Children, Young People, and Education Committee

Bore da, I'm Rocio Cifuentes, Children's Commissioner for Wales.

Good morning, I'm Tom Davies, policy adviser with the Children's Commissioner for Wales.

Thank you. So, Members have a series of questions and we're going to start today with Russ, please.

Thank you, Chair. Good morning. Thanks for being with us today. I'm a new member of this committee, but I'm aware that this time last year you told the committee that your office had seen a significantly increased complexity of cases compared to the previous years. Has this trend continued?

Thank you very much for the question.

Thank you. The trend of complex cases has continued. I don't think it has increased in complexity since last year. I think we've been seeing similar levels of complexity for a few years now. We have this year seen an increase in overall case numbers that the office has dealt with, which has gone from 623 the previous year to 659 this year, and that is from every local authority in Wales. In March 2024, we changed the name and approach of the 'advice and assistance' service, so it was previously called 'investigation and advice' and we changed the name to 'advice and assistance' to make it more accessible and make it sound friendlier and less intimidating and to encourage more children and young people and their families to use it. That approach has included doing a lot of outreach to different organisations, schools, places where families are, so that we can help spread the word about the service. We've created some new leaflets and we've also made improvements to our website to make it more accessible, and we feel that that approach is paying dividends in terms of the increased numbers, but also in increased levels of awareness that we are also hearing about of the office.

But to answer your question specifically on complexity, I don't think it has necessarily increased from the previous year, but it has maintained at a relatively stable level of complexity, where the majority of the cases that we deal with are not simple one-offs, they will take a couple of weeks and up to months to deal with, going back and forth to the different agencies and the individuals involved, and, ultimately, looking to resolve the case.

So, the increase in your case load—I think in part you're saying it's as a result of your outreach work, but to what degree is it other factors outside of your own outreach work?

It's difficult to say. Obviously, we like to think that part of it would be from our efforts. We can only speculate as to whether that reflects things getting worse out there and the problems increasing. I think it's probably a little bit of both.

When you have a new case, do you ask people, 'Why did you approach us?' Because there could be a survey of some sort saying, 'Yes, as a result of your outreach work' or, 'We didn't know about you previously.' Is there any work being done to understand that?

Yes, there is. We're looking to develop further our feedback, evaluation and impact measurement systems. We already have a feedback evaluation form that we send out following every case that we work with. At the moment, we have relatively low returns on that, but from the ones that we do have, we've got high satisfaction rates of around 90 per cent of the people that respond to that feedback survey having said that we've helped them resolve their situation and we've helped them feel more empowered to raise their concerns and to get their case resolved.

And that feedback form also asks about how you contacted us or how you heard about us.

Yes, we gather data on referral sources, so we already know that.

So, going back to my other question, then, what's the split between your outreach and cases that come to you that are not through your own outreach, if that's included in your survey and you've done the evaluation work?

We know that over half of people coming to us are parents, so 52 per cent are parents. We know that in the last year we had 10 referrals directly from the Senedd.

Sorry, I wasn't quite asking about that, and I don't want to take another Member's question that might come on to that, but what I was asking is about why people come to you in the first place, so you know the split between how successful your outreach work is?

We have seen—. We are asking where people found out about us, and we are seeing a lot of those are coming having seen information about our service on social media. We do have those statistics, which I can send to you. I can see it here, actually. Our social media visits have increased—30 per cent of Facebook visits increased, visits to our page up 70 per cent, and Instagram reach up 280 per cent. And we do have the figures, and I can't find them right now, but we can send them to you. But we know that most of the time people are still saying word of mouth or social media, but we can't directly at the moment link, 'Did you hear about us at an outreach event?'

But isn't that on your survey that you send out?

No, the survey is about, 'Did we help them? Are they satisfied?'

Okay. Could that be on your survey? Is it a value to be on your survey? I am asking the question, I suppose.

Yes, it is. Yes, we are looking at that.

Okay, thank you. And then in terms of education, that represents quite a large proportion of your case work. In fact, it is up to 50 per cent if you include additional learning needs cases as well. Why do you think that is?

There are real issues within the education system, and particularly significant issues affecting children with additional learning needs—that is a big part of the picture. But also, because many of our people come to us through word of mouth, we become known—you know, it's a ripple effect, really. One family will contact us for an ALN-related issue, hopefully be satisfied with our service and mention us to people who they know in similar situations. So, I think it's partly that we are known and we have developed, over the years, significant expertise on that subject, and so it's a snowball effect, really. But I think there are equally many other important and significant challenges facing children and young people, which I would like to be able to reach more effectively.

Sure, thank you. And I won't dive any more into that, because other Members might want to come on to that point later, but thank you.

And then last year you also told the committee that you were placing a greater focus on setting up a robust monitoring framework to measure the actual impacts of your intervention. Can you update us on that?

Yes. That work is in train. At the end of the last financial year, the year in question, I initiated a restructure in my office, which has enabled me to introduce new roles that will focus specifically on this impact monitoring framework. And that role in particular came into the organisation in September this year. So, it's relatively early days in terms of that impact monitoring framework actually being implemented, but it is going to be up and running from January in order to actually enable that really robust data to be gathered and shared with you.

So, what did you say? September you said it was—sorry, what did you say about the September date?

The restructure was initiated—

In September.

No, in February of 2025, so the end of the year in question. It took, then, until September to get the new role into the post.

Right, okay. So, the robust monitoring framework that you talked about last year isn't in place yet, but it will be in January.

Yes.

Yes. Okay. Have you got any data so far, though, in terms of the effectiveness of your work, in terms of this—? You're bringing in the new framework from February, but work that's already being done, has that shown you the elements of effectiveness of your work at all?

So, for example, a strong focus for me has been on increasing visibility of the office. So, in order to measure that and to get credible and independent data on that, we commissioned Beaufort Research, who undertook survey work in November 2024, and what they found was that awareness levels of the office had actually doubled from the previous time the office undertook that same survey, asking the same questions in 2017. Awareness levels amongst children and young people was 19 per cent and that had nearly doubled to 36 per cent in 2024.

Why do you think that was the case?

I think some of that is the passage of time as the organisation naturally matures and reaches more people. But I would hope that some of that is also reflective of my efforts to really push visibility as one of my key drivers and to do more with our marketing, with our website, with our outreach, with our stakeholders. And that 36 per cent figure was actually even higher amongst Welsh-speaking children; it was 61 per cent of Welsh-speaking children and young people surveyed who said that they knew about the office.

Lovely. And my final question, this time next year there'll be a new committee scrutinising this area, but this time next year, do you think that you will then be in a position to be able to give some data following the robust measuring framework that you've talked about starting in February? Will you be in a position at that point to say, 'Here's the data'—from February up to the time that you come in next time?

Absolutely. I want to be able to tell you exactly how many children we have—. Well, we already know how many children we have reached, but I also want to know how many children have been empowered through that engagement to find out more about their rights and to feel more confident that they can do something about any issues that they face.

Thank you.

Thank you. Now, we'll go over to Carolyn Thomas, please, who is on the screen.

Good morning. How would you describe your working relationship with the Welsh Government, as we approach the end of our sixth Senedd? And are there some devolved policy areas that are more difficult to influence? And if 'yes', why?

