quadrilateral, if it can be quadrilateral in the sense that Northern Ireland aren't up and running—but certainly with officials from Northern Ireland. We're trying to arrange another quadrilateral between myself, the HE Minister for England and the new HE Minister for Scotland. If I can speak candidly, I don't believe that there's any difference between our view, with regard to the status of international students, and the views of English Ministers within the department in England. It is convincing the Home Office of that case. So, I don't think we need to persuade Sam Gyimah about the importance of this. Jo Johnson got, I think the current Minister gets it—it's a question of whether we can persuade the Home Office of that particular case.

Okay. Thank you. The next questions are from John Griffiths.


So, what are we doing from now on in then? Are we just waiting to see or are we continuing to push?

No—gosh—Llyr, we continue to push the case at the official level, and at the moment, I'm trying to convene a quadrilateral, if it can be quadrilateral in the sense that Northern Ireland aren't up and running—but certainly with officials from Northern Ireland. We're trying to arrange another quadrilateral between myself, the HE Minister for England and the new HE Minister for Scotland. If I can speak candidly, I don't believe that there's any difference between our view, with regard to the status of international students, and the views of English Ministers within the department in England. It is convincing the Home Office of that case. So, I don't think we need to persuade Sam Gyimah about the importance of this. Jo Johnson got, I think the current Minister gets it—it's a question of whether we can persuade the Home Office of that particular case.

Okay. Thank you. The next questions are from John Griffiths.

I have some questions on the sustainability of higher and further education. Firstly, with regard to higher education, we heard that, even without Brexit, higher education is in managed deficit, whilst the funding announcements from Diamond and Reid are awaited. So, is that a concern to Welsh Government, and could Welsh Government take away that uncertainty by outlining a clear funding commitment to the Diamond and Reid reviews?


No—gosh—Llyr, we continue to push the case at the official level, and at the moment, I'm trying to convene a quadrilateral, if it can be quadrilateral in the sense that Northern Ireland aren't up and running—but certainly with officials from Northern Ireland. We're trying to arrange another quadrilateral between myself, the HE Minister for England and the new HE Minister for Scotland. If I can speak candidly, I don't believe that there's any difference between our view, with regard to the status of international students, and the views of English Ministers within the department in England. It is convincing the Home Office of that case. So, I don't think we need to persuade Sam Gyimah about the importance of this. Jo Johnson got, I think the current Minister gets it—it's a question of whether we can persuade the Home Office of that particular case.

Okay. Thank you. The next questions are from John Griffiths.

I have some questions on the sustainability of higher and further education. Firstly, with regard to higher education, we heard that, even without Brexit, higher education is in managed deficit, whilst the funding announcements from Diamond and Reid are awaited. So, is that a concern to Welsh Government, and could Welsh Government take away that uncertainty by outlining a clear funding commitment to the Diamond and Reid reviews?

Welsh Government is fully committed, John, to implementing the Diamond review proposals. It's a commitment that was an element of the agreement between myself and the First Minister that brought me into the administration, and we have been very clear with HEFCW about our expectations and what the implementation of Diamond will mean for grant going to HEFCW. And we've shared those figures with them. With regard to Reid, we continue within Government to discuss how we can implement the recommendations of Reid, but one of the whole principles behind Diamond was to move us to a more sustainable funding settlement for the HE sector in the round, that is fair to students, encourages those with the ability to partake in higher education to do so, especially from those from a poorer background, as well as being able to provide our institutions with the resources that they need.


Okay. Thank you. The next questions are from John Griffiths.

I have some questions on the sustainability of higher and further education. Firstly, with regard to higher education, we heard that, even without Brexit, higher education is in managed deficit, whilst the funding announcements from Diamond and Reid are awaited. So, is that a concern to Welsh Government, and could Welsh Government take away that uncertainty by outlining a clear funding commitment to the Diamond and Reid reviews?

Welsh Government is fully committed, John, to implementing the Diamond review proposals. It's a commitment that was an element of the agreement between myself and the First Minister that brought me into the administration, and we have been very clear with HEFCW about our expectations and what the implementation of Diamond will mean for grant going to HEFCW. And we've shared those figures with them. With regard to Reid, we continue within Government to discuss how we can implement the recommendations of Reid, but one of the whole principles behind Diamond was to move us to a more sustainable funding settlement for the HE sector in the round, that is fair to students, encourages those with the ability to partake in higher education to do so, especially from those from a poorer background, as well as being able to provide our institutions with the resources that they need.

So, you don't accept, then, that there hasn't been a clear funding commitment from Welsh Government to those reviews—the Diamond and Reid reviews?


I have some questions on the sustainability of higher and further education. Firstly, with regard to higher education, we heard that, even without Brexit, higher education is in managed deficit, whilst the funding announcements from Diamond and Reid are awaited. So, is that a concern to Welsh Government, and could Welsh Government take away that uncertainty by outlining a clear funding commitment to the Diamond and Reid reviews?

Welsh Government is fully committed, John, to implementing the Diamond review proposals. It's a commitment that was an element of the agreement between myself and the First Minister that brought me into the administration, and we have been very clear with HEFCW about our expectations and what the implementation of Diamond will mean for grant going to HEFCW. And we've shared those figures with them. With regard to Reid, we continue within Government to discuss how we can implement the recommendations of Reid, but one of the whole principles behind Diamond was to move us to a more sustainable funding settlement for the HE sector in the round, that is fair to students, encourages those with the ability to partake in higher education to do so, especially from those from a poorer background, as well as being able to provide our institutions with the resources that they need.

So, you don't accept, then, that there hasn't been a clear funding commitment from Welsh Government to those reviews—the Diamond and Reid reviews?

With regard to Diamond, I would absolutely refute that. We have been very clear and we have shown HEFCW our analysis of the figures going forward in relation to what is sometimes called within the sector the 'Diamond dividend', although the Diamond dividend is never as big as people imagine the Diamond dividend to be. But we've been absolutely clear with HEFCW and the sector on what that will mean. Now, with regard to Reid, those are ongoing discussions that form part of the normal budgetary process within the Government, but I think we have been as clear as we can be with regard to Diamond.


Welsh Government is fully committed, John, to implementing the Diamond review proposals. It's a commitment that was an element of the agreement between myself and the First Minister that brought me into the administration, and we have been very clear with HEFCW about our expectations and what the implementation of Diamond will mean for grant going to HEFCW. And we've shared those figures with them. With regard to Reid, we continue within Government to discuss how we can implement the recommendations of Reid, but one of the whole principles behind Diamond was to move us to a more sustainable funding settlement for the HE sector in the round, that is fair to students, encourages those with the ability to partake in higher education to do so, especially from those from a poorer background, as well as being able to provide our institutions with the resources that they need.

So, you don't accept, then, that there hasn't been a clear funding commitment from Welsh Government to those reviews—the Diamond and Reid reviews?

With regard to Diamond, I would absolutely refute that. We have been very clear and we have shown HEFCW our analysis of the figures going forward in relation to what is sometimes called within the sector the 'Diamond dividend', although the Diamond dividend is never as big as people imagine the Diamond dividend to be. But we've been absolutely clear with HEFCW and the sector on what that will mean. Now, with regard to Reid, those are ongoing discussions that form part of the normal budgetary process within the Government, but I think we have been as clear as we can be with regard to Diamond.

Okay. The second question, really, is about HE and FE and it's about European funding, which, of course, has been and is on a multi-year basis, which gives, I think, a lot of security and comfort to the sectors, knowing what the budgets will be over a period of time. So, moving from that to a yearly budgeting situation would be worrying. So, would you commit to introducing multi-year funding settlements for HE, and indeed for FE, moving forward beyond Brexit?


So, you don't accept, then, that there hasn't been a clear funding commitment from Welsh Government to those reviews—the Diamond and Reid reviews?

With regard to Diamond, I would absolutely refute that. We have been very clear and we have shown HEFCW our analysis of the figures going forward in relation to what is sometimes called within the sector the 'Diamond dividend', although the Diamond dividend is never as big as people imagine the Diamond dividend to be. But we've been absolutely clear with HEFCW and the sector on what that will mean. Now, with regard to Reid, those are ongoing discussions that form part of the normal budgetary process within the Government, but I think we have been as clear as we can be with regard to Diamond.

Okay. The second question, really, is about HE and FE and it's about European funding, which, of course, has been and is on a multi-year basis, which gives, I think, a lot of security and comfort to the sectors, knowing what the budgets will be over a period of time. So, moving from that to a yearly budgeting situation would be worrying. So, would you commit to introducing multi-year funding settlements for HE, and indeed for FE, moving forward beyond Brexit?

