National Assembly for Wales

We're joined online by Vaughan Gething. I'd like to—. I jumped a bit there. So, I just want to say the meeting is being broadcast live on Senedd.tv, and the record of proceedings will be published as usual. Welcome, everybody, to the meeting.

So, if we move on straight away to new petitions, the first petition is item 2.1, P-06-1489, 'Legislate to ensure swift bricks are installed in all new buildings in Wales'.

'Swifts are the fastest birds in level flight and can sleep, eat, drink and mate on the wing. Their cries define Welsh summers. Sadly, they are rapidly declining – down 72% in the last 30 yrs. Swifts nest in holes in buildings. Renovation makes them homeless, and new-builds currently offer no cavities. Without more nesting options, swifts will disappear. Incorporating swift bricks into all new developments would help swifts (and other struggling birds like house martins and sparrows) to recover.'

This was submitted by Julia Barrell—and welcome to the meeting; she's in the gallery here today—with 10,934 signatures. So, could I invite Luke to discuss the petition?

Diolch, Cadeirydd. I have no opposition to the idea. I don't think at this point, though, that we should take this for a debate. I know it's at the threshold. I only say that because of the number of other, I presume, debates that we're going to be asking the Business Committee for, for some of the long-standing items on our agenda today. But I think we can at least start the process of writing to the Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Energy and Planning around this idea, where Welsh Government sits on it, but as well the Deputy First Minister in his role as well as a Cabinet Secretary, just to start the ball rolling on understanding the Government's position. We can perhaps then come back to it once we've had those responses. But, at the moment, I don't feel like we're in a position to ask for a debate just yet. I'd like a bit more information first.

Okay. So, we could come back to it at a later date, if other committee members thought—.

On the caveat that we do write to the Government, though, seeking their view on this. Again, I have no opposition to the idea of swift bricks, but, in terms of it being a single topic for debate, I think it's too—. I don't want to use the word 'niche', but it's a very restricted topic for an hour-long debate in the Senedd, isn't it? So, I think there are other things that we can do as a committee at this stage.

Okay. So, we've written to the Deputy Minister with this, under his portfolio, but the Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Energy and Planning—. Who would have biodiversity under his portfolio, but the Cabinet Secretary for Housing and Local Government, who's responsible for housing policy and the Cabinet Member as well for that—. So, we could write to her. Oh, actually, it's the Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Energy and Planning, isn't it?

So, it sounds to me that there are number of people—

It crosses over a lot, yes.

There's a number of Cabinet Secretaries that, actually, this would fall under their responsibility. So, I think there would be a need for Government to work on this across portfolios. 

Yes. Sorry. I agree, Luke. It crosses over into three. I'm finding this out quite often, that planning and business and energy crosses over quite a lot. So, a possible action: the committee could write to the Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Energy and Planning for a co-ordinated response on this.

Sorry, Vaughan, you've got your hand up. I missed you there. Did you want to come in on this as well?

Yes. Thank you, Chair. I was just going to say, I think it is sensible to write to the Government, because it does cut across a number of portfolios—I'm completely agnostic about whether the letter goes to the economy and planning Secretary or whether it goes back to the Deputy First Minister and is copied into others—but to ask for a co-ordinated response from the Government. And, look, this committee does ask for fairly niche debates on a range of things, but I think we should try to understand what the co-ordinated action is, and, in the response we've had so far, it does point out that, in the innovative housing programme, swift bricks are being used. There's some use of this already. So, it isn't as if nothing is happening, but if we want to have a more co-ordinated understanding and to directly address the issues the petitioner has raised with us, we're going to need to write to the Government anyway, and let's write one letter, rather than write a letter to one Cabinet Secretary and then get a response and write to others, and then we may be in a position where we don't need a debate because the issue is being resolved. But I think it's a fair point: keep the petition open, write to the Government in one letter—I don't mind whether that goes to Rebecca Evans or Huw Irranca-Davies—but ask for a response on a co-ordinated basis and then we can reconsider, based on that response, what is happening. But there is some good news about the fact that some use of swift bricks has already been made, but it's about how that can be mandated and how that deals with the issue. I should note that, whilst I'm not the species champion, it's an issue that is relevant to my constituency and others as well.

Okay, thank you, Vaughan. Anybody else want to come in? So, rather than a scatter-gun approach, as it's often called, if we write to the deputy leader and ask for a co-ordinated approach, copying in the other Cabinet members—a co-ordinated response, copying in the other Cabinet members—regarding this, and bring it back to committee once we've had those responses. Okay, thank you.

