Y Pwyllgor Deisebau

Petitions Committee

14/07/2025

Aelodau'r Pwyllgor a oedd yn bresennol

Committee Members in Attendance

Carolyn Thomas Cadeirydd y Pwyllgor
Committee Chair
Joel James
Luke Fletcher
Rhys ab Owen

Swyddogion y Senedd a oedd yn bresennol

Senedd Officials in Attendance

Gareth Price Clerc
Clerk
Kayleigh Imperato Dirprwy Glerc
Deputy Clerk
Lara Date Ail Glerc
Second Clerk

Cofnodir y trafodion yn yr iaith y llefarwyd hwy ynddi yn y pwyllgor. Yn ogystal, cynhwysir trawsgrifiad o’r cyfieithu ar y pryd. Lle mae cyfranwyr wedi darparu cywiriadau i’w tystiolaeth, nodir y rheini yn y trawsgrifiad.

The proceedings are reported in the language in which they were spoken in the committee. In addition, a transcription of the simultaneous interpretation is included. Where contributors have supplied corrections to their evidence, these are noted in the transcript.

Cyfarfu’r pwyllgor yn y Senedd.

Dechreuodd y cyfarfod am 14:00.

The committee met in the Senedd.

The meeting began at 14:00.

1. Cyflwyniad, ymddiheuriadau, dirprwyon a datgan buddiannau
1. Introductions, apologies, substitutions and declarations of interest

Croeso cynnes i chi i gyd i gyfarfod y Pwyllgor Deisebau.

A very warm welcome to you all to this meeting of the Petitions Committee.

Welcome to this meeting of the Petitions Committee, and, as a reminder, the meeting is being broadcast live on Senedd.tv, and the Record of Proceedings will be published as usual. We don't have anybody hybrid today, and we've had apologies from Vaughan Gething. So, if we move on to—. Any declarations of interest from Members? No, no declarations of interest.

2. Deisebau newydd
2. New Petitions

We move on to new petitions. Item 2.1, P-06-1505, 'Review the Carr Hill Formula in Wales—the funding system for primary care'.

'The Carr Hill Formula was introduced with the new GMS contract in 2004.

'It has created enormous, unjustifiable and unsafe funding differences between practices and has never once been reviewed in Wales.

'The General Practice Council of England are suggesting a new funding formula is their number 1 priority. However, this is not the case in Wales.'

This was submitted by Dr Matthew Jones, with 718 signatures. Funding of general practice is a very live topic at the moment, isn't it, and primary care? Could I invite Luke to discuss the petition and any action you think the committee should take?

Diolch, Cadeirydd. It's important that we get this right going forward. The funding formula for GPs has been a problem for a long, long time now. But as you've already alluded to, Chair, there are active discussions happening right now within Government, and that, obviously, is going to result in active scrutiny from the Senedd. I do also think that this is one of those things that really should be the focus of a specific subject committee, rather than the Petitions Committee. So, what I would suggest is that we write to the Health and Social Care Committee to highlight the petition and ask for some timescales as well around their work in relation to this. But also as well for us to write to the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care, just to highlight the petition, but also to get an understanding of where things are at from him as well. Again, I don't think there's much more that we can do as a committee other than that. But I think, at the very least, if we can get that information to be able to pass on to the petitioner, and then potentially look at whether or not we close this petition afterwards. But at the very least keep it open until we get that information.

Okay, thank you. Are the rest of the Members in agreement with that? Okay, thank you. So, as it is under active scrutiny, we will write to the Health and Social Care Committee asking for the timescales of the work, and also to the Cabinet Secretary for awareness of the committee's action, and then keep the petition open, pending response. Okay, thank you.

If we move on to petition P-06-1506, 'We call for an end to further public funding for cycle paths and cycle Infrastructure in Wales'.