Shall I take this and give you a little bit of a break? She's not very well. I think the multi-annual nature of the European funding programmes has been very, very useful. People can plan, you can get staffing in place, you can have really strategic aims and I think that's really useful for the institutions involved. Of course, what we don't have is multi-annual budgeting from the UK Government. So, whilst I think we would, in an ideal world, like to see a better view of what's coming our way, it's extremely difficult for us to be able to offer that without having that multi-annual funding commitment from the UK Government. So, I think that will be a major, major loss for the institutions concerned. Of course, it's not just about ESF and apprenticeships—it's also about ERDF funding. So, you mustn't forget that, actually, there's been a lot of ERDF funding that's gone into these institutions. Swansea University, you'll be aware, has been practically rebuilt with ERDF. Also, FE colleges—we've got Coleg y Cymoedd, the college in Blaenau Gwent. These have been built, largely, with European funding. It's because of the multi-annual nature of the fact that we've been able to prepare for them that they have been able to progress. So, that will be a huge loss, but I think it's really important that we don't forget the ERDF aspect in addition to the ESF impact that there will be on these institutions.


With regard to Diamond, I would absolutely refute that. We have been very clear and we have shown HEFCW our analysis of the figures going forward in relation to what is sometimes called within the sector the 'Diamond dividend', although the Diamond dividend is never as big as people imagine the Diamond dividend to be. But we've been absolutely clear with HEFCW and the sector on what that will mean. Now, with regard to Reid, those are ongoing discussions that form part of the normal budgetary process within the Government, but I think we have been as clear as we can be with regard to Diamond.

Okay. The second question, really, is about HE and FE and it's about European funding, which, of course, has been and is on a multi-year basis, which gives, I think, a lot of security and comfort to the sectors, knowing what the budgets will be over a period of time. So, moving from that to a yearly budgeting situation would be worrying. So, would you commit to introducing multi-year funding settlements for HE, and indeed for FE, moving forward beyond Brexit?

Shall I take this and give you a little bit of a break? She's not very well. I think the multi-annual nature of the European funding programmes has been very, very useful. People can plan, you can get staffing in place, you can have really strategic aims and I think that's really useful for the institutions involved. Of course, what we don't have is multi-annual budgeting from the UK Government. So, whilst I think we would, in an ideal world, like to see a better view of what's coming our way, it's extremely difficult for us to be able to offer that without having that multi-annual funding commitment from the UK Government. So, I think that will be a major, major loss for the institutions concerned. Of course, it's not just about ESF and apprenticeships—it's also about ERDF funding. So, you mustn't forget that, actually, there's been a lot of ERDF funding that's gone into these institutions. Swansea University, you'll be aware, has been practically rebuilt with ERDF. Also, FE colleges—we've got Coleg y Cymoedd, the college in Blaenau Gwent. These have been built, largely, with European funding. It's because of the multi-annual nature of the fact that we've been able to prepare for them that they have been able to progress. So, that will be a huge loss, but I think it's really important that we don't forget the ERDF aspect in addition to the ESF impact that there will be on these institutions.

Okay. As far as further education is concerned, in your paper you state that it's a priority to support the FE sector to maintain all the learning opportunities that currently take place under European Union funding. So, would you be able to give the committee an idea of the level of resource you would estimate that the sector requires to achieve that priority, and—? I'll stop there for the moment.


Okay. The second question, really, is about HE and FE and it's about European funding, which, of course, has been and is on a multi-year basis, which gives, I think, a lot of security and comfort to the sectors, knowing what the budgets will be over a period of time. So, moving from that to a yearly budgeting situation would be worrying. So, would you commit to introducing multi-year funding settlements for HE, and indeed for FE, moving forward beyond Brexit?

Shall I take this and give you a little bit of a break? She's not very well. I think the multi-annual nature of the European funding programmes has been very, very useful. People can plan, you can get staffing in place, you can have really strategic aims and I think that's really useful for the institutions involved. Of course, what we don't have is multi-annual budgeting from the UK Government. So, whilst I think we would, in an ideal world, like to see a better view of what's coming our way, it's extremely difficult for us to be able to offer that without having that multi-annual funding commitment from the UK Government. So, I think that will be a major, major loss for the institutions concerned. Of course, it's not just about ESF and apprenticeships—it's also about ERDF funding. So, you mustn't forget that, actually, there's been a lot of ERDF funding that's gone into these institutions. Swansea University, you'll be aware, has been practically rebuilt with ERDF. Also, FE colleges—we've got Coleg y Cymoedd, the college in Blaenau Gwent. These have been built, largely, with European funding. It's because of the multi-annual nature of the fact that we've been able to prepare for them that they have been able to progress. So, that will be a huge loss, but I think it's really important that we don't forget the ERDF aspect in addition to the ESF impact that there will be on these institutions.

Okay. As far as further education is concerned, in your paper you state that it's a priority to support the FE sector to maintain all the learning opportunities that currently take place under European Union funding. So, would you be able to give the committee an idea of the level of resource you would estimate that the sector requires to achieve that priority, and—? I'll stop there for the moment.

I think it is important. What we've said is that we want to maintain that range of learning opportunities that is provided by EU funding. I think we've got to be clear that we are not working to this scenario. I think we've got to—. The UK Government have made us some promises and they've made some commitments, and we need to hold them to that, and so let's keep the pressure on. The moment we start saying, 'No, it's all going to be okay, we'll sort ourselves out'—I think that would be a huge mistake. We have been promised that we will not lose a penny as a result of Brexit, and we need to make sure that we keep them to that commitment. I think it was quite interesting to hear what Philip Hammond said yesterday when he was in Wales, saying that the money that we will receive will depend on the future shape of the economy, which implies that he has no idea what's going to happen there, and that that shared prosperity fund will be designed around the deal. Well, that's really not what we're interested in. We were made some promises, and we need them to commit to those promises. I think we have some real concerns about the shared prosperity fund not really following through on the commitments that were made during the Brexit referendum. But, in terms of the replacements, we'd be looking at about £15 million a year, and that would be a huge impact for us, but we're not looking at that—I don't think we should be—because they made some promises.


Shall I take this and give you a little bit of a break? She's not very well. I think the multi-annual nature of the European funding programmes has been very, very useful. People can plan, you can get staffing in place, you can have really strategic aims and I think that's really useful for the institutions involved. Of course, what we don't have is multi-annual budgeting from the UK Government. So, whilst I think we would, in an ideal world, like to see a better view of what's coming our way, it's extremely difficult for us to be able to offer that without having that multi-annual funding commitment from the UK Government. So, I think that will be a major, major loss for the institutions concerned. Of course, it's not just about ESF and apprenticeships—it's also about ERDF funding. So, you mustn't forget that, actually, there's been a lot of ERDF funding that's gone into these institutions. Swansea University, you'll be aware, has been practically rebuilt with ERDF. Also, FE colleges—we've got Coleg y Cymoedd, the college in Blaenau Gwent. These have been built, largely, with European funding. It's because of the multi-annual nature of the fact that we've been able to prepare for them that they have been able to progress. So, that will be a huge loss, but I think it's really important that we don't forget the ERDF aspect in addition to the ESF impact that there will be on these institutions.

Okay. As far as further education is concerned, in your paper you state that it's a priority to support the FE sector to maintain all the learning opportunities that currently take place under European Union funding. So, would you be able to give the committee an idea of the level of resource you would estimate that the sector requires to achieve that priority, and—? I'll stop there for the moment.

I think it is important. What we've said is that we want to maintain that range of learning opportunities that is provided by EU funding. I think we've got to be clear that we are not working to this scenario. I think we've got to—. The UK Government have made us some promises and they've made some commitments, and we need to hold them to that, and so let's keep the pressure on. The moment we start saying, 'No, it's all going to be okay, we'll sort ourselves out'—I think that would be a huge mistake. We have been promised that we will not lose a penny as a result of Brexit, and we need to make sure that we keep them to that commitment. I think it was quite interesting to hear what Philip Hammond said yesterday when he was in Wales, saying that the money that we will receive will depend on the future shape of the economy, which implies that he has no idea what's going to happen there, and that that shared prosperity fund will be designed around the deal. Well, that's really not what we're interested in. We were made some promises, and we need them to commit to those promises. I think we have some real concerns about the shared prosperity fund not really following through on the commitments that were made during the Brexit referendum. But, in terms of the replacements, we'd be looking at about £15 million a year, and that would be a huge impact for us, but we're not looking at that—I don't think we should be—because they made some promises.

So, could you say that, if they keep their promises, then at least that level of funding would be maintained?


Okay. As far as further education is concerned, in your paper you state that it's a priority to support the FE sector to maintain all the learning opportunities that currently take place under European Union funding. So, would you be able to give the committee an idea of the level of resource you would estimate that the sector requires to achieve that priority, and—? I'll stop there for the moment.