I remember swifts nesting in my grandfather's house and coming back every year. They'd go, 'Oh, they're back again', and the house martins. They did decline, and biodiversity and ecology—you know, it's a shame. So, it would be great to help them, where we can. So, I'd like to thank the petitioner, and we'll keep this open for now. And thank you for attending today. Thank you.

If we move on now to item 2.2, which is petition P-06-1507, 'We call on UWTSD and the Welsh Government to create a viable, sustainable plan for the long-term future of Lampeter campus'.

'The University of Wales Trinity Saint David has announced a plan to end all undergraduate teaching at its Lampeter campus by September 2025, a decision that would sever nearly 200 years of Lampeter’s role as a centre of higher education and devastate the local community. As alumni, students, and supporters, we call upon UWTSD and the Welsh Government to protect Lampeter’s legacy and commit to a sustainable future for this historic campus.'

This was submitted by Esther Weller, with 5,771 signatures. Could I bring Joel in to discuss the petition?

Thank you, Chair, and I just wanted to thank the petitioner for raising such an important topic, I think, and I think I speak for quite a few Members in the Chamber who are concerned about the state of higher education in Wales at the moment, especially what's happening at Lampeter, but then also in my own region, with Cardiff University, and with the music then at the royal college as well.

I definitely would like to see this being debated, if I'm honest. I definitely think there's scope, maybe not just talking about what's happening in Lampeter, but the rest of the sector in Wales, really. I know similar concerns have been expressed in north Wales. So, that's what I would like to be pushing for. I don't know what the rest of the committee think.

But, if it doesn't go that way, I definitely think we need to be looking at what more can be done for this petition, because I know the petitioners have raised some alternative proposals that could be done to save the undergraduate campus on site, and it would good if we could raise that with the relevant Government Ministers then. And that's what I have to say on that, I suppose.

Thank you, Joel. Would anybody else like to come in on this matter? Vaughan, do you want to come in? 

Yes. Sorry, Chair, my screen, for some reason, is going haywire. But my view is that this petition is particular to Lampeter and is particular to the circumstances. I studied in Aberystwyth, so I had friends in Lampeter, so I understand the position of the institution with regard to the town, and, if the whole campus were to close, it would have an impact on the town. But there's a difference of view between the petitioner and the university about the future of the site in the sense that the university's saying the site isn't going to close.

We've already had a higher education debate within the Chamber, and I'm sure we'll get more, because the position across university institutions in Wales means that significant changes are now being made, and I think it would be difficult for this committee to debate and discuss those generally or to push for a petitions debate around higher education. We've already had party debates; I'm sure we'll get more. I think this really is an issue for the university institution to deal with. And part of our problem, I think, is that universities really are independent institutions. Running a debate that says we want the Minister to intervene, when she doesn't have the power, necessarily, to do it, I don’t think helps us, and it lessens the impact that we can have. I think that the points about a viable plan are really about how the institution itself deals with its local stakeholders in Lampeter and in Carmarthen. And I also note the National Union of Students saying that you really need 1,200-plus students in humanities to have a viable campus, and Lampeter now has 92. My son’s primary school has a couple of hundred-plus pupils at it.

So, that’s part of the challenge that I don’t think we can get around. For all of the understandable attachment to Lampeter and its history, I think trying to run this as a petitions debate on a niche basis isn’t going to work. And I think it is worth writing, as the alternative suggestion is, to both the Children, Young People and Education Committee, where there is work coming through about the future of higher education—and I know that committee that I sit on has asked the university vice chancellor to appear before the end of the summer—and also the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee, because, of course, there is a potential impact on the town of Lampeter and the wider environments thereon.

And I think, if those two committees are going to take that forward, that’s the right place for it to happen, together with the debates around the future of higher education that I am sure will continue through the summer whilst universities are going through what is plainly a very difficult and painful process.

Thank you. So, we’ve had that appraisal from Vaughan. Luke, would you like to come in?

Yes. Some of the points I disagree with. I don’t think it’s true to say that the Government is powerless, when it’s funding the university sector, but that would go into a completely different debate, though. But I think the sentiment—

With respect, that isn’t what I said. That isn’t what I said, Luke.

Well, you said that the higher education system and universities are independent of Government. They are also funded by Government, so I don't think Government is powerless in terms of its ability to intervene. But that is a debate, I think, for another time.