'Substantial sums have already been directed towards cycling projects, managed by organisations like Sustrans, courtesy of the Welsh Labour Party. While cycling paths provide benefits to a small segment of the population, the allocation of these funds comes at the expense of far more critical areas like healthcare and education that serves the broader population. We believe that taxpayer money should be redirected to support these essential services that benefit everyone, not niche projects.'

This was submitted by Steve Williams, with 530 signatures. I believe the funding is currently being reviewed. We've been discussing it at the Climate Change, Environment and Infrastructure Committee, about devolving it to corporate joint committees and to local government, so that some of the money could also be used regarding walking as well, to bus stops and other modes of transport. Okay. Could I invite Joel to discuss the petition and any actions you wish the committee to take?

14:05

Thank you, Chair. If I'm honest, I agree wholeheartedly with this petition, really. I have some concerns about the amount of money that is being paid towards active travel in Wales and how little it's achieving. I think we've all seen the headlines in terms of the uptake, which hasn't increased, really, over the years since the legislation came in, and one of my countless frustrations is being sat in traffic next to a cycle lane that's not being used. One of the growing concerns I also have is where active travel routes are coming onto pavements, where those who might have visual impairments, for example, are unaware of that, really. And one of the things that's come to light recently is about the growth in active travel with bus stops, with buses alighting people straight onto these cycle paths, and they're just accidents waiting to happen.

The only thing that worries me is that I don't necessarily know what we can do as a committee, because as you said, Chair, one of the other committees is already looking at the funding element of this and whether or not more should be done in terms of devolving that down to local government. It might be a case where we go back to the petitioner and ask him to link up with that committee really, and maybe we as the Petitions Committee could highlight the petition with the committee. But, unfortunately I don't know what more we can do, really. It's a topic that is actively debated in the Senedd Chamber quite a lot; I know I've asked multiple questions on it. So, I think the scrutiny is there of it, but I just don't know what more, as a committee, we could do though.

Okay. There's been a suggestion to write to the Climate Change, Environment and Infrastructure Committee with a copy of the petition, also the Public Accounts and Public Administration Committee have also looked at it, haven't they? So, we could write to them with the petitioner's comments, and then close the petition. Are we in agreement? Okay. Thank you.

If we move on now to petition P-06-1513, 'Appeal: Wales Autism Bill 2019 (For the Few, Not the Many)'.

'The majority of Labour MSs rejected the Autism (Wales) Bill, despite its potential to significantly improve the lives of autistic people. This petition calls on the Welsh Government to reconsider its stance and prioritize the rights and needs of autistic individuals.

'Don't let autistic people be ignored! The Welsh Government must take action to improve their lives. Sign now to demand change and support the rights of autistic individuals.'

This was submitted by Spencer Errol Grennan, with 597 signatures. There have been lots of discussions regarding autism, neurodivergence on the whole, and the increasing amount of people who have been presented. This has been discussed at the Children, Young People and Education Committee as well. Could I invite Rhys to discuss the petition?

Diolch yn fawr, Cadeirydd. Before I discuss this important petition, could I just mention some visitors we have this afternoon, Cadeirydd, with Noa, who works in my office? We have Hywel and Jack, who are doing some work experience and are very interested in the work of the Welsh Parliament. But we also have a guest who has come from a very long way, we have Ethan from Australia who is visiting Wales. He went to the Stereophonics on Saturday, but I am sure that the visit to the Petitions Committee will be the highlight of his visit to Wales. So, he can go back now to Melbourne and say that he has been mentioned in the records of the Welsh Parliament. So, I would just like to welcome them to our Petitions Committee if that is okay with you, Cadeirydd.

This, of course, was a Member's Bill. It didn't gain Welsh Government support and therefore didn't progress to Stage 3, and it's clear that the Welsh Government view hasn't changed; the current Government is not in support of a specific Bill, they say it's not needed. In response to the Member's Bill in the last Senedd term, the Government introduced a statutory code of practice for the delivery of autism services. Evaluation of that code was published in April of this year. There are plans to expand the code following that. There's a consultation to be conducted with the evaluation due later this summer—when exactly that is, we're not quite sure—with engagement work sometime in the new year. We've had a detailed response from the Minister to this petition.