Okay. On my relationship with Government, I think there are positives and also some areas of more frustration. I think our relationship with the children's branch, in my tenure, has always been very, very positive, very productive, very helpful. I think an example of this is that we have worked with the branch to cascade across Government our suggestion of promoting the concept and idea of 'A Wales for all children' as a campaign, as an umbrella message, to bring together the many successful existing initiatives that support children and young people. And that was introduced because 2024 was the 100-year anniversary of the concept of children's rights starting to be talked about by Eglantyne Jebb, who founded Save the Children. So, it was to mark that 100-year anniversary and to galvanise and increase awareness, but also the prioritisation of children and children's rights issues. So, that was a positive example, because the children's branch enabled us to link to the relevant Welsh Government officials and ensured that Welsh Government was able to utilise that as a campaigning framework. And we've worked with them to develop a joint communications plan, which has meant that Government Ministers have utilised the 'A Wales for all children' campaign as a framing point of reference, as have we. So, that's been an example of a positive.

I think another positive is the connections that I've been able to have with the children and young people's directors board, which has been very supportive and helpful in enabling me to share with them my ideas through the year and also to discuss with them, prior to finalisation, my annual report recommendations. So, I'm able to get a sense check from them on those proposed draft recommendations at the stage at which I meet with them.

I think some areas of frustration—I have aired these in this committee before—have been about perhaps the pace of change and progress on commitments that are already made by Government Ministers. I'm very conscious that officials are working and face a lot of pressure, a lot of competing priorities and challenges on their time, but, nevertheless, I have felt that perhaps children's needs and children's rights have not necessarily been prioritised as much as they should have been. And perhaps that messaging has come from the top with the new stated priorities of the First Minister now. So, I think there are areas of frustration.

I feel that that directors board, for example, could be utilised in a more proactive, productive way, to enable that board to really champion children's rights across Welsh Government and to really tackle some of those really stubborn issues that we know affect children and young people, but are cross-cutting, such as child poverty, such as the mental health issues, such as challenges around children's attendance and behaviour in schools. So, I think that there is a lot more that could be done with a different way of working. In terms of the relationship overall, I like to be frank, and sometimes that is welcomed and sometimes it's a little bit more difficult.

Thank you.

Carolyn, could I bring Vaughan in here a second, please? Okay, Vaughan.

I just want to respond to some of the commentary there. The First Minister's four priorities, as she stated, set out a range of areas. That doesn't mean other things don't happen. So, I'm interested in whether this is a concern that children's rights aren't mentioned in there, because if that's the case then, actually, that seems like form, not substance, and there will be lots of other groups coming to this and other committees, saying, 'We weren't mentioned in those four priorities. That means we're not important.'

Then, the second point is: where are there practical examples of where you think children's rights are not being properly prioritised? In my 11 years in the Government, I could see that the intentions on children's rights were embedded in a regular part of the way that the Government works, in a way they just weren't before. So, I'm struggling to understand why or how the commentary matches up with the reality, and if there are any examples you can give about that. Then, the other point is: is it just a matter of form or substance and the four priorities?

I've had this conversation with the First Minister, and I accept that children and children's rights issues may be within the four priorities. But I think that words do matter, and I think that, for children and young people not to see themselves visibly and clearly within those four priorities, for me, is disappointing. I think children and young people would also feel not heard and not represented, potentially.

Words matter, and the four stated priorities drive action, and they drive prioritisation. There are many examples of work across Government where I feel that children's rights issues need to be prioritised much more. Some of those I've highlighted through the work of the report that we've done this year. For example, within housing, I am concerned that children's rights issues haven't been front—

Sorry, I'm not arguing that you're not saying you think that there is further advancement. It's really about whether you think, if this was done, and if a clearer statement was made, then children's rights would be further advanced. I struggle to see a practical example of that, because, actually, the Government has so many plates to spin and to manage, and I think that the Government is underpowered, actually. I think that the Government's ability to do things is handicapped by the resource that it has. So, I struggle to see how this is, you know—. Is this a criticism, of 'You need to be better equipped to do things'? Or is it that you think that there is a lack of will, because it sounds like what you're saying is, there's a lack of will to do these things, which is quite a serious challenge, and I struggle to see where the evidence for that is?

I think that there is a lack of recognition of the disproportionate impact of many of society's challenges on children. For example, poverty, we know, impacts much more on children than it does on older parts of the population—very disproportionately. The evidence is very clear there. So, poverty, as Audit Wales has said, is the No. 1 challenge facing Welsh Government—that is what it said in its previous report. If that is the No. 1 challenge and children are the most affected by that challenge, I would like that situation to be recognised within that prioritisation, as an example.

Okay. I'll stop because, otherwise, we'll get into lots of other questions and areas. And I know that Carolyn wants to pursue the questions that she's got.

Back to you, Carolyn.

That was a good question, Vaughan, because I know that children's rights and the needs of children are always at the back of my mind when I'm asking questions. And even though it might not be written down, it's always there. So, yes, really relevant questions.

What preparations are you making to build relationships and engage with Members of the newly expanded Senedd after May? I know that you've just published a manifesto for the Senedd elections next year. So, how are you building relations for the newly expanded Senedd next year?

Thank you. Yes, I have just published the manifesto, and we have shared it with all Senedd Members and sent it to the leaders of each political party standing for election in the Senedd election. I have, within that contact, extended an invitation to meet with all of the leaders. I haven't met with all of the leaders as of yet, or I haven't had a response from all of them, but I already regularly meet with leaders of all of the existing parties that are represented within the Senedd, whom I meet termly. So, I am confident that those relationships are established and productive, and I look forward to building similar ones with whoever is elected next year.

Thank you. You lobbied for a Cabinet role to be created that specifically held the portfolio for children. In September 2024, Dawn Bowden MS was appointed as Minister for Children and Social Care. Has this role made any difference to how the main policy issues affecting children are being dealt with at Cabinet level?

I think, yes, some difference, and I have had positive engagement with Dawn Bowden, the Minister for Children and Social Care. The fact that it is in her title does give that visibility and that clear priority to children. I would still like there to be a single Minister for children at Cabinet level, because I feel—and going back just briefly to Vaughan's question—that, for many of the fundamental issues in society, we cannot have an age-blind approach. For example, within the 'Anti-racist Wales Action Plan', one of my recommendations is that there should be a children and young people specific sub-group of that to fit into that governance structure. I hope that that is a recommendation that is accepted and taken forward, because those issues of racism, anti-racism and community cohesion impact very specifically and differently on children and young people. So, I do hope that, in the future, there is a Minister for children specifically, to make sure that those conversations are front and centre of every Government decision.

But, on the whole, it's been positive having that direct contact there in Government.

Yes, it has.

And you'd like it to continue. Okay. Thank you.

Thank you, Carolyn. We now have some questions from Vaughan, please.

Just to pick up a bit on where we were, with questions around child poverty, you've told this committee—and you mentioned Audit Wales—previously that child poverty is the biggest issue affecting children, and it warrants emergency action. That was in your report three years ago. What is the latest on not just child poverty rates, but whether the Welsh Government is doing enough to actually try to improve that? Also, how does what the Welsh Government do interact with other choices that are made as well, not just at a UK Government level, but that the context in which children live their lives isn't just determined by the Welsh Government? I'm interested in how you see the current picture, action to address the current picture, and then, practically, what can be done, bearing in mind that wider context.