I think it is important. What we've said is that we want to maintain that range of learning opportunities that is provided by EU funding. I think we've got to be clear that we are not working to this scenario. I think we've got to—. The UK Government have made us some promises and they've made some commitments, and we need to hold them to that, and so let's keep the pressure on. The moment we start saying, 'No, it's all going to be okay, we'll sort ourselves out'—I think that would be a huge mistake. We have been promised that we will not lose a penny as a result of Brexit, and we need to make sure that we keep them to that commitment. I think it was quite interesting to hear what Philip Hammond said yesterday when he was in Wales, saying that the money that we will receive will depend on the future shape of the economy, which implies that he has no idea what's going to happen there, and that that shared prosperity fund will be designed around the deal. Well, that's really not what we're interested in. We were made some promises, and we need them to commit to those promises. I think we have some real concerns about the shared prosperity fund not really following through on the commitments that were made during the Brexit referendum. But, in terms of the replacements, we'd be looking at about £15 million a year, and that would be a huge impact for us, but we're not looking at that—I don't think we should be—because they made some promises.

So, could you say that, if they keep their promises, then at least that level of funding would be maintained?

I think that would be a minimum, but that's just one aspect of it. That's not including the whole workplace learning money on top of that.


I think it is important. What we've said is that we want to maintain that range of learning opportunities that is provided by EU funding. I think we've got to be clear that we are not working to this scenario. I think we've got to—. The UK Government have made us some promises and they've made some commitments, and we need to hold them to that, and so let's keep the pressure on. The moment we start saying, 'No, it's all going to be okay, we'll sort ourselves out'—I think that would be a huge mistake. We have been promised that we will not lose a penny as a result of Brexit, and we need to make sure that we keep them to that commitment. I think it was quite interesting to hear what Philip Hammond said yesterday when he was in Wales, saying that the money that we will receive will depend on the future shape of the economy, which implies that he has no idea what's going to happen there, and that that shared prosperity fund will be designed around the deal. Well, that's really not what we're interested in. We were made some promises, and we need them to commit to those promises. I think we have some real concerns about the shared prosperity fund not really following through on the commitments that were made during the Brexit referendum. But, in terms of the replacements, we'd be looking at about £15 million a year, and that would be a huge impact for us, but we're not looking at that—I don't think we should be—because they made some promises.

So, could you say that, if they keep their promises, then at least that level of funding would be maintained?

I think that would be a minimum, but that's just one aspect of it. That's not including the whole workplace learning money on top of that.


So, could you say that, if they keep their promises, then at least that level of funding would be maintained?

I think that would be a minimum, but that's just one aspect of it. That's not including the whole workplace learning money on top of that.

Thank you. Suzy, you had a supplementary.


I think that would be a minimum, but that's just one aspect of it. That's not including the whole workplace learning money on top of that.

Thank you. Suzy, you had a supplementary.

Yes, just very quickly on the multi-annual point, obviously I recognise that we're talking about six or seven-year cycles with Europe, and I completely take the point that you don't really know from year to year what your budget's going to be, but Welsh Government does make multi-annual commitments. I think you did it yesterday, actually—the capital commitment is over more than one year. How are you able to do that and yet not quite feel confident that you can do that with—well, both your sectors, really?


Thank you. Suzy, you had a supplementary.

Yes, just very quickly on the multi-annual point, obviously I recognise that we're talking about six or seven-year cycles with Europe, and I completely take the point that you don't really know from year to year what your budget's going to be, but Welsh Government does make multi-annual commitments. I think you did it yesterday, actually—the capital commitment is over more than one year. How are you able to do that and yet not quite feel confident that you can do that with—well, both your sectors, really?

I think it's probably easier to do with capital than it is with revenue, so that's what would make the difference. But it's—. These institutions are interested in revenue, because that's what supports the staff. The one thing we all know is that employment opportunities today—the transitional nature of employment and the fact that people are not getting the kind of contracts that we'd like them to get—that makes their lives very precarious and they're less likely, then, to be committed to those institutions. I think it's a really, really concerning thing, because what makes these institutions work well is their staff, so that makes life very, very difficult without that multi-annual commitment.


Thank you. Suzy, you had a supplementary.

Yes, just very quickly on the multi-annual point, obviously I recognise that we're talking about six or seven-year cycles with Europe, and I completely take the point that you don't really know from year to year what your budget's going to be, but Welsh Government does make multi-annual commitments. I think you did it yesterday, actually—the capital commitment is over more than one year. How are you able to do that and yet not quite feel confident that you can do that with—well, both your sectors, really?

I think it's probably easier to do with capital than it is with revenue, so that's what would make the difference. But it's—. These institutions are interested in revenue, because that's what supports the staff. The one thing we all know is that employment opportunities today—the transitional nature of employment and the fact that people are not getting the kind of contracts that we'd like them to get—that makes their lives very precarious and they're less likely, then, to be committed to those institutions. I think it's a really, really concerning thing, because what makes these institutions work well is their staff, so that makes life very, very difficult without that multi-annual commitment.

They also have to raise some of their own money as well—we mustn't forget that.


Yes, just very quickly on the multi-annual point, obviously I recognise that we're talking about six or seven-year cycles with Europe, and I completely take the point that you don't really know from year to year what your budget's going to be, but Welsh Government does make multi-annual commitments. I think you did it yesterday, actually—the capital commitment is over more than one year. How are you able to do that and yet not quite feel confident that you can do that with—well, both your sectors, really?

I think it's probably easier to do with capital than it is with revenue, so that's what would make the difference. But it's—. These institutions are interested in revenue, because that's what supports the staff. The one thing we all know is that employment opportunities today—the transitional nature of employment and the fact that people are not getting the kind of contracts that we'd like them to get—that makes their lives very precarious and they're less likely, then, to be committed to those institutions. I think it's a really, really concerning thing, because what makes these institutions work well is their staff, so that makes life very, very difficult without that multi-annual commitment.

They also have to raise some of their own money as well—we mustn't forget that.

No, I think that's right, and I think that there's more that these institutions can do in terms of their own funding and being more responsive to employers and the need for skills in their areas.


I think it's probably easier to do with capital than it is with revenue, so that's what would make the difference. But it's—. These institutions are interested in revenue, because that's what supports the staff. The one thing we all know is that employment opportunities today—the transitional nature of employment and the fact that people are not getting the kind of contracts that we'd like them to get—that makes their lives very precarious and they're less likely, then, to be committed to those institutions. I think it's a really, really concerning thing, because what makes these institutions work well is their staff, so that makes life very, very difficult without that multi-annual commitment.

They also have to raise some of their own money as well—we mustn't forget that.

No, I think that's right, and I think that there's more that these institutions can do in terms of their own funding and being more responsive to employers and the need for skills in their areas.


They also have to raise some of their own money as well—we mustn't forget that.

No, I think that's right, and I think that there's more that these institutions can do in terms of their own funding and being more responsive to employers and the need for skills in their areas.

So, given the precarious state of planning for the finances, are you considering letting universities charge EU students international fees?


No, I think that's right, and I think that there's more that these institutions can do in terms of their own funding and being more responsive to employers and the need for skills in their areas.

So, given the precarious state of planning for the finances, are you considering letting universities charge EU students international fees?

We don't regulate the ability for universities to set fees for international students. They would be in a position to—[Inaudible.] They are in a position to set international fees at a rate that, I guess, they feel is appropriate for the provision that they give to those students.


So, given the precarious state of planning for the finances, are you considering letting universities charge EU students international fees?

We don't regulate the ability for universities to set fees for international students. They would be in a position to—[Inaudible.] They are in a position to set international fees at a rate that, I guess, they feel is appropriate for the provision that they give to those students.

Okay, right. We'll move on, then, to questions from Llyr.


So, given the precarious state of planning for the finances, are you considering letting universities charge EU students international fees?

We don't regulate the ability for universities to set fees for international students. They would be in a position to—[Inaudible.] They are in a position to set international fees at a rate that, I guess, they feel is appropriate for the provision that they give to those students.

Okay, right. We'll move on, then, to questions from Llyr.

Thank you. I just wanted to pick up on the funding of apprenticeships and the long-term funding, because the ESF—the commitments take us to 2023, which takes us beyond any transition period. So, I just want to hear from you that there are assurances that the apprenticeship programme can be delivered as a whole, come what may.


We don't regulate the ability for universities to set fees for international students. They would be in a position to—[Inaudible.] They are in a position to set international fees at a rate that, I guess, they feel is appropriate for the provision that they give to those students.

Okay, right. We'll move on, then, to questions from Llyr.

Thank you. I just wanted to pick up on the funding of apprenticeships and the long-term funding, because the ESF—the commitments take us to 2023, which takes us beyond any transition period. So, I just want to hear from you that there are assurances that the apprenticeship programme can be delivered as a whole, come what may.

