Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee

That takes us on to the first item. Can I welcome the president of the Welsh Tribunals and his official? If his official would like to introduce himself, then I will go on to the first question.

David Sargent, head of operations for the Welsh Tribunals unit.

Thank you very much. If I can start with the first question, what are your main reflections from your second year in post as president of the Welsh Tribunals?

Thank you, Chair. Good afternoon, everyone. Well, last year, I said that the first year was challenging, and the second year has been no less challenging.

Last year, I identified two streams of work that we had within Welsh Tribunals. One is what I would call 'business as usual', dealing with the applications, dealing with the appeals as they come to us in our six tribunals as the first stream, and the second stream being tribunal reform, and each has had challenges over the last 12 months. In terms of the business as usual, our tribunals have been under some severe pressure of work over the last 12 months, particularly the Mental Health Review Tribunal for Wales, and that's been the result not particularly of increased application numbers, but as a result of a number of other factors that have come together this year: the nature of the cases in mental health has become more complex; we have had some severe staff shortages as the result of a combination of vacancies, and that issue has been compounded by the length of time it's taken to replace people who have left us, paternity and maternity leave, and some long-term sickness; the absence of any case-management system at all has made life more difficult; and we've had difficulties in putting together some panels, particularly because of medical members—difficulties with obtaining available medical members. So, there have been real challenges to get through the work, but I think the positive side of that is the response that there has been to those challenges from all of us, and by that I include not only the judicial leads and the judicial office holders, but also the administrative staff within our tribunals, the staff in the Welsh Tribunals unit and the officials within the central Welsh Government, and they've responded very positively and constructively to these challenges.

For example, earlier this year we moved from a default position in mental health of having face-to-face hearings to remote hearings, which changed the proportions from about 60:40 to 40:60 now in favour of remote hearings, and that has resulted in efficiencies and cost savings. And more recently, the new president, Judge Jane McConnell, who has only been in post since 1 October, has introduced a number of measures to ensure that those mental health applications that are time sensitive—they tend to be the restricted cases, so these are cases where patients are detained compulsorily and there are strict time limits in those cases—she's taken these steps to ensure that the time limits are met. Those measures include holding all hearings remotely, other than in exceptional circumstances and for good reason. So, there has been a big collective effort to make sure that we keep the tribunal running as efficiently as we can.

The other stream of our work is the reform process. Obviously, we were very disappointed by not having a Bill presented in this session, and that's been disappointing particularly because we had hoped that the implementation of the Bill would give an opportunity for us to progress some changes to the way we work, changes to processes that would benefit all of the tribunals across our system in Wales, and those benefits, as it were, have been at least delayed. But, again, some constructive work has been undertaken to minimise the adverse effects of not having a Bill this session. Firstly, the Counsel General has given me an assurance that the work on the Bill will continue this session so that, by the end of the session, hopefully, we will have a completed Bill, and that, according to my information, is what is happening. We regularly engage with the justice policy team, who are working on the Bill, and they hope to have a Bill ready by the end of the session, so that, in the new Senedd, it will be a Bill that, hopefully, will be ready to be presented soon in the new Senedd.

Thank you very much. On a more positive note, following the recalibration of the budget for the Welsh Tribunals, are you confident you will now have the resources available to ensure cases are disposed of speedily, efficiently and justly?

I would really love to be able to say 'yes' and move quickly on. I'm afraid that that would be a simplistic answer, I think. A couple of positive things have happened with regard to our budget over the last year. Firstly, there has been a recalibration of our budget. Our budget was at about £4 million until last year, whereas our expenditure, as everybody knew it would be, was about £6 million. There's now been a recalibration of the budget so that our budget reflects much better reality, and it's a budget that we can now try and work to and be measured by. I think that's a really important and positive step on budgeting.

In respect of the finances, we've put forward our proposals for what we think we will need over the next two years, and that shows an increase in our budget as a result of increased workload. There are some legislative changes that are going to be coming through in the next year or two in mental health, in residential property, which will result in very substantial increases in the workload for those two particular tribunals, but also inflationary increases and increases in pension contributions.

But I think the important thing, when we look at finances, is not to just look at the money that we are getting; it's really important—and increasingly important—that we use the money that we are allocated as efficiently and as well as we can. I have a real concern that that is not being done at the moment.

Just to take one example, we find really challenging the absence of any case management system for our work. We were delighted this year when we were allocated a substantial sum of money—about £0.5 million—for a case management system [correction: a substantial sum of money—£350,000— for a case management system.] That, from our point of view, was really good news, because a case management system would give us the means properly to monitor our work, to deal with our work more efficiently, and also to obtain data that would enable us, going forward, to have a much better handle on our work and how best it can be dealt with.

We have hit issues with using the capital expenditure, because of resource difficulties at our end, in having people within the Welsh Tribunals unit who can move forward with a programme of work to implement the case management system, and also within Welsh Government IT, whose assistance we also need on this. That has caused a real problem about us being able to spend that capital money within this year. It seems to me now highly unlikely that we'll be able to do that, which means that we will have to rebid for it next year, but with the same issues of having to do that, quite rightly, with a proper programme that's been worked out by our officials and Welsh Government officials, to make sure that the case management system is fit for its purpose and we can use it optimally.

Thank you very much. Sam Kurtz.

Thank you very much, Chair, and good afternoon to you. The return to pay rate parity is to be welcomed, but what discussions have you had with the Welsh Government about ensuring that the pay rate for members of the Welsh tribunals keeps pace with those sitting on reserved tribunals?