I have focused on this a lot, because, as we know, all the data tells us that levels of child poverty are worsening in Wales and are projected to get even worse. As I've mentioned already, there is a real disproportionate impact as well on the youngest children. New evidence from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, and the Bevan Foundation also, shows us that it's not just that 31 per cent of children that are under the poverty line, but the proportion of children far below the poverty line is also growing. That experience of deep poverty is one that I'm calling in my manifesto that should be the real focus for the next Welsh Government, because it's not just about being a little bit below the poverty line, but so far that families are really struggling to put food on the table. Clearly, many of the levers are reserved to the UK Government, and I have been working with my counterparts across the UK to jointly call for the UK Government to end the two-child limit on universal credit. Clearly, we're still waiting for decisions and for the UK Government's child poverty strategy to be published.

Within Wales, I would like there to be a real laser-sharp focus on this, with specific actions taken to really reach those who are furthest from the poverty line and who are experiencing the deepest forms of poverty. So, I am calling for the introduction of a Welsh child payment, like the Scottish style, like what we have in Scotland, which has been shown to have been very effective in lifting thousands of children out of poverty in Scotland. I'm also calling for quicker progress towards rolling out the Welsh benefits charter to make sure that families can access all of the Welsh benefits that they are entitled to in an easier, less bureaucratic way, to make sure that the money reaches their pockets more quickly. I'm also asking that the income threshold for free school meals should be revised, because that hasn't moved for a few years, and we know, from the work that my office has been doing, that children struggle—secondary school aged children who still don't have universal free school meals. Secondary-aged children are really struggling to buy the food that they need in the day, and many are going hungry.

So, I think it's clearly a complex picture because of the devolved and reserved mix of powers and levers, but I do urge the Welsh Government to really focus on the levers that it does have, and on making sure that their monitoring framework enables them to really measure the impact of the work that they are doing so that we can see whether there is value for money and whether investment is paying dividends or not, and adjustments can be made accordingly.

There are some significant spending commitments in there. One of the things that I'm trying to understand is, as you see your role, do you think it is your role to simply say, 'Here is a problem and I want you to fix it', or that the point is around, 'Here is an answer to that, and here's how it can work'? If you spend more money in the way you suggest, you'd need to find a fairly significant amount of money. For the UK Government, if it were to change the two-child limit, it's about £3.5 billion to £4 billion, so it's not an inconsequential change in terms of how you have to find money to do that. So, there's a point about powers and money, but it's the practical side, and that means you don't spend the money somewhere else. So, it's that trade-off, and I'm trying to understand whether—. You haven't in your manifesto said, 'Here's how you could take that money or do something different', and when I look quickly at your manifesto asks, I couldn't see that there was anything that talked about adults in poverty, because a child living in poverty almost always lives with an adult living in poverty as well, and we hear lots about adults who make sacrifices. Most parents make some sacrifice for their children, but, actually, if you're living in poverty, you're almost always making even bigger and more difficult sacrifices—not having meals and that sort of thing that we hear regularly. But I can't see where there is something that talks about, 'Here's how we want you to spend more money’, and that's a clear ask, and I can't see, 'Here's where you can find that money', and there's a point of whether you think it's your job to say that. Secondly, I can't see anything about how you help adults with responsibility for children in poverty to actually move from where they are, because if this is all a call for extra spending, I think that's quite challenging, as opposed to how you change someone's life so they're no longer living in poverty. And I can't see in the manifesto that there's a route to do that or a suggestion about how it should happen.

My statutory remit is very clear: it’s to be the voice of children and an advocate for children in Wales. There are 0.5 million children in Wales, and 31 per cent of them are living in poverty. I carried out a survey that engaged with over 12,000 children and young people, who told me very clearly that poverty was one of their priorities, and that they were very worried about it, extremely worried, including primary-age children. This year I have engaged myself directly, with my team, with over 9,000 children face-to-face, and over 20,000 children through online engagement mechanisms, and they are telling me loud and clear that they are extremely worried about the poverty that they are experiencing, and also their families. And this means that they very often don't have the means to get to school, because they can only afford the bus maybe three days out of the five days a week. It means that they are not able to buy lunch that day. They can only maybe afford a snack at mid-morning break, and then can't have lunch, or they have to choose between one or the other. It means that their homes are not heated, they may not have enough money to buy the uniform they need. It's my job—

I understand the depth the challenge, I really do.

—to actually make this very clear, because children and young people at the moment aren't sitting around this table. I am, as their advocate.

I don't think it's my job to work out where you can save money—not you as a committee, but where the Welsh Government can save money. It's my job to say this is a huge problem, this is what I'm hearing from children and young people. We all know, don't we, investing in children and young people is such a clear-cut way to make long-term savings, because investing in children's lives, preventing them from falling into ill health, or substance misuse, or dropping out of school is clearly going to be cheaper in the long term than enabling those problems to develop and get worse, and then having to pick up the pieces afterwards.

So, my call is very clear: it's about investing in children early, meeting their needs, preventing them from experiencing poverty, preventing them from experiencing really poor mental health, and the savings will definitely be there, I'm sure.

I think I'm making a point about seeing the child in the context in which they live, and that includes the family and the community.

On the family, I do make calls to accelerate the roll out of the Welsh benefits charter, which is—. That would directly put money in the pockets of families to support their children.

Okay. There are lots of people and we could take the whole session going through more of this, but you talk about mental health, which is a significant issue, significantly worsened during and since the pandemic. There are some structural challenges we have not just in Wales, but across the UK, and quite rightly, you've got a number of things to say about that. We've got a mental health and well-being strategy. To what extent are you confident this can help to address the concerns that face children and young people about whether they are getting the right support, when they need it, and where as well? Because, again, how a child lives their life isn't neatly boxed off into one service area or another.

We responded to the mental health strategy consultation and advised that we would like to see a children and young people-focused delivery plan, to make it really clear to children and young people what actions they could expect from Welsh Government. So, we're disappointed that there isn't an age-specific delivery plan, but we have based this on engagement with children and young people.

Last year, we held a series of round-table events with children and young people, as well as professionals, to hear their thoughts on mental health and to help us feed into the strategy response. They were very concerned. We heard clearly from them that there needed to be a greater age-specific focus on the mental health needs of babies, children and young people, and particularly better co-production with young people, so that they could be involved in developing those services to properly meet their needs. More than that, they were also very clear that there was a real need to look at the root causes and social determinants of mental ill health, and embed a children's rights approach across this mental health strategy.

I have also visited several of the mental health sanctuary hubs that have been commissioned by health boards, with Welsh Government funding, and have seen a range of excellent work that they are delivering for children and young people, and these sanctuary hubs offer more accessible walk-in services. But they have told me that they are worried about their funding, because it is short term and due to end by next March. So, I think it is a real challenge. I think we need to make sure that we are showing children and young people that we really do care about their mental health, and that the services that they need will be there for them.

I also would like to see much better integration and quicker progress towards achieving the whole-school approach to mental health and well-being. We know that most schools have a plan to deliver this approach, but we haven't really seen much detail within—. There's a lot of variation, obviously, but overall I think there's a slowness in delivering on that plan, specifically within schools. And we also know that many of the front-line workers within schools, who are really picking up the pieces of the children's mental health crisis, we know that those roles are, unfortunately, very often under pressure and under threat of cuts due to financial pressures on local authorities and on schools. So, it's a very difficult picture because of that.