Well, we're fine until 2020, because we've had that guarantee from the Government. The issue for us is the n+2 that we would have if we do have some kind of transition deal or an agreement with the EU. So, there is a risk and there is concern, beyond 2020, that that would create problems if they don't agree to fund that, which is the expectation that we have.


Okay, right. We'll move on, then, to questions from Llyr.

Thank you. I just wanted to pick up on the funding of apprenticeships and the long-term funding, because the ESF—the commitments take us to 2023, which takes us beyond any transition period. So, I just want to hear from you that there are assurances that the apprenticeship programme can be delivered as a whole, come what may.

Well, we're fine until 2020, because we've had that guarantee from the Government. The issue for us is the n+2 that we would have if we do have some kind of transition deal or an agreement with the EU. So, there is a risk and there is concern, beyond 2020, that that would create problems if they don't agree to fund that, which is the expectation that we have.

But it is a prospect that this wouldn't be achieved as you foresee.


Thank you. I just wanted to pick up on the funding of apprenticeships and the long-term funding, because the ESF—the commitments take us to 2023, which takes us beyond any transition period. So, I just want to hear from you that there are assurances that the apprenticeship programme can be delivered as a whole, come what may.

Well, we're fine until 2020, because we've had that guarantee from the Government. The issue for us is the n+2 that we would have if we do have some kind of transition deal or an agreement with the EU. So, there is a risk and there is concern, beyond 2020, that that would create problems if they don't agree to fund that, which is the expectation that we have.

But it is a prospect that this wouldn't be achieved as you foresee.

Well, we do hope, because we've had the pledges and commitments from the Government, that they will respect what we expected and what was expected by these institutions that have had the commitment of the funding.


Well, we're fine until 2020, because we've had that guarantee from the Government. The issue for us is the n+2 that we would have if we do have some kind of transition deal or an agreement with the EU. So, there is a risk and there is concern, beyond 2020, that that would create problems if they don't agree to fund that, which is the expectation that we have.

But it is a prospect that this wouldn't be achieved as you foresee.

Well, we do hope, because we've had the pledges and commitments from the Government, that they will respect what we expected and what was expected by these institutions that have had the commitment of the funding.

So, to what extent does that undermine the current work? Because institutions want to enter into agreements with providers and so on. Businesses want to know, if they're starting on some sort of journey, that they are going to get to the end of it some years down the line. That must be undermining a lot of the work that's going on now.


But it is a prospect that this wouldn't be achieved as you foresee.

Well, we do hope, because we've had the pledges and commitments from the Government, that they will respect what we expected and what was expected by these institutions that have had the commitment of the funding.

So, to what extent does that undermine the current work? Because institutions want to enter into agreements with providers and so on. Businesses want to know, if they're starting on some sort of journey, that they are going to get to the end of it some years down the line. That must be undermining a lot of the work that's going on now.

Well, as I said, because the guarantee is there until 2020, I think that, for now, people are willing to go into those agreements, and I hope that we'll have a better outlook by November of the direction we're moving in. But I don't think it's had an impact. You have to remember that the number of apprenticeships in Wales is rising, while they've collapsed entirely in England. So, it is important that we do continue, and it's important that we don't create an atmosphere here that's going to undermine the confidence of our employers in committing to training in the workplace.


Well, we do hope, because we've had the pledges and commitments from the Government, that they will respect what we expected and what was expected by these institutions that have had the commitment of the funding.

So, to what extent does that undermine the current work? Because institutions want to enter into agreements with providers and so on. Businesses want to know, if they're starting on some sort of journey, that they are going to get to the end of it some years down the line. That must be undermining a lot of the work that's going on now.

Well, as I said, because the guarantee is there until 2020, I think that, for now, people are willing to go into those agreements, and I hope that we'll have a better outlook by November of the direction we're moving in. But I don't think it's had an impact. You have to remember that the number of apprenticeships in Wales is rising, while they've collapsed entirely in England. So, it is important that we do continue, and it's important that we don't create an atmosphere here that's going to undermine the confidence of our employers in committing to training in the workplace.

Are you confident that the Government will achieve its targets in this context?


So, to what extent does that undermine the current work? Because institutions want to enter into agreements with providers and so on. Businesses want to know, if they're starting on some sort of journey, that they are going to get to the end of it some years down the line. That must be undermining a lot of the work that's going on now.

Well, as I said, because the guarantee is there until 2020, I think that, for now, people are willing to go into those agreements, and I hope that we'll have a better outlook by November of the direction we're moving in. But I don't think it's had an impact. You have to remember that the number of apprenticeships in Wales is rising, while they've collapsed entirely in England. So, it is important that we do continue, and it's important that we don't create an atmosphere here that's going to undermine the confidence of our employers in committing to training in the workplace.

Are you confident that the Government will achieve its targets in this context?

Yes. We're on target to reach 100,000 apprenticeships. I think we're slightly ahead of that target, I'm pleased to say. So, of course, our hope is to do that. But let's be clear: if there is a 'no deal' scenario, that will have an impact on the economy, and who knows what will happen then to some of these companies that are reliant on the EU.


Well, as I said, because the guarantee is there until 2020, I think that, for now, people are willing to go into those agreements, and I hope that we'll have a better outlook by November of the direction we're moving in. But I don't think it's had an impact. You have to remember that the number of apprenticeships in Wales is rising, while they've collapsed entirely in England. So, it is important that we do continue, and it's important that we don't create an atmosphere here that's going to undermine the confidence of our employers in committing to training in the workplace.

Are you confident that the Government will achieve its targets in this context?

Yes. We're on target to reach 100,000 apprenticeships. I think we're slightly ahead of that target, I'm pleased to say. So, of course, our hope is to do that. But let's be clear: if there is a 'no deal' scenario, that will have an impact on the economy, and who knows what will happen then to some of these companies that are reliant on the EU.

Talking about the impact on the wider economy, on the point you made earlier that it's not just the direct effect on these institutions, but also on the businesses that they engage with, that is a concern in this context, that means, of course, that there is a lot of pressure in this context on the work that other departments in the Government are doing, because perhaps they are the ones dealing with some of this. So, could you tell us a little bit about how you're working with Ministers and Cabinet Secretaries and other departments within the Government to safeguard these interests?


Are you confident that the Government will achieve its targets in this context?

Yes. We're on target to reach 100,000 apprenticeships. I think we're slightly ahead of that target, I'm pleased to say. So, of course, our hope is to do that. But let's be clear: if there is a 'no deal' scenario, that will have an impact on the economy, and who knows what will happen then to some of these companies that are reliant on the EU.

Talking about the impact on the wider economy, on the point you made earlier that it's not just the direct effect on these institutions, but also on the businesses that they engage with, that is a concern in this context, that means, of course, that there is a lot of pressure in this context on the work that other departments in the Government are doing, because perhaps they are the ones dealing with some of this. So, could you tell us a little bit about how you're working with Ministers and Cabinet Secretaries and other departments within the Government to safeguard these interests?

So, as part of the employability programme, I have started going round every member of the Cabinet to ask what the impact will be on them—for example, in health, and, certainly, the economy, but here are many other areas. What's important for us is that we do collaborate and we do get this analysis, but we hope to do that on the ground through the regional skills partnerships. That's our way of ensuring that we can have an understanding, on the ground, of what's needed by employers. And so ensuring that people feed into that and that we respond to those requirements—that's where we're focusing our work. So, we're asking, for example, health boards to ensure that they feed into the regional skills partnerships.


Yes. We're on target to reach 100,000 apprenticeships. I think we're slightly ahead of that target, I'm pleased to say. So, of course, our hope is to do that. But let's be clear: if there is a 'no deal' scenario, that will have an impact on the economy, and who knows what will happen then to some of these companies that are reliant on the EU.

Talking about the impact on the wider economy, on the point you made earlier that it's not just the direct effect on these institutions, but also on the businesses that they engage with, that is a concern in this context, that means, of course, that there is a lot of pressure in this context on the work that other departments in the Government are doing, because perhaps they are the ones dealing with some of this. So, could you tell us a little bit about how you're working with Ministers and Cabinet Secretaries and other departments within the Government to safeguard these interests?

So, as part of the employability programme, I have started going round every member of the Cabinet to ask what the impact will be on them—for example, in health, and, certainly, the economy, but here are many other areas. What's important for us is that we do collaborate and we do get this analysis, but we hope to do that on the ground through the regional skills partnerships. That's our way of ensuring that we can have an understanding, on the ground, of what's needed by employers. And so ensuring that people feed into that and that we respond to those requirements—that's where we're focusing our work. So, we're asking, for example, health boards to ensure that they feed into the regional skills partnerships.