The question before us at the moment is actually what do we do with this petition. And I actually do agree with what Vaughan has said here. I think, actually, we should be writing to the relevant parties around what can be done. I think the reality is, I don’t think, again, in this particular petition, because it’s such a focused petition, that a debate just on Lampeter would actually be of benefit. But I do think that a wider debate could happen around the higher education system. Whether that’s how we fund it or not, I don’t know, but I think we should at least follow through on Vaughan’s recommendation of writing, and that, perhaps, then, could inform the next stage of our deliberations on this particular petition.

Okay.

I agree with the suggestion. 

Okay. So, if—. There probably will be another debate that comes along. I’m just talking to Joel now—if there’s another debate, I could speak on behalf of the committee about Lampeter. Would that be okay with you?

Yes. 

And then, as has been proposed by Vaughan and Luke, we write to CYPE and the ETRA committees to highlight the petition for awareness. Okay. Is that okay with you? Okay. And then close the petition? And then we close the petition. We’ve got nods. A nod from Vaughan? Thank you. And from everybody else? Okay. Joel.

Yes. I don’t necessarily support the closure of the petition, but I’m happy to go with the rest of it.

Okay. So, are we okay to—? I’m happy to close the petition with writing, or do you want to wait until there’s a response first? I don’t think there’s much more we can do, really, anyway. So, I’m quite happy to close it at this stage. Yes? Okay. So, if we just note that Joel’s concerned about that, but the majority are happy to close the petition, after writing to both CYPE and ETRA. But I can still—. If we have a debate, which I’m sure we will, on universities, I can raise, on behalf of the committee, Lampeter and the petition. Okay.

Right, moving on to item 2.3, P-06-1508, ‘Limit the Welsh Councils to a maximum increase of 2% on Council tax each year, starting in April 2025’.

‘The increase in council tax in 2024 was too high for the people of Wales, and to increase Council tax again by above inflation is not a fair increase for the people of Wales.'

That was submitted by Stuart Phillips, with 1,454 signatures. Well, it's too late for April 2025 now. Okay, can I invite Rhys to discuss the petition, please?

Diolch, Gadeirydd. I think we can all acknowledge that there are some very strong views on this. That is reflected in the fact that we have three open petitions at the moment with regard to capping council tax increases, and we can see, just by looking through social media and talking to constituents, that people have very strong views on this. However, the response from the finance Minister is very clear. His position may be different to some noises in the past from Welsh Government, but his position is very clear that he respects the autonomy of local authorities to set council tax and to set their own budgets, and he sees that as an important element of local democracy in Wales.

Now, the petitioner, and one probably could understand—maybe not agree with, but understand—his position, believes that the Cabinet Secretary for finance is just passing the buck. He mentions that, once again, the increases are above inflation, and that obviously impacts the poorest and those struggling within our communities. But because the response is so clear from the Cabinet Secretary for finance, I don't think we are in a position as a committee to change his mind, or the Government's mind, at this point, with regard to this, so I think the only position left for us as a committee is to thank the petitioner, but to close it. Diolch yn fawr.

Okay, thank you. Any other comments?

I think the difficulty is that we had a parliamentary debate on it last week, which my group put forward, about the funding formula and that, and obviously the outcome of that was pretty swift there. I agree with the petition. Where I live—I live in Rhondda Cynon Taf—I pay more in council tax than I think I would pay if I was living in Cardiff, and my council has—. I know we can talk about reserves and what they're used for and everything, but mine has £255 million in reserve. I remember when I was first on the council, it has £102 million, so that's gone up substantially since I was first on the council, and I just definitely think this needs to have some sort of wider debate, really, and the issue that happens is—. I know my colleague Rhys was saying that the Cabinet Secretary has said that he respects local democracy, but in the past we have had Ministers who have said that they would intervene if they felt it necessary—I think Lesley Griffiths, and I think Leighton Andrews as well, at one point, when he was in the Government. And I think that's what's frustrating, because we all see what goes on online, what Westminster City Council charges and everything, compared to areas that are quite poor in comparison, actually. It's just frustrating, really. But I agree, I don't think there's much more that can be done other than to close it.

We did have a big debate on it, about whether councils should have a baseline of funding without having to use council tax to close the gap. As well as inflationary pressures, we've got growing need in social healthcare as well, so it all comes into that, but a 2 per cent cap would be very restrictive at this stage, I think, for councils as well. Okay. So, do we agree, then, to close this petition and not take it any further? Okay, thank you. We'll close the petition and not take it any further.

So, if we move on now to updates to previous petitions, 3.1 is 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. I remember meeting him on the steps. I think he'd walked here along the old line as far as he could, as well, which was amazing. Could I invite Vaughan to discuss the petition and any actions he wishes the committee to take?