So, how much of this is about your interaction with health? Health is a universal service, and certainly before a child is school age, it is the universal service. So, there's something about that where you've got Flying Start, but more than that, if you like, the health within it—so, the midwifery service, the perinatal support that exists, which is important for the adult, as well as how they care for their child, and some of the challenges that you see by the age of three as well. So, I'm trying to understand whether—and this goes a bit into form and substance—you don't see delivery that gathers together what is being done, with commitments within it, or whether actually what you're saying is the clarity of sight of what's happening, whether you want different commitments as well as how they're doing. Because they're two different things, aren't they? So, I think it would be helpful to understand whether the delivery plan would help give clarity on what should happen, or whether you want different actions within it.

The delivery plan would help the clarity and I think both—more clarity, but also different actions and particularly more focus on the services that I've mentioned, those front-line services, and particularly how those services connect to and reach children and young people. So, the role of mental health support services in schools is a really critical one, and we know, don't we, that this seems to be a perennial challenge in Wales, about bringing health and education together, to speak to each other about how to support children and young people's needs holistically and together.

I have been embarking, this year, on a piece of work visiting every local authority in Wales. I've visited 13 of 22 so far, and have been talking to them about how they support the participation of children and young people in their local authorities. Part of that has been trying to understand how the regional partnership boards work. It does seem that, in many cases, there aren't effective forums to have a focused conversation on children and young people and their holistic needs, be they delivered by health services or education services. I think that is a structural challenge.

Have you had joint conversations with health and local authorities in those areas around what they do and don't do together? Because, you know, we've got questions about ALN that I'll go on to next, but, obviously, there's a health interface there as well, with education. So, some of this is about how health needs are met when a child's interaction with the public service at school age is most likely to be through school. So, it isn't a neat case of you either need to be in a health setting or an education setting, but there is still something about how the health service is present, when it needs to be, and is supporting people whose job isn't to deal with health service needs.

I have regularly found that if you talk to the big part of the public sector, they can often talk about problems in the other part. So, if you talk with local authorities—and I'm talking about health and local authorities—have you had that joint conversation to say, 'This child, these children, you are responsible for them, how do you make sure you meet your responsibilities to that child?', as opposed to telling them what the problems are in an individual setting?

I have—. For the project I'm talking about, it has been—. So, health boards haven't been involved in that conversation; it's been local-authority focused. But I have been asking about their interactions with public services boards, regional partnership boards, and what I'm hearing is it's a very complex governance structure and one that is not necessarily serving the needs of children and young people effectively. But I'm happy to have further conversation.

Well, I helped set up RPBs and put money into them. I don't think the structure is complex, it's how people create things that aren't there in the legislation and, actually, about how people work together and whether they are determined to work together or not. I think it's often an excuse to talk about structure rather than what people choose to do. I've got a really robust view about that from a number of years in ministerial life.

Look, ALN needs make up 15 per cent of your casework, so it's a significant issue. We've had the Minister here just a few weeks ago as well, the review that she's undertaken and the response to it. I'm really interested in your take on the review that the Cabinet Secretary has undertaken, how far you think that will go to address the issues that we need to deal with, to support children and young people. So, I want to go back to this point around the health interface as part of that, and about whether you think that is being addressed, or it's one of the things you expect to be addressed in the action that will be taken.

I welcome the legislative review. I welcome the tone of the recent statement, which is far more accepting, recognising there being a structural and fundamental challenge with the existing system. I also welcomed the commitment to have a far more comprehensive conversation and redesign of the system, and to reset the vision, potentially. I know, fundamentally, that there are significant resourcing challenges in relation to additional learning needs, so what I have called for is for there to be greater transparency and sustainability of funding to meet the needs of children with additional learning needs. I think that there does need also to be more support to actually help children and families to understand and navigate the existing system. So, it is complex.

To answer your question about the role of health services, I would absolutely like that conversation to be more clearly defined within the review and the future work of Welsh Government on this. I don't hear about that very much within the context of ALN discussions. My office does sit on the ALN reform national steering group, and will have also been invited to be part of the new ALN national delivery and improvement board.

I also think that these are cross-cutting issues affecting children and young people, and I think we often talk about ALN over here, and then attendance in a different conversation and a different working group, and then behaviour in a completely different one, and they're actually very cross-cutting and overlapping issues that affect many of the same children and families. So, I would like there to be—. I welcome the commitment to really have a much more fundamental and comprehensive look at the system and see where it needs to improve.

Okay. Thank you. And finally—I'm conscious that I've done lots of talking—a question about disabled children. You published a report. You said you were doing work on the theme of what it's like to be a disabled child in Wales, and you published a report. Could you set out for us what your next steps on that piece of work will be, and which stakeholders you expect to not just take part in your work, but to actually take action to improve the lives and the experience of what it's like to be a disabled child in Wales?

So, we have recently commissioned independent consultants to do a review of my office's work so far, to help us identify gaps and opportunities of where we can move specific pieces of work forward, to inform my next three-year strategy. So, I expect that there will certainly be a focus on disability and taking forward the key lessons from that and recommendations from that report. We haven't got to the point of defining stakeholders, but my office has very well-developed links with many specific children's groups that support children and young people with disabilities, as well as national groups who represent the wider disabled population. So, I will let you know when we have a more clearly defined project approach.

I'm sure this committee and/or its successor will be very interested. Thank you. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you. Just quickly from me, last year this committee published a report on, 'Do disabled children and young people have equal access to education and childcare?' I'm just wondering what your thoughts are on the Welsh Government's response and progress in relation to this report.

Sorry, could you say that again?

Last year, this committee published a report on, 'Do disabled children and young people have equal access to education and childcare?' I'm just wondering what your thoughts are on the Welsh Government's response and progress with this report.

I think many of the challenges that I've been talking about in relation to children with additional learning needs in relation to access to education are unfortunately still the same themes that your report identified very comprehensively. I think the response has been a little bit disappointing in that it hasn't necessarily specifically defined actions that it will take to address those key issues. We have, as an office, identified specific issues with physical access and have recommended that work to address the regulations around disabled children's schools, in particular, should be one of the actions that we would like to see. We hope that that recommendation is accepted. But, overall, I think that it really is something that hasn’t been properly grappled with, or the commitment to actually act on those findings hasn’t necessarily been there.

Okay. Thank you. We now have some questions from Natasha, please.

Thank you very much, Chair. Good morning, both. Neil Foden—it’s a name that’s been revolving around these corridors for quite some time, and I know the press and the public have been speaking about it in quite a bit of depth and detail. We all know that he was convicted on 19 counts of sexual activity with a child as a headteacher, and the subsequent child practice review, published last week, found that there were more than 52 opportunities—sorry, more than 50 missed opportunities—with an overarching theme that the voice of the child had not been listened to. So, I’d like to ask you: in your professional opinion, do you not feel that this failure to deliver the most basic of children’s rights—and yet again in Wales—has allowed the long-term sexual and physical abuse of children to be perpetrated in plain sight?