Is there a danger that we're a little bit behind in this process? Because Brexit could be upon us in no time at all, and, of course, this work is still ongoing.


Talking about the impact on the wider economy, on the point you made earlier that it's not just the direct effect on these institutions, but also on the businesses that they engage with, that is a concern in this context, that means, of course, that there is a lot of pressure in this context on the work that other departments in the Government are doing, because perhaps they are the ones dealing with some of this. So, could you tell us a little bit about how you're working with Ministers and Cabinet Secretaries and other departments within the Government to safeguard these interests?

So, as part of the employability programme, I have started going round every member of the Cabinet to ask what the impact will be on them—for example, in health, and, certainly, the economy, but here are many other areas. What's important for us is that we do collaborate and we do get this analysis, but we hope to do that on the ground through the regional skills partnerships. That's our way of ensuring that we can have an understanding, on the ground, of what's needed by employers. And so ensuring that people feed into that and that we respond to those requirements—that's where we're focusing our work. So, we're asking, for example, health boards to ensure that they feed into the regional skills partnerships.

Is there a danger that we're a little bit behind in this process? Because Brexit could be upon us in no time at all, and, of course, this work is still ongoing.

Well, I have been pushing and ensuring that in the direct areas facing the greatest risk, and agriculture's one of those, of course—. We have been pushing to see what we can do further, so, for example, I'm in the process of developing a policy on rural skills at present because I do think it's important that we do focus on those sectors that are likely to suffer the worst impact if the worst does happen. So, those preparations are in place as far as they can be, but, of course, it's very difficult without knowing to what extent it's going to impact on us.


So, as part of the employability programme, I have started going round every member of the Cabinet to ask what the impact will be on them—for example, in health, and, certainly, the economy, but here are many other areas. What's important for us is that we do collaborate and we do get this analysis, but we hope to do that on the ground through the regional skills partnerships. That's our way of ensuring that we can have an understanding, on the ground, of what's needed by employers. And so ensuring that people feed into that and that we respond to those requirements—that's where we're focusing our work. So, we're asking, for example, health boards to ensure that they feed into the regional skills partnerships.

Is there a danger that we're a little bit behind in this process? Because Brexit could be upon us in no time at all, and, of course, this work is still ongoing.

Well, I have been pushing and ensuring that in the direct areas facing the greatest risk, and agriculture's one of those, of course—. We have been pushing to see what we can do further, so, for example, I'm in the process of developing a policy on rural skills at present because I do think it's important that we do focus on those sectors that are likely to suffer the worst impact if the worst does happen. So, those preparations are in place as far as they can be, but, of course, it's very difficult without knowing to what extent it's going to impact on us.

And each sector's running on its own timescale, I would presume. But, as you've mentioned rural skills, when do you foresee that that work will appear, and when will plans or schemes or whatever you're intending to put in place see the light of day?


Is there a danger that we're a little bit behind in this process? Because Brexit could be upon us in no time at all, and, of course, this work is still ongoing.

Well, I have been pushing and ensuring that in the direct areas facing the greatest risk, and agriculture's one of those, of course—. We have been pushing to see what we can do further, so, for example, I'm in the process of developing a policy on rural skills at present because I do think it's important that we do focus on those sectors that are likely to suffer the worst impact if the worst does happen. So, those preparations are in place as far as they can be, but, of course, it's very difficult without knowing to what extent it's going to impact on us.

And each sector's running on its own timescale, I would presume. But, as you've mentioned rural skills, when do you foresee that that work will appear, and when will plans or schemes or whatever you're intending to put in place see the light of day?

Well, we hope during this term that that will be published or announced. So, certainly, it is something that we have been discussing with people in rural areas directly, with the colleges, to see what the provision is there and to what extent we need to expand that, and to what extent we will need to change and move really quickly if there is no deal. That's something that I think we have to learn and we need to convince the FE sector about in terms of moving more quickly and to be more responsive to the demand that there is in the workplace.


Well, I have been pushing and ensuring that in the direct areas facing the greatest risk, and agriculture's one of those, of course—. We have been pushing to see what we can do further, so, for example, I'm in the process of developing a policy on rural skills at present because I do think it's important that we do focus on those sectors that are likely to suffer the worst impact if the worst does happen. So, those preparations are in place as far as they can be, but, of course, it's very difficult without knowing to what extent it's going to impact on us.

And each sector's running on its own timescale, I would presume. But, as you've mentioned rural skills, when do you foresee that that work will appear, and when will plans or schemes or whatever you're intending to put in place see the light of day?

Well, we hope during this term that that will be published or announced. So, certainly, it is something that we have been discussing with people in rural areas directly, with the colleges, to see what the provision is there and to what extent we need to expand that, and to what extent we will need to change and move really quickly if there is no deal. That's something that I think we have to learn and we need to convince the FE sector about in terms of moving more quickly and to be more responsive to the demand that there is in the workplace.

Yes, because there is the dilemma you touched on earlier about providing the skills that are required for the economy and providing the courses that are easy to fill. That is a live discussion across FE and HE, but you're confident that that discussion is taking place in a constructive and positive way and moving in the right direction.


And each sector's running on its own timescale, I would presume. But, as you've mentioned rural skills, when do you foresee that that work will appear, and when will plans or schemes or whatever you're intending to put in place see the light of day?

Well, we hope during this term that that will be published or announced. So, certainly, it is something that we have been discussing with people in rural areas directly, with the colleges, to see what the provision is there and to what extent we need to expand that, and to what extent we will need to change and move really quickly if there is no deal. That's something that I think we have to learn and we need to convince the FE sector about in terms of moving more quickly and to be more responsive to the demand that there is in the workplace.

Yes, because there is the dilemma you touched on earlier about providing the skills that are required for the economy and providing the courses that are easy to fill. That is a live discussion across FE and HE, but you're confident that that discussion is taking place in a constructive and positive way and moving in the right direction.

Well, it's helped that we've put £10 million on the table, because they do understand now that we are serious about our aim of ensuring that they do respond to what employers are asking for. So that has helped a lot in terms of focus and, of course, we're in the middle of a review now as well in terms of how we fund FE, and that will certainly be a part of that.


Well, we hope during this term that that will be published or announced. So, certainly, it is something that we have been discussing with people in rural areas directly, with the colleges, to see what the provision is there and to what extent we need to expand that, and to what extent we will need to change and move really quickly if there is no deal. That's something that I think we have to learn and we need to convince the FE sector about in terms of moving more quickly and to be more responsive to the demand that there is in the workplace.

Yes, because there is the dilemma you touched on earlier about providing the skills that are required for the economy and providing the courses that are easy to fill. That is a live discussion across FE and HE, but you're confident that that discussion is taking place in a constructive and positive way and moving in the right direction.

Well, it's helped that we've put £10 million on the table, because they do understand now that we are serious about our aim of ensuring that they do respond to what employers are asking for. So that has helped a lot in terms of focus and, of course, we're in the middle of a review now as well in terms of how we fund FE, and that will certainly be a part of that.


Yes, because there is the dilemma you touched on earlier about providing the skills that are required for the economy and providing the courses that are easy to fill. That is a live discussion across FE and HE, but you're confident that that discussion is taking place in a constructive and positive way and moving in the right direction.

Well, it's helped that we've put £10 million on the table, because they do understand now that we are serious about our aim of ensuring that they do respond to what employers are asking for. So that has helped a lot in terms of focus and, of course, we're in the middle of a review now as well in terms of how we fund FE, and that will certainly be a part of that.


Well, it's helped that we've put £10 million on the table, because they do understand now that we are serious about our aim of ensuring that they do respond to what employers are asking for. So that has helped a lot in terms of focus and, of course, we're in the middle of a review now as well in terms of how we fund FE, and that will certainly be a part of that.

Sorry, Chair, could I just clarify something? The last question you asked me about—


Sorry, Chair, could I just clarify something? The last question you asked me about—

I was just going to go back to that, yes.


Sorry, Chair, could I just clarify something? The last question you asked me about—

I was just going to go back to that, yes.

—fees—. Sorry. Of course, that is in the context of a 'no deal' scenario. There could be a scenario where there are reciprocal arrangements, so, if a deal was reached with the European Union that established the principle of reciprocal arrangements, then, obviously, the ability of the HE institutions to charge international fees would be curtailed. I just want to make that clear.


I was just going to go back to that, yes.

—fees—. Sorry. Of course, that is in the context of a 'no deal' scenario. There could be a scenario where there are reciprocal arrangements, so, if a deal was reached with the European Union that established the principle of reciprocal arrangements, then, obviously, the ability of the HE institutions to charge international fees would be curtailed. I just want to make that clear.