Whilst I have every sympathy with the petitioner, it's clear that this current Government isn't going to take this Bill forward. So, there's nothing much that we, as a committee, can do at this stage, other than to thank him for raising this important issue and to close the petition, but to encourage him to get involved in the revising of the code and to be engaging with the Welsh Government's work. Diolch yn fawr.

14:10

Okay. Thank you. Would any other committee members like to come in? Okay. Thank you. So, we'll close the petition, but ask the petitioner to carry on with his work. We do raise it quite often, don't we, in debates and at committee as well. So, even though we'll close the petition, it's very much alive in all our minds with the work we do. Okay.

So, petition P-06-1529, 'Adjourn the implementation of the 36 extra members of the Senedd until 2030'.

'By delaying the implementation of the act, there would be time to fully consult with the public and see what they really think of the cost and the benefits.

'The Welsh Government has admitted that, "in the timescale available for developing the legislation it was not possible to undertake its own open public consultation on either the general concepts of Senedd Reform or a draft Bill."'

And then,

'Page 91 of the Explanatory Memorandum to the Senedd Cymru (Members and Elections) Bill',

and there's a link there to it. This was submitted by Lyndon Walker, with 4,840 signatures collected, on paper and online. Okay. So, Rhys, could you take us through this?

Diolch, Gadeirydd. And from the outset, I think, we can all acknowledge that a number of people do share the views of the petitioner. I believe the petitioner himself is a former councillor, and he raises questions with regard to—that extra Members will improve scrutiny. So, there is a job of work to persuade people out there that extra Members are needed. And it'll probably be up to Members in the next Senedd to show that the additional Members do improve scrutiny.

However, the legislation was passed with a supermajority last year. To reverse that now would need primary legislation to be passed. That's not going to have the support of a supermajority in the Senedd. So, it will happen; there will be 36 additional Members. But, of course, there are parties, including the party of my colleague Joel, here, who'll be standing in next May's election on a platform that they'll reverse this decision. So, there is opportunity for Mr Walker, if he so wishes, to support a party that will reverse that decision, not that I'm encouraging him to do so, but there are parties with differing views to others of us here today.

So, I don't think we, as a committee, can take things any further, other than to acknowledge that he does share the view of many others, to thank him and to close the petition. Diolch. 

Yes, thank you, Chair. I'd just like to highlight that I know the petitioner quite well—well, I think it's the same individual—we were on the council together. 

Just to follow on with my colleague Rhys's comments here, I fully agree with the petition. And I would encourage anyone out there who doesn't want to see the Senedd expansion to vote Welsh Conservative at the next Senedd election—

14:15

—as we are the only political party determined to overturn this. Thank you.

The Chamber is being fully fitted out at the moment, as we speak. So, you'd have to work out how to sort that out. 

I remember, when I was a councillor, there were 70 Flintshire councillors, and scrutiny would meet maybe once every four to six weeks. I think it was 12 members on scrutiny, 21 on the planning committee. Whereas I'm on three committees that meet weekly, and there are six Members on most, a bit less on this one. Because I'm a Member of the Senedd, I understand, but when you're a councillor and you have to deliver legislation and budgets delivered by the Senedd or made by the Senedd and you're struggling with funding and capacity at local level, sometimes you might challenge, because you don't understand: 'What's the point of the Senedd if we cannot deliver the budgets and the legislation?'

It's an education thing, I think, that we need to do, so that people understand the roles of different governments and what they do. Because I would say the average resident that we all serve doesn't understand all the layers of government and what we all do. I think that's something that we all should try and do, to help people to understand the role of the Senedd. There we are. We'll take your advice and close the petition. Thank you.

Moving on to petition P-06-1530, 'Save Childcare Provision in Wales—Demand Fair Funding and a Fair Process for Providers and Parent'. 