Diolch, Cadeirydd. I think we're at a position now where the committee needs to keep faith with its previous commitments in a predecessor form. The overall history of how the cuts to rail lines have taken place, the infamous Beeching cuts and others, means that there are various parts of track bed that exist across Wales without tracks on them or services, some of which have been developed on, and in this stretch in particular, part of it has been taken over for a narrower gauge railway; part of it is now actually an active travel network as well. So, they're not unused in that sense. However, the reason why a previous Petitions Committee agreed to pause matters, but keep the petition open, was that there was a co-operation agreement to undertake a feasibility study into improving links in this area. That's now concluded with a recommendation around an express coach service.

I don't think we have a response from the Government yet, but it does appear to me that now that report has been provided and published, we should be in a position to request a debate on this matter, given the previous undertakings and indications that were given. That should also give time for the Government to respond on this issue and the linked issue of Aberystwyth to Carmarthen, which regularly comes up as part of links broadly across the north-west coastline, from north Wales down to south-west Wales.

So, my view is that we should request a debate now that the feasibility report is available, and we should make clear that, in that debate, we want to discover not just the Bangor part, but actually Aberystwyth to Carmarthen, and that would then be an area for the Government to set out its plans and for the committee to have met its previous indication of how it would act. I think that once the debate is agreed, we could then close the petition, because I'm sure that there would be commitments given about how the Government would take that forward. And if the Government is going to commit to undertaking those matters, that will go into the budget and a range of other areas, and I'm sure there'll be further scrutiny from the Parliament. So, that's my proposal, to seek a debate, to seek that the Government responds to the report either before or during that debate, and then we can move forward with whatever the Government proposes and what Members choose to do through the Parliament.

Okay, thank you, Vaughan. Any other Members? Are we happy with that proposal? Okay, thank you. Thank you very much, Vaughan. That's been moved. We'll take that forward to debate with those recommendations.

If we move on now to 3.2, which is petition P-06-1380, 'Make Blue badge Applications Lifelong for individuals who have a lifelong diagnosis'. This was submitted by STAND North Wales CIC with 1,618 signatures. So, Luke, would you like to take us through this?

Yes. I can see that a lot of work has happened on this already, a lot of different conversations and dialogues between different stakeholders, cross-party groups, Welsh Government and that, and I'm conscious that this has been with us now since December 2023, so it's been with us for a while. I think there's enough information out there for us perhaps to look at asking the clerks, for fear of giving them more work, to put together either a one-pager or a two-pager with some recommendations that we can then present to Government, and then on doing that and on completion of that, then look to close the petition. I think that will crystallise all the conversations that have happened, hopefully, and when brought together in that way, that would hopefully give a clear set of recommendations to the Government, and hopefully a clear pathway to getting this over the line.

I would really welcome that proposal, Luke. I've had several meetings and it really does feel like we need to have clear guidance on this, consistency in the way it's being delivered. I'm hearing different views regarding the 'not for reassessment', the inability to add it onto the form, and omission of the term from the guidance and consumer information. And also, some authorities offer help, and some are not quite so helpful as well. So, I think training would be really useful as well, for local authorities and that consistent approach. Having cognitive behaviour under the walking ability behaviour and planning a journey has become part of the assessment now, which is welcomed. But I don't know whether it's giving it a high enough consideration and treated consistently by all local authorities, so that's something else I'd like us to look at.

But it does feel like—. I know the ESJ committee looked at this five years ago. There are still outstanding recommendations. We have many questions in the Chamber, as well, from different Members cross party, and, again, it covers different portfolios. So, it's delivered by the transport portfolio, the Cabinet Secretary for North Wales and Transport; the Cabinet Secretary for local government is also involved, and Jane Hutt on social justice, because I believe, as others do, that this is a social justice issue as well, and I feel like it's a bit scattered. So, to have that focused approach from the committee, please—thank you very much—if we can take this forward with recommendations, that would be really welcome. Is committee in agreement with that, with a short inquiry? Thank you very much.

So, if we move on now to 3.3, which is petition P-06-1400, 'Fair and Adequate Resourcing of General Practice in Wales'. This was submitted by Lewis Williams from British Medical Association Cymru Wales, with 21,620 signatures. Could I ask Joel to take us through this?

Thank you, Chair. I'll be honest, there's not much that I think we can do on this now. I know that the Petitions Committee had a debate on it in November last year, and I think that was one of a number of debates, actually, if I remember rightly, on it. It's coming to the end, where I think we just need to close the petition, but I note that the Health and Social Care Committee is doing a consultation on the future of general practice in Wales, and that closes, I think, at the end of March, in a couple of weeks' time, and I don't know whether or not we can feed this into that. If the committee is minded, we could just keep it open until we know the outcome of that consultation and we could go from there, really, but I'm quite open to what the rest of my colleagues suggest on this.