—fees—. Sorry. Of course, that is in the context of a 'no deal' scenario. There could be a scenario where there are reciprocal arrangements, so, if a deal was reached with the European Union that established the principle of reciprocal arrangements, then, obviously, the ability of the HE institutions to charge international fees would be curtailed. I just want to make that clear.

—then it will be open to universities to charge market-driven, international rates.


—then it will be open to universities to charge market-driven, international rates.

Yes, that's right. Sorry, I just wanted to clarify. I should have made it very clear that the answer I gave was in the context of no deal, which is what we seem to be talking about mostly this morning, but if there was a deal to have reciprocal arrangements, then that ability, obviously, would be curtailed.


—then it will be open to universities to charge market-driven, international rates.

Yes, that's right. Sorry, I just wanted to clarify. I should have made it very clear that the answer I gave was in the context of no deal, which is what we seem to be talking about mostly this morning, but if there was a deal to have reciprocal arrangements, then that ability, obviously, would be curtailed.

Okay, thank you. Are there any other questions from Members? No. Okay, well, can I thank the Cabinet Secretary, the Minister and the officials for attending and for answering all our questions? We very much appreciate your time. As usual, you'll be sent a transcript to check for accuracy after the meeting. Thank you very much. Okay. Item 5, then, is papers to note. Members will see that there are 18 papers to note, so I'd like to suggest that we note them as a block, please, and just to flag that I would like to return to paper to note 18 when we go into private. Is that okay with everyone? Everyone happy to note those? Thank you. Item 6, then, can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17.42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting and the whole of the meeting next week? Are Members content? Okay, thank you.


Okay. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received apologies for absence from Janet Finch-Saunders, and also from Dawn Bowden, and I'd like to welcome Huw Irranca-Davies, who is substituting for Dawn Bowden. Can I ask Members if there are any declarations of interest, please? No. Okay. We'll move on, then, to our evidence session for our inquiry on school improvement and raising standards. I'd like to welcome Kirsty Williams AM, Minister for Education, and Steve Davies, director of education. Thank you both for attending and for your detailed paper in advance of the meeting. We've got a lot of ground to cover, so we'll go straight into questions, if that's okay. If I can just start by asking you: to what extent is the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development still involved in the Welsh Government's school improvement journey?

First of all, can I thank the committee for their invitation this morning, and their interest in this particular area? As you will be aware, on coming into office, the director and I agreed to ask the OECD to do a rapid review of the state of Welsh education at the beginning of this Assembly term. They did that, and the feedback from that work informed the publication and content of the national mission. I was very clear in the national mission that I would invite the OECD back to review our progress against that mission, and that has happened in the tail end of last year, and the OECD will publish their latest report on Welsh education next month now, in March. So, the expectation is that the report will be published on 23 March, and my intention is to make a statement to the Chamber on 24 March. The nature of that review is part of our ongoing development of self-evaluation. So, we talk a lot about self-evaluation in the school system. Actually, the continuing relationship with OECD is about self-evaluation of the entirety of the system and Welsh Government. We don't want to accept our own orthodoxy and just be in a bubble where we are constantly listening to ourselves and those people who might want to agree with us or tell us what we want to hear. So, the OECD is our best attempt of having some external verification of where we are. That's a risk for Ministers and for Government, because we want them to give an honest evaluation of where we are, but that's a really important tool for me, to ensure that we're constantly testing ourselves. The nature of that review is that the OECD were able to talk to whoever they felt it was important to talk to, so that included practitioners on the ground, elements of the middle tier, as well as Welsh Government. And I know, Chair—I hope you'll be pleased to hear this—that the reports of this committee have formed parts of their review, looking at how the Senedd itself has contributed to and has held the Government to account. So, as I said, we expect our report to be published towards the end of March.

Okay, thank you, Minister. Can I ask about the powers under the School Standards and Organisation (Wales) Act 2013, to ask you to tell us about the use of those powers either by Welsh Government or by local authorities, and how effective you feel that legislation has been?


First of all, can I thank the committee for their invitation this morning, and their interest in this particular area? As you will be aware, on coming into office, the director and I agreed to ask the OECD to do a rapid review of the state of Welsh education at the beginning of this Assembly term. They did that, and the feedback from that work informed the publication and content of the national mission. I was very clear in the national mission that I would invite the OECD back to review our progress against that mission, and that has happened in the tail end of last year, and the OECD will publish their latest report on Welsh education next month now, in March. So, the expectation is that the report will be published on 23 March, and my intention is to make a statement to the Chamber on 24 March. The nature of that review is part of our ongoing development of self-evaluation. So, we talk a lot about self-evaluation in the school system. Actually, the continuing relationship with OECD is about self-evaluation of the entirety of the system and Welsh Government. We don't want to accept our own orthodoxy and just be in a bubble where we are constantly listening to ourselves and those people who might want to agree with us or tell us what we want to hear. So, the OECD is our best attempt of having some external verification of where we are. That's a risk for Ministers and for Government, because we want them to give an honest evaluation of where we are, but that's a really important tool for me, to ensure that we're constantly testing ourselves. The nature of that review is that the OECD were able to talk to whoever they felt it was important to talk to, so that included practitioners on the ground, elements of the middle tier, as well as Welsh Government. And I know, Chair—I hope you'll be pleased to hear this—that the reports of this committee have formed parts of their review, looking at how the Senedd itself has contributed to and has held the Government to account. So, as I said, we expect our report to be published towards the end of March.

Okay, thank you, Minister. Can I ask about the powers under the School Standards and Organisation (Wales) Act 2013, to ask you to tell us about the use of those powers either by Welsh Government or by local authorities, and how effective you feel that legislation has been?

Okay. Well, as you'll be aware, local authorities have quite extensive powers of intervention in schools if they feel that is necessary. If I'm honest, I think there's a mixed picture, with some local authorities using those powers not on a regular basis, but obviously demonstrating a willingness to use those powers. There are other local authorities who don't seem to have used them. Since that legislation came into being, there have been a number of reasons, because of course a local authority has to give a reason for using those powers of intervention. They usually focus on standards, but sometimes they focus on a breakdown in governance arrangements, perhaps, or a failure or a breakdown in financial management. So, sometimes the budgetary issues trigger an intervention power. And the types of interventions that have been used have included, in some cases, appointing additional governors to governing bodies, or suspending a school's delegated budget so the local authority takes on, then, financial control of that particular school, or sometimes applying to the Welsh Government to entirely replace a governing body and establish an intervention board. So, if I can give you an example of where that's been used and has been successful, in Flintshire. They applied to Welsh Government for two interim executive boards, in Sir Richard Gwyn Catholic High School and in Ysgol Trefonnen. They applied to us. Those governing bodies were dissolved. The IEBs were put in place and both of those schools, which had been in special measures, moved quite rapidly, actually, out of special measures. Perhaps the most recent example of this is one that the Chair will know very well in her own constituency of Torfaen, in Cwmbran High School, where Torfaen has intervened in that case. The Welsh Government has not used those powers to date. My expectation always is that local authorities should be the first port of call, and I would encourage—and we always encourage—local authorities to take a proactive approach to intervention and to use those powers. But it's my belief that it is they who are best placed initially to do that.


First of all, can I thank the committee for their invitation this morning, and their interest in this particular area? As you will be aware, on coming into office, the director and I agreed to ask the OECD to do a rapid review of the state of Welsh education at the beginning of this Assembly term. They did that, and the feedback from that work informed the publication and content of the national mission. I was very clear in the national mission that I would invite the OECD back to review our progress against that mission, and that has happened in the tail end of last year, and the OECD will publish their latest report on Welsh education next month now, in March. So, the expectation is that the report will be published on 23 March, and my intention is to make a statement to the Chamber on 24 March. The nature of that review is part of our ongoing development of self-evaluation. So, we talk a lot about self-evaluation in the school system. Actually, the continuing relationship with OECD is about self-evaluation of the entirety of the system and Welsh Government. We don't want to accept our own orthodoxy and just be in a bubble where we are constantly listening to ourselves and those people who might want to agree with us or tell us what we want to hear. So, the OECD is our best attempt of having some external verification of where we are. That's a risk for Ministers and for Government, because we want them to give an honest evaluation of where we are, but that's a really important tool for me, to ensure that we're constantly testing ourselves. The nature of that review is that the OECD were able to talk to whoever they felt it was important to talk to, so that included practitioners on the ground, elements of the middle tier, as well as Welsh Government. And I know, Chair—I hope you'll be pleased to hear this—that the reports of this committee have formed parts of their review, looking at how the Senedd itself has contributed to and has held the Government to account. So, as I said, we expect our report to be published towards the end of March.

Okay, thank you, Minister. Can I ask about the powers under the School Standards and Organisation (Wales) Act 2013, to ask you to tell us about the use of those powers either by Welsh Government or by local authorities, and how effective you feel that legislation has been?