'Childcare Providers across Wales are at risk of closing due to an unsustainable funding model imposed by the Welsh Government. The flat rate schemes do not cover the true costs of delivering childcare and providers are not allowed to charge the parent the true cost of care when it exceeds the set rate. Since every setting operates differently, many are being forced to run at a loss. This is despite Welsh Government regulations stating our businesses must be sustainable to safeguard our children.'

This was submitted by Lisa Owen, with 1,914 signatures. This is a huge issue, isn't it? Good childcare is so important. My daughter has said that, across in England, parents are now charged for nappies and a lot of money for hours that aren't covered by the free childcare, up to £12 an hour, and they're getting charged for food as well. So, different ways of trying to bring the money in. There has been an increase, up to £6.50 an hour, but it's not covering the costs. Could I bring Luke in to discuss this?

Diolch, Cadeirydd. I know the Equality and Social Justice Committee have done quite a bit of work on this. I think it's worthwhile highlighting the petition with that committee, for information. Could I also ask that we highlight the concerns that have been outlined by the petitioner with the relevant Cabinet Secretary or Minister to seek some answers, some further information, and, until we get that information, that the petition remains open?

Thank you, Luke. Okay, so we'll share the petition with ESJ, and also write to the Minister—I think it's Dawn Bowden in charge of children and early years—and we'll keep the petition open, awaiting that response. Thank you.

3. Y wybodaeth ddiweddaraf am ddeisebau blaenorol
3. Updates to previous petitions

That brings us now on to updates to previous petitions. Petition P-06-1240, 'Improve health services for people with epilepsy living in Wales'. This was submitted by Janet Paterson, with 1,334 signatures. Could I invite Joel to discuss the petition and any actions you think the committee should take?

14:20

Thank you, Chair. I understand that Epilepsy Action Cymru have come forward with their key asks going forward to the next Welsh Government elections next year. I think there are five of them, including introducing a waiting time guarantee. I was wondering if we could write to the relevant Cabinet Secretary and ask for their opinions on this, and what the Welsh Government is doing to address those five action points, but then also to address the other points that the petitioners raised going forward. Because I know we have had this petition on the books for quite some time, and it would be good to try and get something concrete from it, so we can go back to the petitioner with something positive. I think it also probably would be best to copy in the relevant committee—the health committee—as well.

Okay, thank you. We'll just keep it open while we get the response back as well. Luke.

Diolch, Gadeirydd. Just to declare an interest here, I've been working with Epilepsy Action for some time now. Just to come in on what Joel said there, I don't think we should be asking for the opinion of the Cabinet Secretary or Minister. What I think the petitioners and people living with epilepsy want to know is what exactly has the Government been doing to support those with epilepsy over the last Senedd term, at the very least, and what plans are there to specifically improve those services.

We know the services aren't up to scratch. We know there are, for example, links between epilepsy and low income, which is something that needs to be explored further. I saw a couple of confused faces there about that particular point—it's specifically that those from low-income backgrounds living in deprived areas have higher chances of epilepsy. That hasn't been explored in enough detail, I don't think.

Has a general public health—like pollution—issue been—

Well, this is what needs to be explored. There are linkages in a number of reports by this point now for people living in deprived communities having high rates of epilepsy. There are a number of things over the last Senedd term and last couple of years, actually, where Government doesn't seem to have been progressing with this agenda, even though it's been brought to them several times. What I would want us to ask is what exactly have they been doing to address those issues, and what exactly will they then be doing to improve services for those with epilepsy, meeting the five points that have been set out by Epilepsy Action in the petition. 

Have we got that? Okay. So, we need to write to the Cabinet Secretary asking what exactly have they been doing to help people with epilepsy, highlighting those five points. Like you said, there seems to be a lot more that needs to be investigated, especially if people with epilepsy are more prevalent in low-income areas, which I was unaware of. It sounds like there is a lot of work to do there. And copy in the Health and Social Care Committee. We'll keep it open, pending response. It seems a very important and live issue.