Okay, thank you, Joel. What are the committee's views on this? Would anybody like to come in? So, we—

Yes, Chair.

Yes, Vaughan.

My view is that given that the main subject committee is already looking at the area that it's highlighted, I don't think that there is a point or a purpose in this committee keeping this petition open. Funding for general practice and primary care in broader terms, because general practice isn't all of primary care, is a regular source of debate and discussion, and will continue to be so, quite rightly. Given that the Health and Social Care Committee is looking at this and it's about to close its consultation, these issues will get taken forward. I do think, though, it's entirely appropriate for us to write to the Health and Social Care Committee to make them aware of the work that we're doing, and then I'm sure that will result in not just more questions and debate, but I'd be surprised if there isn't a report for the Welsh Government to respond to with ongoing scrutiny around that. So, that's my proposal: we close the position, write to the Health and Social Care Committee to make them aware of the level of interest and the correspondence we've had around this as well.

We've got two proposals here—

Chair, I'm happy with Vaughan's recommendation.

Okay, thank you. So, the proposal is we highlight, again, the further correspondence to the Health and Social Care Committee Chair as part of the inquiry that closes at the end of March. There will probably be a debate then on that paper that's produced. We could speak on behalf of what's been raised with us then, if it's not highlighted in that debate already, that paper, and we can close the petition going forward. Thank you.

Moving on to 3.4, petition P-06-1425, 'We ask the Welsh Government to reverse its decision to stop T2 buses calling at'—. Garndo—

Locals call it 'Garn'.

Thank you. To Garn. Thank you, Rhys, for that help. It was submitted by Steven Churchman, with 282 signatures. My Welsh teacher will tell me off and give me intense lessons next Monday on how to pronounce that name, but there we go. Rhys, would you take us through this one?

Diolch yn fawr, Gadeirydd. I can assure you that 'Garndolbenmaen' is a mouthful for a native Welsh speaker, so I admire your attempt at saying 'Garndolbenmaen'.

This is the third time we've considered this. I think I've spoken to it on all of those occasions. We adjourned last time for a meeting to be held between the Welsh Government, Transport for Wales, Cyngor Gwynedd and the petitioner. We've had a response from the petitioner—I think a very positive response. There hasn't been a resolution, but he felt that the meeting went well and that the concerns of his community are now being considered. In a way, what more can we ask than for that to have happened? I'm glad that the committee played a role to ensure that that did happen. So, my suggestion would be that we close the petition, in that we're glad that the meeting took place, that the concerns were heard and that the petitioner has said that he'll keep us informed. But I don't think that there's anything more that we as a committee can do now. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you for the update, Rhys. Are we all in agreement with closing the petition now, going forward? Yes. Okay, thank you.

We move on to item 3.5, P-06-1435, 'We’re calling on the Welsh Government to commit to implementing targeted lung cancer screening'. This was submitted by Simon Scheeres, with 5,339 signatures. Could I ask Vaughan to discuss the petition?

Diolch, Gadeirydd. Members will recall, and I should point out, that the member who has provided the petition is a constituent, but it's a Wales-wide issue. This is the third time we've considered the issue. The last time, we agreed for the chair to write to the Cabinet Secretary for health and the response confirms that Public Health Wales have been funded to take forward more scoping work following the intelligence gained from the pilot. Whilst the pilot is due to end this month, the Cabinet Secretary has already asked Public Health Wales to advise on implementation by the spring, so that's earlier than anticipated. So, it does seem to me that the petition has, together with the work being done, helped to achieve its objectives of both raising the issue and speeding up the intelligence from the pilot being used to improve the screening service.

My view is that we therefore have reached a sensible point with this petition to conclude what we're doing and close the petition. I think we can write to the Chair of the Health and Social Care Committee to confirm that we've closed our petition, but I am robustly confident that this cancer screening service and others will continue to be raised in the Health and Social Care Committee, but also in the Chamber. Given that the Cabinet Secretary has publicly committed to not just seek advice but to do something with it for earlier implementation, I think this is not a matter that is going to go unnoticed, and I, for one, as a Government-supporting backbencher, will be happy to ask questions about this, as I'm sure others will who may not be quite as supportive of the Government. So, I don't think the issue is going to go away. I think this committee's work has been done. Thank the petitioner and write to the Health and Social Care Committee.