Okay. Well, as you'll be aware, local authorities have quite extensive powers of intervention in schools if they feel that is necessary. If I'm honest, I think there's a mixed picture, with some local authorities using those powers not on a regular basis, but obviously demonstrating a willingness to use those powers. There are other local authorities who don't seem to have used them. Since that legislation came into being, there have been a number of reasons, because of course a local authority has to give a reason for using those powers of intervention. They usually focus on standards, but sometimes they focus on a breakdown in governance arrangements, perhaps, or a failure or a breakdown in financial management. So, sometimes the budgetary issues trigger an intervention power. And the types of interventions that have been used have included, in some cases, appointing additional governors to governing bodies, or suspending a school's delegated budget so the local authority takes on, then, financial control of that particular school, or sometimes applying to the Welsh Government to entirely replace a governing body and establish an intervention board. So, if I can give you an example of where that's been used and has been successful, in Flintshire. They applied to Welsh Government for two interim executive boards, in Sir Richard Gwyn Catholic High School and in Ysgol Trefonnen. They applied to us. Those governing bodies were dissolved. The IEBs were put in place and both of those schools, which had been in special measures, moved quite rapidly, actually, out of special measures. Perhaps the most recent example of this is one that the Chair will know very well in her own constituency of Torfaen, in Cwmbran High School, where Torfaen has intervened in that case. The Welsh Government has not used those powers to date. My expectation always is that local authorities should be the first port of call, and I would encourage—and we always encourage—local authorities to take a proactive approach to intervention and to use those powers. But it's my belief that it is they who are best placed initially to do that.

Thank you, Minister. Can I ask, then, about the national evaluation and improvement resource and how significant a role that will play in the raising of school standards, and how you feel it's evolved since it was first conceived?


Okay, thank you, Minister. Can I ask about the powers under the School Standards and Organisation (Wales) Act 2013, to ask you to tell us about the use of those powers either by Welsh Government or by local authorities, and how effective you feel that legislation has been?

Okay. Well, as you'll be aware, local authorities have quite extensive powers of intervention in schools if they feel that is necessary. If I'm honest, I think there's a mixed picture, with some local authorities using those powers not on a regular basis, but obviously demonstrating a willingness to use those powers. There are other local authorities who don't seem to have used them. Since that legislation came into being, there have been a number of reasons, because of course a local authority has to give a reason for using those powers of intervention. They usually focus on standards, but sometimes they focus on a breakdown in governance arrangements, perhaps, or a failure or a breakdown in financial management. So, sometimes the budgetary issues trigger an intervention power. And the types of interventions that have been used have included, in some cases, appointing additional governors to governing bodies, or suspending a school's delegated budget so the local authority takes on, then, financial control of that particular school, or sometimes applying to the Welsh Government to entirely replace a governing body and establish an intervention board. So, if I can give you an example of where that's been used and has been successful, in Flintshire. They applied to Welsh Government for two interim executive boards, in Sir Richard Gwyn Catholic High School and in Ysgol Trefonnen. They applied to us. Those governing bodies were dissolved. The IEBs were put in place and both of those schools, which had been in special measures, moved quite rapidly, actually, out of special measures. Perhaps the most recent example of this is one that the Chair will know very well in her own constituency of Torfaen, in Cwmbran High School, where Torfaen has intervened in that case. The Welsh Government has not used those powers to date. My expectation always is that local authorities should be the first port of call, and I would encourage—and we always encourage—local authorities to take a proactive approach to intervention and to use those powers. But it's my belief that it is they who are best placed initially to do that.

Thank you, Minister. Can I ask, then, about the national evaluation and improvement resource and how significant a role that will play in the raising of school standards, and how you feel it's evolved since it was first conceived?

So, this brings us back to the principle of self-evaluation and something, if we're honest, we've not been very good at. If you look at a number of chief inspectors' reports into the Welsh education system, self-evaluation has always been identified as something that is missing or underdeveloped in our system to date, hence, then, the work to establish not a new approach, but a more robust approach to self-evaluation. We've done that in conjunction, again, with the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. It's really important, throughout the entirety of our reform journey that that's done in co-construction, because we want this resource to be usable in schools. So, it's all very well having a conceptual idea and people outside the classroom working on it, but if it's of no practical use to a school leadership team, then we won't see the impact. So, it's—. We're in phase 2 at the moment, where we're doing—. So, the initial resource has been developed by the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. We're in the testing phase at the moment and having it evaluated itself, with a view to introducing that resource across the system at the start of the new academic year, in September 2020. I truly believe that, if we're to make progress in Welsh education, we have to develop the skills within our system to have robust self-evaluation. This resource gives us continuity of approach right the way across Wales. So, it's not left to an individual school to come up with a system; it's right the way across the system. My hope would be that those principles could then be applied to local education authorities, to regional school improvement services and Welsh Government as part of a whole-system approach to self-evaluation. I don't know if there's anything more you want to add, Steve.


Okay. Well, as you'll be aware, local authorities have quite extensive powers of intervention in schools if they feel that is necessary. If I'm honest, I think there's a mixed picture, with some local authorities using those powers not on a regular basis, but obviously demonstrating a willingness to use those powers. There are other local authorities who don't seem to have used them. Since that legislation came into being, there have been a number of reasons, because of course a local authority has to give a reason for using those powers of intervention. They usually focus on standards, but sometimes they focus on a breakdown in governance arrangements, perhaps, or a failure or a breakdown in financial management. So, sometimes the budgetary issues trigger an intervention power. And the types of interventions that have been used have included, in some cases, appointing additional governors to governing bodies, or suspending a school's delegated budget so the local authority takes on, then, financial control of that particular school, or sometimes applying to the Welsh Government to entirely replace a governing body and establish an intervention board. So, if I can give you an example of where that's been used and has been successful, in Flintshire. They applied to Welsh Government for two interim executive boards, in Sir Richard Gwyn Catholic High School and in Ysgol Trefonnen. They applied to us. Those governing bodies were dissolved. The IEBs were put in place and both of those schools, which had been in special measures, moved quite rapidly, actually, out of special measures. Perhaps the most recent example of this is one that the Chair will know very well in her own constituency of Torfaen, in Cwmbran High School, where Torfaen has intervened in that case. The Welsh Government has not used those powers to date. My expectation always is that local authorities should be the first port of call, and I would encourage—and we always encourage—local authorities to take a proactive approach to intervention and to use those powers. But it's my belief that it is they who are best placed initially to do that.

Thank you, Minister. Can I ask, then, about the national evaluation and improvement resource and how significant a role that will play in the raising of school standards, and how you feel it's evolved since it was first conceived?

So, this brings us back to the principle of self-evaluation and something, if we're honest, we've not been very good at. If you look at a number of chief inspectors' reports into the Welsh education system, self-evaluation has always been identified as something that is missing or underdeveloped in our system to date, hence, then, the work to establish not a new approach, but a more robust approach to self-evaluation. We've done that in conjunction, again, with the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. It's really important, throughout the entirety of our reform journey that that's done in co-construction, because we want this resource to be usable in schools. So, it's all very well having a conceptual idea and people outside the classroom working on it, but if it's of no practical use to a school leadership team, then we won't see the impact. So, it's—. We're in phase 2 at the moment, where we're doing—. So, the initial resource has been developed by the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. We're in the testing phase at the moment and having it evaluated itself, with a view to introducing that resource across the system at the start of the new academic year, in September 2020. I truly believe that, if we're to make progress in Welsh education, we have to develop the skills within our system to have robust self-evaluation. This resource gives us continuity of approach right the way across Wales. So, it's not left to an individual school to come up with a system; it's right the way across the system. My hope would be that those principles could then be applied to local education authorities, to regional school improvement services and Welsh Government as part of a whole-system approach to self-evaluation. I don't know if there's anything more you want to add, Steve.

Just to add that the other critical partners are Estyn themselves.


Thank you, Minister. Can I ask, then, about the national evaluation and improvement resource and how significant a role that will play in the raising of school standards, and how you feel it's evolved since it was first conceived?

So, this brings us back to the principle of self-evaluation and something, if we're honest, we've not been very good at. If you look at a number of chief inspectors' reports into the Welsh education system, self-evaluation has always been identified as something that is missing or underdeveloped in our system to date, hence, then, the work to establish not a new approach, but a more robust approach to self-evaluation. We've done that in conjunction, again, with the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. It's really important, throughout the entirety of our reform journey that that's done in co-construction, because we want this resource to be usable in schools. So, it's all very well having a conceptual idea and people outside the classroom working on it, but if it's of no practical use to a school leadership team, then we won't see the impact. So, it's—. We're in phase 2 at the moment, where we're doing—. So, the initial resource has been developed by the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. We're in the testing phase at the moment and having it evaluated itself, with a view to introducing that resource across the system at the start of the new academic year, in September 2020. I truly believe that, if we're to make progress in Welsh education, we have to develop the skills within our system to have robust self-evaluation. This resource gives us continuity of approach right the way across Wales. So, it's not left to an individual school to come up with a system; it's right the way across the system. My hope would be that those principles could then be applied to local education authorities, to regional school improvement services and Welsh Government as part of a whole-system approach to self-evaluation. I don't know if there's anything more you want to add, Steve.