Yes, this is absolutely a key moment for children and safeguarding, and the Neil Foden CPR has illustrated and highlighted many of the key issues that I have actually been raising and talking about for many years, since coming into the role, actually. Some of the fundamental weaknesses that I identified, even from child practice reviews that were published prior to the Neil Foden one, were about the lack of a robust governance and oversight system, and what systems are there to enable us to learn and implement the lessons emerging from child practice reviews. I was raising those even before Neil Foden, but this has been such a serious and egregious, awful case that it has, thankfully, now prompted the commitment to undertake a review of safeguarding governance arrangements, which I absolutely welcome, but I wish it had come sooner.

As well as that, I also welcome the commitment and the recent announcement that the Welsh Government will be undertaking a review of how schools are governed—so, governing bodies. Again, that is something that I have been raising previously and is one of the recommendations in my annual report. But I’m really glad that has now been announced.

I think those are two specific issues that have emerged from this Neil Foden case specifically, on which we do now have a pathway towards addressing them. But, I think, even more urgently and fundamentally, we need to look at how practitioners and professionals are reminded about their existing duties, and how oversight mechanisms are working to make sure that those professionals are actually doing what they should be, and really having the voice of children and young people as the most important thing. So, listening to children is absolutely clear as the most fundamental thing that all professionals working with children need to do, and, particularly when they raise safeguarding concerns, they have to be passed on. And we know, in the case of Neil Foden, that, unfortunately, didn’t happen way too many times. We heard about so many missed opportunities in that case in particular.

But I want to make sure that the publication of this review is not in itself another missed opportunity, and that we actually use it as a turning point in Wales, and that the Welsh Government really takes the lead in driving forward the changes that this review makes clear are absolutely needed. Unfortunately, they’re not necessarily new lessons or themes that have emerged; they’re very familiar.

Okay. You mentioned a few times in your response to me just now that you’ve raised this with other authorities. Can you be specific, for the benefit of the committee, about who exactly you have raised these matters with when they’ve come to you as a concern, or when they’ve come into your vision?

Yes. Previous annual report recommendations have talked about the need to strengthen safeguarding governance arrangements. I have also previously called for the fulfilment or the acceptance of the recommendation that came from the independent inquiry into child sexual abuse report that was published in 2022. I called for the recommendation to establish a child protection authority to be accepted and taken forward. I’m still calling for that, because that still has not been accepted. I’ve spoken out from as early as the child practice review into Logan Mwangi’s death, and Kaylea Titford. There are so many names that, unfortunately, we have become very familiar with, because they all identified very similar failings.

So, to what extent does the detail of the child practice review show that children's basic right to be kept safe is not being delivered by key front-line services? You mentioned some of the cases we've heard about in Wales that have been really prevalent in the news, but, obviously, it does include schools, social services, the police force. You mentioned a number of different organisations that you've spoken out for or you've spoken with, and I appreciate you've mentioned a few times today that you're an advocate for children, but how much are you working with these particular bodies to ensure that they are up to the mark when it comes to dealing with these issues as well?

I'll be publishing this week a full position paper that sets out in detail how many times I've been calling for these measures to strengthen safeguarding governance arrangements. My office has, for the last few years before I started, been convening a round-table on child sexual abuse and exploitation, which brings together key professionals, including the Welsh Government, but also police and many other organisations who have a responsibility in, particularly, prevention of child sexual abuse and exploitation. So, we are very engaged with those stakeholders. In advance of the publication of the Neil Foden CPR, my office convened a specific meeting with stakeholders, including Estyn, including the Education Workforce Council, including Care Inspectorate Wales, for all of us to really put on the table what our concerns were, what actions we were taking, how we could work collectively to make sure that we were all speaking out on the right things, that we were informed about the plans that other organisations had and that we were working effectively together. So, we have a series of ways in which we do ensure that that engagement is there.

Okay. The Neil Foden case, and particularly the review, mirrors the circumstances of extensive and, perhaps, long-term sexual abuse happening within schools and, unfortunately, in plain sight. This was a case that almost mirrored a situation in Rhondda Cynon Taf that we saw quite some time ago. It was investigated under—pardon my pronunciation, Cefin; you can pick me up on this—the Clywch inquiry. I hope I pronounced that correctly.

Clywch.

The Clywch inquiry in 2004, by the commissioner Peter Clarke at the time. I believe this was the first ever review conducted by the first Children's Commissioner for Wales. I'd like to know what's your view on it, on the fact that we are technically in the same position now that we were in 20 years ago as well. What do you feel is the fundamental flaw here in Wales that allows this to keep happening again and again?

So, the Clywch review, yes, was 20 years ago and very similar. It did bring in new arrangements and it led to the introduction of school counselling services. So, there has been important progress made as a result of that, and it put in place some of the structures of what should happen at the level of practice. But what we have since seen in more recent years is that that lack of oversight is where things are still—. Clywch didn't really address work at that level. That's where we can still do much more, because—

Such as? What areas do you feel that there were oversights in?

The main gap now is that there is lack of clarity over what happens with the CPRs that regional safeguarding boards commission, and how they're expected to share those findings and who keeps an eye on whether those recommendations or those actions have actually happened. We know that there is a national independent safeguarding board, but its role and its remit is unclear, and we know that the Welsh Government has recently introduced the single unified safeguarding review approach, which was intended to improve the system, and alongside that it introduced a repository where CPR reports and SUSR reports could be kept together in a kind of a database. But we have had concerns about who has access to that data and that repository. We have asked, ourselves, to be given access, and although we've been told in theory that we can have it, that hasn't been granted as yet. And also there's a ministerially led advisory board, which oversees that repository at the moment, but, again, there's the question then of how independent is that oversight mechanism. So, this is the key gap, in my view, and this is what I've been raising repeatedly, and that is what I think could make a huge difference in actually making sure that practice on the ground is robustly overseen, and that any changes that are identified emerging from CPRs are actually introduced and brought into practice.

Can I bring Vaughan in quickly?

Yes, that's fine.

If I just follow your line of logic here, I can see it's a perfectly reasonable ask for the children's commissioner’s office to have access to the repository of the child practice reviews and safeguarding reviews. I think that's an entirely reasonable ask. What I don't understand is what that or a change to the oversight for access to that bank of knowledge actually means when you think about Foden, because, actually, it seems to me that the clarity here was about culture and practice. It wasn't that—and correct me if I'm wrong—a single policy change or a change of access to that repository would have led to earlier action; actually, there was a failure in the culture and decision making and practice that led to a prolific and secretive offender who used his position of authority to continue to act in a way that was outside all of the norms that should exist. Plenty of rules were broken, but I think it was the culture and the practice that was the big challenge.

And I understand that you might say, 'Actually, we would be better equipped to understand lessons and I'd be better able to do my job as the children's commissioner if I had access to the repository of the reviews that are undertaken', but I'm trying to understand how there's then a direct line to practice. Is that the primary thing that needs to be done or is it actually about people not looking the other way when complaints are made? The review is devastating because it talks about the fact there were so many opportunities where people, basically, didn't take seriously the concerns that were raised, and it only was because an adult saw something and did something about it in the end. So, I'm trying to understand how much of this would you say, in terms of getting this right, is about people taking seriously the lessons we've had from Clywch, Foden, from the way we have our system now, and how much of it is that the system needs to change? I don't want to try to misunderstand what you're saying, so the clarity on this is quite important, because there are choices in this Senedd as well in the future about what we do and what we expect people with their own practical and legal responsibilities to do as well.