Are we in agreement? Okay. So, we thank the petitioner, we'll close the petition and we'll write to the Chair of the Health and Social Care Committee to let them know that the petition has been closed now. Thank you, Vaughan.

Moving on to item 3.6, P-06-1453, 'Provide funding and support for the adequate provision of accessible and clean public toilets'. This was submitted by Gareth Parsons, with 1,172 signatures online and 947 on paper: 2,119 signatures in total. Could I ask Luke to take us through the petition, please?

Diolch, Cadeirydd. This is obviously more important than I think people realise, especially for older people and people with disabilities. I can see, of course, we wrote to Pencoed Town Council, my former council back before I got elected to this place, and it is a good example, actually, of how public buildings are maintained by town councils and community councils. So, I was really glad to see the evidence they provided. I think there are going to be a number of Members in this place, not just in this Senedd but the next Senedd, who will be raising this as a concern and the need for Government to intervene. So, in terms of our role now, as a Petitions Committee, we have, I think, taken this as far as we can. We've given that evidence provided by Pencoed Town Council to the Minister and the Minister has responded to that as well. So, on that basis, given that I don't think there's much more that we can do with this, and the fact that there will be Members raising this consistently after this meeting, we should close the petition and thank the petitioner for raising this issue with us.

Thank you, Luke. I think there was £500,000 in the budget to improve toilets on main roads in Wales, wasn't there? It won't go very far, but it's a help. Like you say, it's a really important issue and one of those that we used to take for granted in times gone past when there was more money. Are we all in agreement to close this petition? Thank you very much. Thank you for the update as well.   

Item 3.7, petition P-06-1479, ‘Stop the detention of learning disabled and autistic children, young people and adults in hospitals’. This was submitted by Stolen Lives, with 1,754 signatures. Could I invite Joel to discuss the petition and any actions you might wish the committee to take?

Thank you, Chair, and thank you for bringing up this quite important petition. For over a year now, we've been looking into it. I think the latest is that the Welsh Government is looking at a task and finish group to look into this. I was wondering, if the rest of the committee is mindful, if we can hold back on making any decision on this until we know what the outcome of that is first.

How do committee members feel about that? I can see heads nodding in approvement. So, if we can do that, then. We note that a task and finish group has been set up and we’ll keep the petition open pending that. Thank you.

Item 3.8, petition P-06-1480, 'Make menopause a mandatory part of the curriculum for all healthcare sciences and medical students'. This petition was submitted by Nico Campbell, with 540 signatures. Could I invite Rhys to discuss the petition and any actions you wish the committee to take? 

Thank you very much, Cadeirydd. Diolch yn fawr. We’ve had, I thought, a very helpful response from the General Medical Council that says while they can’t force any medical school to provide any specific content, they are required to meet the standards of the council, and that includes, with regards to licensing assessment for doctors and including doctors from abroad, women’s health and menopause. They’ve also stated how they are very keen to continue to work with various stakeholders across the United Kingdom, including the Senedd here, to make sure that women’s health and menopause are fully considered and to improve outcomes for them. The women’s health plan has been published; it’s been discussed on many occasions in this place. It’s currently subject to scrutiny by the health committee, I understand. I recommend that we share the response from the General Medical Council with that committee and thank the petitioner for raising an important point, but to close the petition now. 

Thank you. Would anybody else like to contribute? Thank you for that proposal. Perhaps we’ll write to the Chair of the Health and Social Care Committee and just point out that it should be looked at as part of the women’s health plan going forward. And we thank the petitioner. There does seem to be more awareness now, I think, of menopause, which is really good and really important. Thank you. Do we agree to close the petition, going forward? Thank you.

Item 3.9, petition P-06-1486, ‘Grant BN(O) Hong Kong students home fee status after three years of residence’. This was submitted by Chai Yiu Melody Lin—Melody Lin, I remember her coming in, actually, we met her, didn’t we, here—with 377 signatures. I apologise I wasn’t able to meet her again last week, I was just too busy, she’d hoped to meet with me then. Can I invite Vaughan to discuss the petition and any actions you wish the committee to take?

Diolch, Gadeirydd. This is quite a complex issue at the interaction between visas and what their status actually provides and people’s entitlement to undertake higher education and wider benefits. It’s a regular topic of conversation, and I’m sure it will continue to be so more generally. The specific issue around Hong Kongers is different because of the nature of the visas that some of them were able to obtain. The Minister has responded previously on more than one occasion. There’s a difference of opinion between the Minister and the petitioner about the status that the British national (overseas) visa provides.