If we move on now to petition P-06-1288, 'Deliver Magor and Undy Walkway Station, part of the Burns Delivery Programme, as a quick win'. This was submitted by Paul Turner, and 547 signatures were collected all together. Could I invite Rhys to discuss the petition and any actions he wishes the committee to take?

Diolch, Gadeirydd. This is another quite an old petition. It is the fourth time we've considered it, but it's pretty timely, following the UK Government's spending review of last month, especially with regard to rail investment. The petitioner met with the Cabinet Secretary. I think the petitioner, in quite a polite way really, described the meeting as somewhat disappointing. So, obviously, it didn't reach what the petitioner had expected.

As we know, and as has been discussed a lot in the Senedd, there is some real uncertainty about what's happening with rail investment. There is real uncertainty when any of these Burns stations will open to passengers. So, I think it is worth keeping this petition open. We could still press for some questions. I suggest that we write to the Cabinet Secretary and we ask him for clarity about what’s happening with the Burns stations, and also for any information with regard to discussions he’s had with the UK Government on this matter. Diolch.

14:25

There was an announcement that on top of the £460 million there was another £200 million in consequentials as well coming to Wales. So, action to write to the Cabinet Secretary for transport for more clarity on his discussions with the UK Government. I think generally people want to know the plans of the priorities for the new stations as well.

Yes, clarity on that and also information about the discussion he's had with the UK Government.

Okay, highlight the petitioner's frustrations about the lack of progress. We'll keep the petition open, say for a further six months, waiting for the response. Everybody happy? Yes. 

Petition P-06-1365, ‘Re-open railway lines to connect the north and south of Wales’. This was submitted by Elfed Wyn ap Elwyn with 12,936 signatures. We debated this in the Chamber recently. Could I invite Rhys to discuss the petition and any actions? Oh, was it Rhys or should I pass this on to Joel, actually? Sorry. I think—. Because we're sharing out Vaughan’s.

I don't think it was me, but I'm happy to deal with it. 

I passed this on to Joel, to be fair, to share it out, because Vaughan couldn't speak on it today. 

Thank you, Chair. As we know, we had that debate on it a couple of weeks back, which was really well attended, with a lot discussed. I think we've had some success with our feasibility study that was published earlier in the year. However, as a committee now, I don't know what more we can do with it, really. I think the best thing we could do is just to thank the petitioner and close. But it's a tremendous amount of signatures and it's definitely caught a lot of the imagination, I think, and that was shown with the level of debate we had about it, actually. I was very impressed that the guy walked the entire length of the line as well, which was very impressive. I think that's all we can do, though, as a committee now. 

I think it's been a really good petition, hasn't it, to highlight it, and it's there now on the aspiration list, I think, for Transport for Wales going forward. And it's in people's minds, isn't it, now after that debate as well, which is really important. It has raised the profile of it. If you agree, I don't think there's more we can do at the moment, so we'll thank the petitioner and close it. Are we in agreement? Yes. Okay, thank you.

We move on now to petition P-06-1389, ‘Introduce a 30mph limit on the trunk road through the villages of Eglwys Fach and Ffwrnais’. Ffwrnais? Rhys is nodding; thank you. This was submitted by Catherine Stevenson with 419 signatures. Luke to take us through this.

With this particular petition, I think we've had some positive progress, and I think we're at the stage now where there's not much more we can do as a committee. So I would ask the committee that we thank the petitioner and close the petition. But of course, we have had some positive progress on this one.

That sounds good. Are we in agreement? Okay, thank you very much. So we're going to close that petition now.

Petition P-06-1391, ‘Introduce regulation of the dog grooming sector, to protect the welfare of dogs and rights of owners’. This was submitted by Brian Howell with 284 signatures. So we're looking at the animal welfare establishments regulations. At the moment, I think it would be going through the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee, I guess. Joel, could I bring you in on this?