Of course, there were clear individual failings in Gwynedd. Fundamentally, there's one odious individual responsible for all of this, but there were definitely failings on an individual and—

Multiple failings.

—on an institutional level in Gwynedd. But in terms of how much an effective oversight mechanism could challenge that, I think that there are themes that have emerged from previous child practice reviews that could have helped. So, making sure that information sharing was happening in a more systematic way, for example, was one of the things that went wrong in Gwynedd—one of many—and which could have been addressed if specific measures had been implemented. The role of the governing body, in the case of Gwynedd, was a clear failing, and this is why the review into governing bodies is so important, because governing bodies are fundamentally there to hold headteachers, the school and the leadership of schools to account, and without an effective governing body, there is—. Well, that's what we saw—a very powerful individual who is completely unfettered by any check or balance.

The reason that I would like access to the repository is that I think that we—. My hunch is that, if we properly analyse that data, we would probably see a theme around charismatic leaders, let's call it that, and how they are able to get away with the most odious crimes because of a lack of challenge. And I think within schools, governing bodies are absolutely fundamental—they have to work effectively to make sure that individuals and headteachers are held to account properly. So, I do think that some of the challenges within Gwynedd could have been addressed by a more rigorous and robust oversight mechanism—possibly not all of them, because individual failings were a key part of it as well.

Thank you.

Thank you. Natasha.

In your response to the recently published north Wales child practice review, you said, and I quote:

'To date, we have clearly failed to learn the lessons and implement the recommendations identified from previous reviews'.

End quote. So, I'd like to ask you today: to what extent can those failures be attributed to the lack of impact of successive children commissioners in the role so far?

Well, I was asking Tom to pass me the detail of the previous recommendations that I made, so I've got those now. Thank you, Tom. Yes, you know that the recommendations I made this year are that we should have a fundamental review of safeguarding governance and around the governing bodies of schools. But last year one of my recommendations was that Welsh Government should confirm how the single unified safeguarding review proposals will adequately ensure that learning emanating from child practice reviews will be implemented and monitored. And it's not just—. So, those are just the two that I've made in my term. But it's not just me saying this, because the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child also mentioned this in its own concluding observations on the UK's implementation of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. And they said, in 2023, that there is a need to ensure the systematic collection and analysis of data on child protection issues to inform the implementation of national strategies.

And they also said that there's a need to ensure that child protection systems take a child rights-based approach to prevention of abuse and neglect. I think I have been clearly saying this as much as I can, so I would like to have been listened to sooner. I don't see that as my failure, but you may if you want to. But I think I've been as loud and as clear as I could possibly have been on this particular issue. I'm glad that action has now been committed to, but that action has still to be taken, so I will be keeping a very close eye on progress towards this, particularly given where we are in the Government term. And I hope that this is certainly a key priority for the next Welsh Government.

I appreciate your reference to the United Nations. I'm sure that, regardless of our party affiliations, we have respect for the United Nations. But I mentioned Peter Clarke earlier on, and obviously yourself in this particular report, so how different have your findings been, in terms of your view on this report, from his 20 years ago?

So, his report was a very detailed inquiry into what happened in that case. We haven't conducted an inquiry of that scale. So, they're not equivalent, I suppose, because I believe that the child practice review has been a comprehensive investigation of what happened and what went wrong in the case of Gwynedd and Neil Foden. So, that is where the detailed look at what went wrong is in this case. My office hasn't undertaken that this time. Many of the issues are very similar, as I've outlined. And I think where we need to go next is to make sure that those oversight mechanisms are there at the top, but also in terms of practice and what practitioners are doing on the ground. There needs to be, obviously, far more training, but also, I think, a culture change in how seriously practitioners and professionals actually take their responsibilities to listen to and safeguard children.

I completely appreciate that, as I think would those watching, and those of us in the room as well. You mentioned earlier that you've done your job to the best of your ability, and I can totally take that on board, but don't you feel, from our perspective and for those outside looking in now, that they must be thinking to themselves—and I'm sure a lot of people around here do as well—and share this view that something has seriously gone wrong somewhere if, by 2025, children in Wales don't know which adults they can go to for help and support in instances like this. Do you not feel that there's been a failing along the line here somewhere?

Absolutely, and I think one of the recommendations of the 'Clywch' report was that every school should tell children about the role of the children's commissioner, and that hasn't been a recommendation from the Neil Foden report, but I would like there to be much more of a requirement for schools to do much more to actually tell children who they can go to for help and how. But the 2021 curriculum did make the teaching of children's rights mandatory in the curriculum, and that is positive progress, and I think there's been a recent survey to show that over 90 per cent—I think it's 91 per cent—of children in Wales are aware of their rights. So, they are aware of children's rights as a concept, as a thing, which is progress, but it needs to go further and they need to be aware of exactly who they can go to if they have a problem.

I mentioned earlier that awareness of my office has increased to 36 per cent, but I don't want to rest on my laurels. Thirty-six per cent is far from where I actually want to be, and so I want children absolutely to know that my office is here as an advocate for them if they need me. But I'm not the only service; we already have school-based counselling services that were introduced and are available in every school. They may not be easy to identify or access, so I think that's a job that really needs to be done. But, yes, all children need to know really clearly who to speak to, who can help them if they have a concern or if something is happening to them that shouldn't be.

You mentioned about it being taught in schools, about the roles and various—how children can speak up and where they can go et cetera. You mentioned also initially, I think, to one of my colleagues—I think it was Russell George—that you've done lots of school visits, you've done surveys. Have you actually sat in a class and watched children being taught what your job is, what it entails, you know, children's human rights? Have you actually witnessed them being taught and does it meet your standard of requirement as that is, for them to be able to know exactly what that is?

I haven't sat—I haven't independently observed. I've been part of a visit with my team where my team will talk about children's rights, and then I will usually come and do my bit about my role specifically. But I haven't observed, you know—the requirement on schools is to embed children's rights in a cross-cutting way across the curriculum.

My team works very hard to produce as many resources and as accessibly as possible to support children, but also teachers to deliver that requirement. I guess I tend to be invited to the schools that really are doing it best, I suppose, because they want to show off their work, but I'm sure that there are many schools who maybe are struggling to have the resources or the time to deliver that aspect of the curriculum effectively, because of the many pressures on schools that I know exist. So, I would like that to be benchmarked and to be evaluated, and I would love for the standard of that teaching to increase, so that children can properly understand what their rights are, but also what my office is and how they can get help if they need it.

And does your office provide any materials to those schools? I mean, I appreciate there are some schools out there who are brilliant, fantastic, wonderful, but there are some, as you said, who are struggling with materials and things. Does your office provide them, or all schools, with materials to be able to sort of embed that into the children?

Yes, regularly. So, posters, leaflets, pens—they're always taken with us on visits, but they're all on our website and downloadable, fully bilingual and as accessible as we can make them as well. So, yes, we do provide those.