However, what I think is most important is that the issue is not just on the ministerial radar, but the Minister has provided a direct opportunity for affected individuals to take up the issue with her directly in writing. It’s also been mentioned by Members in the Chamber, as well as in writing. I think the route now is for the petitioner to be able to raise that matter directly with the Minister and her elected representatives in the normal way. I don’t think the Petitions Committee acting as a Petitions Committee is going to be able to deliver more than we have already. I think we should thank the petitioner for raising the issue and encourage her to take up the Minister’s invitation to write individually and/or collectively about the direct experience of people on this particular type of visa and their engagement in higher education and wider society, as the Minister has provided the offer to do so. I think that’s the right way to proceed.

So, close the petition, write back to the petitioner urging the petitioner to take up the direct offer the Minister has made, and to make sure that other affected individuals are able to do so. And of course, elected Members, whether in a constituency or a region, I’m sure would be happy to assist if required to do so.

Thank you, Vaughan. Luke, you want to come in.

I agree with what Vaughan has set out there. To be fair to the Minister, she has offered to meet with those people who have been affected, so I think if we are able to write to the petitioner with the relevant contact details as well to be able to get through to the Minister so that they can have that meeting and discuss it in detail. Because my only concern with this petition now is that it’s too complex for the Petitions Committee to be looking at itself. I think this is more for either a subject focus committee to look at, or even Government officials as well to look at.

I think there might be perhaps some questions that we could ask of the Equality and Social Justice Committee as well. I’ll have to send this on to the clerks. I did do a bit of reading around this late last night and I’ve forgotten the exact declaration that was put out by the UN in relation to this specific topic. But there are some questions I think ESJ might be able to answer or maybe will want to look at in relation to the Welsh Government’s objectives of Wales as a nation of sanctuary and so on. But I would agree with Vaughan, I think we should ensure that the petitioner knows now that the Minister is open to meeting with them, but I think we should also write to ESJ to ask them to have a look at this as well as a relevant subject committee.

I think that's a good way forward as well. When I met with them, they were able to explain more about it, and I think that was really useful. We'll carry forward that suggestion as a committee. So, if we write to the petitioner, sharing that and details of how to get in touch with the Minister. Or is that something that we need to organise ourselves, as a committee, to facilitate that? It might be a way forward, mightn't it? We can do that, can't we?

If that is something we can facilitate, I don't know. That's a question for the clerks.

We'll organise that, thank you, and then close the petition. I tried to raise it as well at scrutiny of the First Minister, but I think this detail is needed going forward. Thank you.

The next one, I need to declare an interest on, which I didn't do at the beginning. As the chair of the cross-party group on animal welfare, I've been strongly fighting for the ban on greyhound racing in Wales. I led a short debate on it as well, and took part in the petition debate. We've got two petitions here. The first one, item 3.10, is P-06-1253, 'Ban greyhound racing in Wales', which was submitted by Hope Rescue, with 35,101 signatures, which has been debated. And then also, item 3.11, which is petition P-06-1354, 'The Welsh Government should support greyhound racing in Wales'. So, it's actually saying that the Welsh Government should support greyhound racing in Wales. That's been submitted by David Tams, with 10,601 signatures. But things have happened since then. Luke, would you like to take us through this?

Diolch, Gadeirydd. I will declare an interest myself as well, as a member of Greyhound Rescue Wales. But just looking at this now, objectively, in terms of the role of the Petitions Committee going forward, I think the Government has set out what it intends to do on this particular issue now, and, as such, I think it then falls on, again, a specific subject committee to then look at the scrutiny of how the Government progresses things. In this case, it would actually be another committee that I sit on, which is the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee. So, because of that clear direction from Government now, and the need for greater scrutiny, which would come through that committee, I would suggest that we write to the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee to make them aware of these petitions, so when it comes to their deliberations, that they have these to hand, but we close both petitions and allow the scrutiny process within the Senedd to take place.

Thank you. Are we in agreement with those recommendations? Joel.

Thank you, Chair. Actually, I was on the Petitions Committee when we first looked at the petition before, when your colleague Jack Sargeant was the Chair, and, at the time, I expressed reservations there, because of the fact we didn't actually do any site visits, for argument's sake. We didn't look at the tracks, we didn't do any comparison with what was going on in England, and a lot of it was just evidence based in the Chamber—written and oral. And also, I didn't support one of the recommendations that said that we would then look at other sports in Wales involving animals.