Just to add that the other critical partners are Estyn themselves.


So, this brings us back to the principle of self-evaluation and something, if we're honest, we've not been very good at. If you look at a number of chief inspectors' reports into the Welsh education system, self-evaluation has always been identified as something that is missing or underdeveloped in our system to date, hence, then, the work to establish not a new approach, but a more robust approach to self-evaluation. We've done that in conjunction, again, with the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. It's really important, throughout the entirety of our reform journey that that's done in co-construction, because we want this resource to be usable in schools. So, it's all very well having a conceptual idea and people outside the classroom working on it, but if it's of no practical use to a school leadership team, then we won't see the impact. So, it's—. We're in phase 2 at the moment, where we're doing—. So, the initial resource has been developed by the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. We're in the testing phase at the moment and having it evaluated itself, with a view to introducing that resource across the system at the start of the new academic year, in September 2020. I truly believe that, if we're to make progress in Welsh education, we have to develop the skills within our system to have robust self-evaluation. This resource gives us continuity of approach right the way across Wales. So, it's not left to an individual school to come up with a system; it's right the way across the system. My hope would be that those principles could then be applied to local education authorities, to regional school improvement services and Welsh Government as part of a whole-system approach to self-evaluation. I don't know if there's anything more you want to add, Steve.

Just to add that the other critical partners are Estyn themselves.

So, they have played a critical role and, as we know, as the Minister has said in the past, she may introduce policy and practice, but if Estyn are part of it then schools, usually, because they recognise that it will be part of the inspection process—it gives it greater push and support around it. So, they've been key players within it.


Just to add that the other critical partners are Estyn themselves.

So, they have played a critical role and, as we know, as the Minister has said in the past, she may introduce policy and practice, but if Estyn are part of it then schools, usually, because they recognise that it will be part of the inspection process—it gives it greater push and support around it. So, they've been key players within it.

And I think, if I just say as well, that the external perception of what that's about is really important. It's not a test of school readiness for reform, it is a genuine attempt for a school to evaluate their strengths, their weaknesses and where they need to go next. It's not an Estyn checklist. And because of the word 'toolkit'—the feedback was that it gave the impression of a checklist, 'Just do this and check list'. So, we're actually going to change the name of that resource. So, it'll be called the national evaluation and improvement resource, rather than the toolkit, because, as I said, the feedback was that 'toolkit' gave the impression of a checklist exercise, and it's got to be about more than that if it's going to be meaningful. So, it'll be changed to an 'improvement resource'.


So, they have played a critical role and, as we know, as the Minister has said in the past, she may introduce policy and practice, but if Estyn are part of it then schools, usually, because they recognise that it will be part of the inspection process—it gives it greater push and support around it. So, they've been key players within it.

And I think, if I just say as well, that the external perception of what that's about is really important. It's not a test of school readiness for reform, it is a genuine attempt for a school to evaluate their strengths, their weaknesses and where they need to go next. It's not an Estyn checklist. And because of the word 'toolkit'—the feedback was that it gave the impression of a checklist, 'Just do this and check list'. So, we're actually going to change the name of that resource. So, it'll be called the national evaluation and improvement resource, rather than the toolkit, because, as I said, the feedback was that 'toolkit' gave the impression of a checklist exercise, and it's got to be about more than that if it's going to be meaningful. So, it'll be changed to an 'improvement resource'.

Okay. Before I bring Suzy in, can I just welcome Siân Gwenllian, who is joining us via video-conference in north Wales? Morning, Siân.


And I think, if I just say as well, that the external perception of what that's about is really important. It's not a test of school readiness for reform, it is a genuine attempt for a school to evaluate their strengths, their weaknesses and where they need to go next. It's not an Estyn checklist. And because of the word 'toolkit'—the feedback was that it gave the impression of a checklist, 'Just do this and check list'. So, we're actually going to change the name of that resource. So, it'll be called the national evaluation and improvement resource, rather than the toolkit, because, as I said, the feedback was that 'toolkit' gave the impression of a checklist exercise, and it's got to be about more than that if it's going to be meaningful. So, it'll be changed to an 'improvement resource'.

Okay. Before I bring Suzy in, can I just welcome Siân Gwenllian, who is joining us via video-conference in north Wales? Morning, Siân.

We can, yes. We can hear you very nicely, thank you.


Okay. Before I bring Suzy in, can I just welcome Siân Gwenllian, who is joining us via video-conference in north Wales? Morning, Siân.

We can, yes. We can hear you very nicely, thank you.


We can, yes. We can hear you very nicely, thank you.


We can, yes. We can hear you very nicely, thank you.

Yes. Only a very quick one. It's about the development of the—


Yes. Only a very quick one. It's about the development of the—


Yes. Only a very quick one. It's about the development of the—

Yes, the resource, thank you—about whether there were any conflicting ideas in the process of development that made it quite difficult to zone in on something that school leadership teams, in particular, could rely on. Were there differences of opinion on what this should look like?


Yes. Only a very quick one. It's about the development of the—

Yes, the resource, thank you—about whether there were any conflicting ideas in the process of development that made it quite difficult to zone in on something that school leadership teams, in particular, could rely on. Were there differences of opinion on what this should look like?

Not that I'm aware of from the practitioners that I've spoken to who have been part of that. So, for instance, Suzy, you will know the very small school of Gladestry. The head of Gladestry has been involved in this process, and she said that she'd really enjoyed the process of working alongside Estyn and the OECD as a school leader to be able to shape it. But I'm not aware that there's been conflict in that process.


Yes, the resource, thank you—about whether there were any conflicting ideas in the process of development that made it quite difficult to zone in on something that school leadership teams, in particular, could rely on. Were there differences of opinion on what this should look like?

Not that I'm aware of from the practitioners that I've spoken to who have been part of that. So, for instance, Suzy, you will know the very small school of Gladestry. The head of Gladestry has been involved in this process, and she said that she'd really enjoyed the process of working alongside Estyn and the OECD as a school leader to be able to shape it. But I'm not aware that there's been conflict in that process.

I'm not suggesting that there has been; I'm just interested as to how it had worked, that's all.


Yes, the resource, thank you—about whether there were any conflicting ideas in the process of development that made it quite difficult to zone in on something that school leadership teams, in particular, could rely on. Were there differences of opinion on what this should look like?

Not that I'm aware of from the practitioners that I've spoken to who have been part of that. So, for instance, Suzy, you will know the very small school of Gladestry. The head of Gladestry has been involved in this process, and she said that she'd really enjoyed the process of working alongside Estyn and the OECD as a school leader to be able to shape it. But I'm not aware that there's been conflict in that process.

I'm not suggesting that there has been; I'm just interested as to how it had worked, that's all.

Chair, I think, inevitably, when you bring stakeholders together, they're not going to be in total agreement as to how it's going to work, and I think initially one of the challenges was having Estyn there as part of the facilitation group. There are always some concerns that, actually, it's coming from a to inspect, oral, judgmental tick box. So, we had some early day challenges where we had to convince—and, ultimately, Estyn convinced them—that they were there to help and support as opposed to to inspect, and that the model that was developed, as the Minister said, was not going to be a tick box, 'You are good at this part of self-evaluation', it was to build the skillsets up.


Not that I'm aware of from the practitioners that I've spoken to who have been part of that. So, for instance, Suzy, you will know the very small school of Gladestry. The head of Gladestry has been involved in this process, and she said that she'd really enjoyed the process of working alongside Estyn and the OECD as a school leader to be able to shape it. But I'm not aware that there's been conflict in that process.

I'm not suggesting that there has been; I'm just interested as to how it had worked, that's all.

Chair, I think, inevitably, when you bring stakeholders together, they're not going to be in total agreement as to how it's going to work, and I think initially one of the challenges was having Estyn there as part of the facilitation group. There are always some concerns that, actually, it's coming from a to inspect, oral, judgmental tick box. So, we had some early day challenges where we had to convince—and, ultimately, Estyn convinced them—that they were there to help and support as opposed to to inspect, and that the model that was developed, as the Minister said, was not going to be a tick box, 'You are good at this part of self-evaluation', it was to build the skillsets up.

Okay. So, it's got their full confidence.