Okay, final question for me, and I promise I'll try and keep it concise. It's quite a long one, so bear with me. Introducing a legal requirement on individuals to report concerns about a child at risk was a recommendation of the landmark UK independent inquiry into child sexual abuse, and which the Welsh Government consulted on proposals to legislate for. Most respondents supported the principle of the Welsh Government introducing a duty on specified individuals to report children at risk of abuse. In light of the Neil Foden review, do you now regret not pushing harder when this proposal for mandatory reporting for individuals was dropped from the Health and Social Care (Wales) Bill by the Welsh Government last year, and do you feel this was a missed opportunity?

My office has been part of working groups where Welsh Government has been exploring the proposal to make it mandatory, and I have heard, and I have sympathy with the—. My position is I have sympathy with the view that there are existing duties already in Wales to report any concerns of child abuse or neglect, and I agree that making it mandatory would potentially mean that too many unfounded concerns would be reported, creating a huge level of workload for those receiving those disclosures, which would mean that serious cases would perhaps get lost because of the volume of potential referrals that a mandatory approach could create.

Another concern is also that that approach could inadvertently criminalise members of the public, practitioners and professionals who—. I would guess that practitioners shouldn't be fearful in doing their jobs that they may inadvertently be criminalised through something that they did or didn't do. I know it's a fine line, and it's been a debate that my office has been very much part of, but I have settled on the side of I don't think it should necessarily be made mandatory at this stage because of the existing duties. So, I think it's more about reminding, ensuring that there is clarity over when and how to report, and making sure that those receiving reports also know exactly what to do and why, and really fundamentally making sure that children are always spoken to in any case of concern around their abuse or neglect.

Okay, the second part of the same question now is that a mandatory reporting requirement is planned in England through the Crime and Policing Bill. It'll introduce a new legal duty for individuals such as anyone working in education in England to report suspected child sex offences. But the opportunity was not taken in Wales. Do you regret not objecting when the proposals were dropped in Wales?

I think that would be similar to my previous answer, so 'no'.

Okay, thanks.

Thank you. I have a very quick question. In 2023 this committee flagged concerns about vacancy rates of 17 per cent in children's front-line social services. We called for a legal maximum case load for children's social workers alongside a workforce sufficiency plan. This was rejected by Welsh Government. So, to what extent has workforce fragility been considered in response to the north Wales CPR and other cases?

Workforce sufficiency, particularly of social workers, continues to be a significant problem. I continue to hear from children who are looked after about high turnover and numbers of social workers who are charged with their care, and that experience is really quite traumatising and re-traumatising for children. My office has done important pieces of work in the last year with children who are looked after and we're really looking to highlight that experience and the challenge of that social worker turnover and how they have to retell their story so many times. So, I am concerned about that. I know that there have been efforts to make more equal—to look at the pay of locum social workers, which, hopefully, will reduce some of that, but I know that there still need to be more social workers trained, recruited and attracted to the profession. I think there is much more that still needs to be done, essentially, on this topic.

Okay, would you mind staying a few minutes over your allocated time just so that Cefin can ask his questions?

Yes, of course.

Thank you. Over to Cefin, please.

Thank you very much. I will be asking my question in Welsh. And good morning and welcome. I want to follow up on something that you've referred to more than once already, which is that, in the context of the child practice review into the disgraceful behaviour of Neil Foden, there were inherent risks and weaknesses associated with the way that governing bodies operate in schools. A little before that, of course, the Government launched a review of governing bodies in Wales. So, how important do you think that review is, and to what extent do you believe that we need to change the system that we have at the moment in terms of how schools are governed by their governing bodies?

Thank you for that question.

I think that review is absolutely crucial. As I've spoken about already, governing bodies play a huge and fundamental role in the leadership of a school. So, they are there to scrutinise and hold to account the leadership, but they also help to set the culture and help to make important decisions about the school, which are significant entities in terms of the number of children they support, but also financially. So, it's huge. I have been a governor myself, and I have experienced some of the challenges that I've already spoken about in terms of how effective those bodies are currently. At the moment, governing bodies are made up of volunteers, and there is minimal mandatory training for governors. So, I'm suggesting that the review really needs to look at the training, mandatory requirements for governors, as well as—. My recommendation is that the review should also consider questions of diversity amongst governors and do governors have the right skills to deliver their role.

I think the review should also consider the question of remuneration: should school governors be paid for their work in a similar way to how public appointments work and how board members of health boards, for example, are paid a daily rate for their time? So, I've had recent conversations with the Cabinet Secretary for Education on this, and she has said to me that nothing is off the table. And I really welcome that approach, because I'm aware that, historically, when and how governing bodies were introduced, it was a very long time ago, and perhaps the impetus for that—. You know, we're in a very different place now, where we're talking about there needing to be really effective mechanisms to ensure that school leaders are effectively supported and governed. So, I know that there are discussions of potentially returning to local authority-controlled schools rather than having so much power and autonomy within schools. So, I think there's a real balance to be achieved, but I think the review itself is really important.

In my discussions with the Cabinet Secretary for Education, I've been asking how that review on governing bodies will interface with the review on safeguarding governance arrangements, because they are connected in many ways. So, I was reassured that the timings and the communication structures are there to make sure that they do interface effectively. I think governors are making decisions on a daily basis about whether children should be excluded or not, about school uniform, about ALN provision and how many teaching assistants should be in a classroom and so on. These are real, important decisions that impact very directly on children's lives, so we absolutely have to make sure that we are getting it as right as we can, or at least that there's a really effective structure of training, recruiting and supporting those governors and making sure that they know what the job is that they're meant to do. Of course, there are already many fantastic governors out there, but I think the system as a whole is currently quite weak.

Could I follow up on that? Most of us have been on governing bodies, and some are extremely effective, and others, perhaps, show some fundamental weaknesses. And you only need one weak governing body for a strong head to be able to take advantage of that situation of amateurs and volunteers as members of governing bodies. So, are you of the view that we need to ask the question as to whether we need governing bodies at all in moving to the future, given that the level of expectations and responsibilities are so high, particularly in light of what's happened in the Foden case?

Diolch. Yes, I do think we need to ask that fundamental question about the existence of governing bodies. Different models of governing schools should be considered and I hope will be considered as part of the review.

Okay. Chair, have I got time for one or two more questions?

Yes.

Okay. So in your—I was going to say 'tystiolaeth'—in your evidence to the UK COVID-19 inquiry back in October, you said that children's rights were not given due regard at the outset and that decisions were rushed in respect of school closures. How significant an impact has this had, longer term, in terms of children, for example, and pupil absence?

Yes, I gave evidence about two weeks ago to module 8 of the COVID inquiry, and was pleased to be one of only a few core participants there from Wales and giving voice to the really traumatic experience of children and young people during that period. I think my main message was about the really long lasting and deep impacts of the pandemic on children's lives. And particular impacts that I highlighted then, and will focus on today, are the increase in mental health challenges for children and young people and the impact on their relationship with school and on their attendance, as a marker of that changing relationship. So, I think those are two specific examples of the impact, which we can clearly see, the evidence tells us about.

And I am concerned that perhaps we in Wales, and not only in Wales, but certainly in Wales, seem to have maybe tried to go too quickly back to a kind of back-to-normal narrative, without properly recognising the lasting impact of nearly two years of lockdown and pandemic on children's lives at such a formative and transformational time. Childhood is so short and precious, but to have to spend two years of that childhood in this situation has indelibly marked, I think, unfortunately, a generation. And we should, as a society, and I hope as Welsh Government, really recognise that and put resources towards what needs to be put right to particularly meet those needs. I think a restorative approach is what I am calling for in, really, first of all, just recognising what happened and then trying to put it right.