Thank you, Chair. Again, I think this is another petition where we've had some success in terms of getting dog groomers as a specific item on the consultation that the Welsh Government was doing. I understand that the petitioner and the Cabinet Secretary have been going back and forth. We have two phases coming forward with animal welfare, and I think dog grooming is going to be in the second phase. But I know the petitioner would like some clarification on the timescales of these phases, and I think also that they have asked if they could meet the Cabinet Secretary, and I think maybe we can write and ask if this is possible.

14:30

Okay. Yes, I think it would be good to seek clarification, because it can be difficult to find time in the Cabinet Secretary's diary, and you might not be able to do that. But if that's—. He could also meet with the committee maybe, or the Chair.

I think you're quite right there, Chair, and just to see how best they can engage with the process, and try and get some clarification on that.

Yes. So, if we write back to the petitioner, thank him for the petition, and just to seek out whether he would like to meet with the Cabinet Secretary, but it could be difficult with time, or would he meet with me as Chair of the committee, or the rest of the committee, and also regarding engagement with the process, really.

If the rest of my colleagues are agreeable, we could even look at closing the petition then.

Yes. Okay, so we'll get clarification regarding phases 1 and 2 of the animal welfare regulations, what it means, and where this will be then regarding more detail on the timelines, and then close the petition. Yes. Okay, nodding heads. Righto. Thank you.

So, if we move on to P-06-1476, '1000 meter mandatory buffer zone for all new and existing quarries'. This was submitted by Monika Golebiewska, and there were 11,473 signatures with this one. So, we've met with the residents, the petitioners, and we've had a debate on this as well in the Chamber. So, Rhys, would you like to take us through this?

Diolch, Cadeirydd. I thought we had a really good debate on this matter last month. You can't help but be moved by the testimony of the residents and the strength of feeling of the residents. The evidence is incredible—the photographic evidence, the video evidence, the evidence of dust and noise, and the fact that the quarry and the explosions at the quarry are so close to the school. I worked out it was from the Senedd steps to the Norwegian church; you could never imagine it happening here.

The debate itself, I think, showed the importance of this committee, that these local matters can have an airing in the national Parliament, and I think the residents were grateful for the opportunity to have the debate heard here. I think we—certainly I—share the clear frustration of the petitioners. I think that their comments should be passed on to the Cabinet Secretary. I share their disappointment in some of the answers given. With regards to minerals technical advice note 1, about the review of that, I think we need some clarity from the Cabinet Secretary about what is needed, what evidence do they actually need, to review the current MTAN 1. Because the Cabinet Secretary is obviously open to review it, but we have so much evidence already, what more does this—? I'd be interested to know from the Cabinet Secretary, if we could write to the Cabinet Secretary, because I think this is an idea that was mentioned by Hefin David, who I think has issues with the quarry in his own constituency. I know Heledd Fychan also raised it, and I know Joel has been very vocal in supporting the campaigners. So, I think that there is one more step we can certainly do, which is to get some clarification from the Cabinet Secretary. So, that would be my recommendation. I know quite often a debate is the end of a petition's journey, but I was moved by their experience, and I think there is more that we can still do with regard to this petition.

There are other quarries that have been mothballed, but they have extant planning permission for them—they could become live again, whenever. 

14:35

So, this local issue can become a national issue quite quickly.

Yes. So, it says here:

'MTAN 1 is clear that the potential impact on health must always be considered in relation to proposals for aggregates extraction and a health impact assessment should be carried out for any proposal for a new quarry or sand'.

We did see that evidence, and it was really hard to put that across, I think, to the Cabinet Secretary—you have to see it for yourself, which we did. So, Hefin David put forward that proposal about reviewing MTAN 1, it was supported by other Members, and the response from the Cabinet Secretary was

'since MTAN 1 came into force, so, please, let's have that evidence and explore that evidence, because, as I say, we do keep things constantly under review.'

So, I feel that there's a little opening there.