I still maintain that this doesn't actually address the welfare issues that need to be addressed—and there are welfare issues with greyhound racing, but that's in the minority, I would argue, really. I am concerned by the nature of how the ban came around, the lack of engagement all around there, and I definitely think that needs scrutinising, because if we look at the next petition coming forward about dog grooming, that was in the same consultation exercise that was being done, and we don't really know what's come of that, really, other than greyhound racing has been banned. What are the wider implications of that consultation?

So, that's my view on it. I think I remember, at the time when I was on the Petitions Committee, we agreed that we'd only have the one debate, and that they would be treated as similar. So, yes, I think this probably does need to be closed now, and anything else can be done in the Chamber, or on the committee, as Luke said.

Thank you. Joel, I was aware of your views as well; you don't agree with banning things, et cetera. 

I just think it's an easier way out of trying to tackle the core problems.

We've all got different views on this one. I'm particularly concerned about this particular track being quite dangerous with that bend there as well. So, moving forward, it's being proposed that we write to the ETRA Committee—. Luke, do you want to come back in? Sorry.

I was going to say that I actually agree with something Joel has said here, which is that there was a lot in the consultation that the Government put forward, which included a greyhound racing ban and the dog grooming sector. So, I think in our letter to the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee, it might be worth just referencing what Joel has highlighted as a concern, which is that the wider consultation around that needs to be looked at in a bit more detail.

There was an announcement as part of the Bill, which we had a consultation on, which was the animal welfare licensing Bill, I believe. I can't remember the exact phrase.

The point Joel makes, though, is a valid one, which is that this shouldn't eclipse all the other stuff that was in there.

Which is really important. The whole Bill is really important for animal welfare, I agree. So, we're going to write to the ETRA committee. Vaughan, sorry, would you like to come in?

Just on the points that are being made, we're dealing essentially with two greyhound petitions, and we've gone into dealing with the next substantive item, on dog grooming. If we're going to write to the ETRA committee, and I think that's a sensible suggestion in closing the petition, I think it is worth writing to point out that we are closing this one, but then to have the same letter pointing out what our view is on dog grooming, which we have yet to fully discuss, because it was part of the same consultation. It doesn't have to get messy, but I think I agree with the suggestion about closing these two petitions, and about the single track we have in Wales. The scrutiny to be done about how that's going to be done and the time frame for it I think are important, but are outside the Petitions Committee, as with dog grooming, I think, because it's part of a wider set of consultations. But I'm just pointing out that we can deal with the one piece to do with these two, but my view would be we should write the same letter to cover the dog grooming, because I think we'll cover some of the same ground about the consultation. So it's really about trying to match the different petitions that we're at least discussing, in part, before Joel has his moment of glory in bringing forward a view on the matters of dog grooming. And I should declare an interest: I am a dog owner and I regularly use dog grooming services.

I use a bucket of water and a hosepipe. Thank you. So, moving forward, is that quite clear? We'll write to ETRA regarding those, and we'll close these two petitions on greyhound racing. 

We'll move now to the next item, which we just discussed partly, item 3.12, which is petition P-06-1391, ‘Introduce regulation of the dog grooming sector to protect the welfare of dogs and rights of owners’. It was submitted by Brian Howell, with 284 signatures. Joel, would you like to talk about this one a little more?

Thank you, Chair. I’ll only be brief, because as you said, we touched on it in the previous petition. As I'm aware, there's other things in that consultation that are coming out, but I definitely think we need to get an idea of the timescales here of that delivery, and just keep it open then, as Vaughan said, and to let the committee know about it.

Yes, that would be good. It was the licensing of animal welfare establishments, activities and exhibits Bill. So, if we could write to the Cabinet Secretary with a timescale for delivery of that Bill. And then we need to keep a watching brief on the progress and keep the petition open for now. Is that okay? Is that what we are agreeing?

Along with what Vaughan suggested, we'll also include a reference to this in the letter to ETRA that we're sending, ostensibly about greyhounds, but it will include these wider matters.

Yes, so that they're aware we've also got this petition regarding dog grooming, and we're asking the question regarding the Bill going forward, and timelines. And then hopefully they will keep us informed of any correspondence that they have as well, which would be useful. Are we in agreement? Okay, thank you. Thank you, Gareth.

That brings us to item 4, a motion under Standing Orders to resolve to exclude the public from the meeting for the remainder. Can we have a proposer to do that?

I propose.

Thank you. Okay, if we can now close into private. That concludes today's business. The committee's report on the petition ‘Ban smartphones in all schools in Wales (with exemptions for exceptional circumstances)’ will be published this week. It should be published on Wednesday. The committee will next meet on 24 March. Thank you very much.