And in that evidence, you talked about repaying the debt and also that there was a need for a well-resourced recovery plan for children. Can you explain a little bit about what exactly you meant by those comments?

I'm not aware of there being a recovery plan currently. I know there were short-term ones immediately emerging from the pandemic, but I'm not aware that there is one now, yet children do continue to bear the scars, as it were, impacting particularly on their mental health and on their relationship with schools. We do hear about problems and issues with attendance, with behaviour, with ALN, but we don't put the two together, or the three or the four together, and realise that maybe all of these issues are, actually, symptoms of more of an underlying issue and potentially—. We talk a lot about being trauma-informed and recognising early childhood trauma. I think for many children—not all, of course—the pandemic was a traumatic time of their lives. We know that many children would have been in homes that perhaps were difficult places to be.

What I mean by having a clear and resourced recovery plan is that I would like Welsh Government to really put increased money—. And I know, Vaughan, that you don't like me asking for money, but I think this is what is needed.

You've got to find it from somewhere.

This is what is needed to address the mental health needs and the education needs of children to enable them to live their best lives now and to recover properly from the effects of that pandemic.

And your legal representative said, and I quote,

'had the legal and policy duties been fully and properly followed in Wales, the worst impact of the pandemic on children and young people would very likely have been mitigated'.

So, what did the legal adviser mean by that? How could it have been mitigated if things had been done differently?

So, that was talking mainly about the fact that there was no consultation with my office prior to the closure of schools. That, my office feels, is a missed opportunity and a failure, ultimately, of the requirement to fully consider children's rights in all of Welsh Government's decision making. There was no children's rights impact assessment done on that decision—accepting that they were exceptional times and emergency situations and measures may have been taken, but it's the position of my office. Of course, I wasn't there myself at the time, but it's the position that, if we had been involved, as an office, in those conversations with Government about how the risks arising from school closures could effectively have been mitigated, then that could have led to more detailed consideration of the particular impact of school closures on certain groups, including children with additional learning needs, or children who were on child protection registers, for example, both groups—as we found out the hard way, ultimately—that were disproportionately impacted by the closure of schools. So, that was an example, really, of where, if things had been done differently, we feel that more mitigations could have been put in place that could have better protected those children.

Could I just press you on that last point? So, given that there were exceptional circumstances, and things were moving at pace, things were changing on a daily basis, if the Welsh Government would have liaised with your office and asked for your advice, especially around the most vulnerable groups that you referred to, would you have given any different advice in terms of school closure, or not?

What my predecessor has said, and what the position is, is that we would have helped to think through specific measures and actions that could have better mitigated the impacts. So, it wouldn't have been our decision about whether to close or not, because there were many other sources of evidence to inform that decision. But the mitigation measures, we think, could have been better thought out in advance, with better involvement of our office and more specific consideration of children's rights.

Okay.

Can I bring Vaughan in quickly?

I just need to put something on the record. Obviously, I've given evidence to the UK COVID inquiry. I've given written evidence to nine modules and oral evidence in four or five; I can't remember how many I've actually given evidence in orally. I don't think that it's appropriate for me to engage in questions 14 and 15 substantively, because of the evidence that I've given and my involvement in the decisions that are being discussed. I just wanted to put it on there. I don't think that it's a formal declaration of a conflict of interest, but I think that it's an important point of clarity about why, because, otherwise, I may well have had things to say.

Do you have any further questions, Cefin?

Yes. One further question, if I may ask it.

Yes, there's time. There's time. I know that Natasha has a question as well.

Just a brief question. You have made reference to the need for more resources and more support for many of the areas related to children and young people. Now, given that the draft budget is currently being discussed, what considerations and what message would you like to convey to the Welsh Government, and to opposition parties that are involved in negotiations at the moment, as to your priorities in relation to children and young people for the next financial year, particularly?

I think that my messages would be similar to what I've already spoken about—that children's needs should be prioritised to a far greater extent than they seem to be so far. I would particularly welcome more investment in earlier intervention and preventative services, because they are the most cost-effective in the long term and they are the ones that have been most vulnerable to cuts. I know that there are difficult decisions to be made. My own office is facing—. According to the draft budget, we're being allocated less money, 2 per cent less, than we need. Two per cent may seem like a small amount, but with most of our costs being fixed in terms of staffing and premises, there's a limit to how much more adjustments we can make and cost savings. But, overall, it's about putting children's needs front and centre and I think, particularly, putting more focus on the key strategic issues that my report talks about. Child poverty, mental health, ALN and equalities issues I think, for me, would be the priorities.

Okay, fine. Thank you.

Thank you. I think Natasha has a question.

Thank you, Chair. The last section was meant to be an open for all, basically, and I do have three very brief questions. I promise you they're not going to be long, but I hope that you'll indulge me. I may sound like I'm going off on a public accounts committee route, but I'm not, I assure you, and everyone will understand the method to my madness afterwards. The first question, then, from the open round, as I'm going to call it, is: I understand the commissioner's office has actually had a round of redundancies recently, can you please outline for us why you justified this?

So, there weren't any redundancies in the end. Restructure was initiated in February 2025, and there were some roles identified as being at risk of redundancy, but, as it played out, there weren't any, and there were just two voluntary exits.

Okay. The next question is very simple and you can answer with one word: is the children's commissioner's office politically neutral? 'Yes' or 'no'.

Yes.

Fine. Perfect. And the last question—I appreciate your answer and tolerating the way I'm going about this; I'm just conscious of time, and I appreciate everyone wants to get on with the rest of the session. So, I appreciate your answer. I ask because I understand a new chief operating officer has been recruited into a role to provide you with support, which is absolutely fine, and the successful candidate, from my understanding of what I've been shared with via an e-mail from, actually, someone who's quite prominent within their work, working with yourself and working with other groups and organisations—. They've actually stipulated that the successful candidate is actually a Labour Party member and also is planning to stand for the Senedd next year as well. So, do you not believe, somewhere, somehow, that this appointment, and perhaps the individual's continuation within the post, and the political activity, may actually compromise the integrity of the role in your office?

So, the role is not politically restricted—my role is, of course—and we are putting in place a full plan for risk mitigation. It's been discussed with my audit and risk committee, and we are taking steps in accordance with—. Depending on—. As you know, there's a process still playing out in terms of where people are on that list. But I feel that there is—. We are looking to minimise the potential impact.

Okay. Bearing in mind we've got six months, when will this be out? You just mentioned about the risk mitigation and all of that. We've not got very long till our election, so when exactly will that be out, in order to make sure that there isn't going to be any conflict of interest, because, obviously, your priority is the children. We don't want to have any issues later on. So, how is that going to be mitigated?

There are lots of measures depending on where the individual ends up on the list, which will be shortly decided and informed.

Okay. Fine. Thank you very much.

Okay. Thank you. We do still have a number of questions, but I'm so conscious of time, because we've run over—is it okay if we write to you with those questions?

Yes, absolutely.

Thank you. We really do appreciate you staying the extra time this morning. So, thank you. Thank you for joining us this morning. You'll be sent a transcript for checking in due course. Thank you.