So, if we write to the Cabinet Secretary, and ask her what evidence is needed for them to explore the review of MTAN 1. I think it would be good to take that forward, because I was dissatisfied with the response. I think there is more we can do, and keep it open.

Chair, can I just echo my colleague Rhys's comments? I think the petitioners were disappointed with the Cabinet Secretary's response as well. I know, when we discussed this just before the debate—. I think it was key for people to manage expectations on this, because I know—. I think we all had an inkling that the Welsh Government wasn't going to change its standpoint from what it was before. But I definitely think the strength of feeling is still there against this. Again, with Rhys, I'd like to get that clarification on MTAN, do a bit more, and also to keep this petition open, really, until we get those responses.

It's a balance, isn't it, between the business being paused and taking into consideration community health as well, with them being so close. So, you've got to get that right.

Yes. And the thing is that there are issues on both sides there. Because I know—. I've met with the quarry management, and they've said that for years they've tried to have those liaison committees, but there's just been no take from either the local authority or the local community at the time. I think a lot of these issues could have been avoided with that as well, really.

I believe that they are meeting now. A meeting has been brokered through the local authority, which is good, and, hopefully, changes will happen then for them. Okay. So, we'll do that: we'll keep it open for now, and write to the Cabinet Secretary.

Petition P-06-1482, 'Ban smartphones in all schools in Wales (with exemptions for exceptional circumstances)'. This was submitted by Zena Blackwell, with 3,369 signatures. So, we did an inquiry on this. I think we all went into this thinking, expecting, the proposal would be to ban smartphones in all schools, and then we heard the evidence, and so the view shifted.

Sorry, Chair; sorry about this, but I just have to leave for that doctor's appointment, if that's okay.

Okay. That's fine. That's fine. Thank you. We're still okay to keep going. There are lots of conversations still ongoing, aren't there? I've heard about Monmouthshire working with parents, encouraging them not to buy smartphones. So, it's not just at school time, it's also out-of-school time as well, in the evenings. The UK Government also, they've been asked to look at it as well. So, it's an ongoing topic. Okay. Could I bring you in, Luke, on this?

Yes. It's definitely been an interesting piece of work that we've undertaken, and there's definitely been more of an interest in this particular topic over the last couple of months than there was before. Within that report we published, there were five recommendations. Government have accepted those recommendations, either in full or in principle, which I think is a positive step. I think, in the debate, the Cabinet Secretary said that there was active work happening within Government to look at what future policy it would pursue around the use of smartphones within an educational setting. So, I think, actually, all round there's been quite a positive result of this petition. I think we are at a point now where there is not much more we can do as a committee. So, what I would like to propose is that we thank the petitioner, reiterate the steps that we've been told Welsh Government are going to be taking, and then close the petition.

Okay. Yes. And we'll thank the petitioner for it, for the petition—it's been a really, really good petition—with those recommendations going forward.

14:40
4. Papurau i'w nodi
4. Papers to note

That brings us now on to papers to note. Are we happy to note those papers? Thank you. Then that concludes the public business.

5. Cynnig o dan Reol Sefydlog 17.42(ix) i benderfynu gwahardd y cyhoedd o weddill y cyfarfod
5. Motion under Standing Order 17.42(ix) to resolve to exclude the public from the meeting for the remainder of today's business

Cynnig:

bod y pwyllgor yn penderfynu gwahardd y cyhoedd o weddill y cyfarfod yn unol â Rheol Sefydlog 17.42(ix).

Motion:

that the committee resolves to exclude the public from the remainder of the meeting in accordance with Standing Order 17.42(ix).

Cynigiwyd y cynnig.

Motion moved.

So, I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17.42, that the committee resolve to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting. Are we content? Okay. Thank you.

Derbyniwyd y cynnig.

Daeth rhan gyhoeddus y cyfarfod i ben am 14:40.

Motion agreed.

The public part of the meeting ended at 14:40.