This is a very important issue. For one year, our pay fell 2 per cent behind the reserved tribunals, which resulted in a particular challenge, because judicial office holders who held posts both in Welsh tribunals and in reserved tribunals tended to favour sitting in reserved tribunals because of the pay. But also, I think that they felt, I'm sure wrongly, that that was a mark of how much they were valued by the Welsh Government within the Welsh tribunals system. That has been rectified over the last 18 months. We now have parity with the reserved tribunals, and that, I think, has given a big boost to the judicial office holders and has alleviated that particular challenge in getting judicial office holders to sit here.

In terms of the importance of retaining parity, I make that point regularly to the Welsh Government. It's now, I think, clearly—. Well, I don't mean to suggest that it wasn't apparent to them; I think it's always been very clear to them the importance of parity. I think that they are now very sensitive to the need for parity with the reserved tribunals, to ensure that judicial office holders are willing and enthusiastic about sitting in our tribunals.

Thank you. How will you ensure that the views of members of the Welsh tribunals are considered in the forthcoming major review of public services by the Senior Salaries Review Body?

Positively, the Welsh Government have bought fully into the SSRB quinquennial review. They are fully a part of that review, which I, of course, welcome. That has resulted in me as judicial office holder, but also a member of the Welsh Tribunals unit administrative team, being part of the advisory and evidence group for the SSRB. We have regular meetings there, and direct input into the SSRB through that group. Shortly—I think it's next week—the judicial office holders, the judicial leads within the Welsh tribunals, are due to meet the SSRB representatives for a meeting, so that we'll have direct input. For this review, the lines of communication between the Welsh Government and the SSRB, and the Welsh judicial office holders within the Welsh tribunals and the SSRB, are very much open. The SSRB clearly understand the need to take into account the uniqueness of the Welsh tribunals when coming up with their recommendations.

You've identified disparities in the terms and conditions offered to members of the Welsh tribunals compared to those sitting on reserved tribunals. What work are you undertaking to identify and address the disparities?

There are two sets of disparities that we're looking at. That is one, the disparities between Welsh tribunals and the reserved tribunals. But there are also some disparities within the Welsh tribunals.

In terms of the former—and this was your question—we are very much looking forward to the outcome of the work that's been done in London on the reserved tribunals over a very extensive period. There has been an enormous amount of work on things like defining a hearing day for fee-paid judicial office holders in England, as well as then working out the best way, the fairest way, to compensate different judicial office holders doing different work in different jurisdictions, some salaried and some fee paid.

In terms of the outcome of that work, we would like to see where the direction of travel of the reserved tribunals will be, so that we can then compare our terms and conditions, our working practices, with those in the reserved tribunals at that point, and then address any differences. There are some obvious differences, for example in writing-up time—normally for the chairs of tribunals, the legal member within a tribunal. That is dealt with differently both between our tribunals inter se and between us and the reserved tribunals. It can be a real disincentive for legal members to sit in our tribunals. It's something that we're wanting to address sooner rather than later. But it's not straightforward.

As a smaller issue, and one that we are tackling now, we are looking at how remuneration is paid for travelling time. Again, there are differences between various tribunals. What we're doing now is to identify how our tribunals each deal with that, comparing that with appropriate reserved tribunals, and then trying to work out a protocol with the Welsh Government so that that time is recompensed properly and fairly, and without any differences that cannot be justified.

Thank you. Moving on to tribunal reform, the committee has outlined its disappointment in the delay in introducing a Bill to reform the Welsh tribunals, which you describe in your annual report as

'vital to the progress of an efficient and effective justice system in Wales.'

What impact could this delay have on the work of the Welsh tribunals and access to justice for people in Wales?

I understand the reasons for the delay, and that is pressure on the time of the Senedd as it comes to the end of the five-year term. I understand that. It is disappointing, because some of the characteristics of our current system, which has evolved in a sort of haphazard manner, are really unfortunate, frustrating, and time-consuming.

Again, just to take one example, appointments to our tribunals are made under a whole—to give it even a polite word—patchwork of statutory provisions. The Lord Chancellor has a part to play in many of these appointments, making some of the appointments, having to approve some other appointments, and her role in that leads firstly to delay, because sometimes some Lord Chancellors are slow at approving appointments in which they have little direct involvement or interest.

But more than that, some of our jurisdictions require particular criteria to sit or to chair. For example, in some cases, the appointment has to be a Lord Chancellor's appointment, which means that members who have been cross-ticketed from reserved tribunals into our tribunals as a result of an expression of interest exercise are unable to sit on all of the work that our tribunals have. For example, in some cases, they cannot chair the tribunal, because the chair has to be a Lord Chancellor's appointment, and if they're cross-ticketed across, then for our tribunal, it is not a Lord Chancellor's appointment.

There are all sorts of anomalies that a reform programme would correct by making everything a lot more straightforward, a lot simpler, far more under our control—that is, the control either of the president of Welsh Tribunals or the judicial leads or the Welsh Government—and far easier to make more efficient. I think that the delay is unfortunate. I think the only ways in which we can deal with this are the two I've identified. Firstly, it would really help if we had a draft Bill by the end of the session, which would be ready to present in the new Senedd. And secondly, we are actively identifying areas that cannot now wait until the implementation of the eventual Bill that we are going to have to try and deal with on a piecemeal basis with the Welsh Government.

Thank you for that. Can you outline how you've been working with the Welsh Government on the development of proposals for reform of the Welsh tribunals? You mentioned a draft Bill there; are you currently working with them in any way?

Yes, that has continued, which is why I can say with some confidence that, hopefully, we will have a draft Bill by the end of the session. That takes place in a number of ways, through a number of conduits. Most directly, we have dealings regularly with the justice policy team, who are working on the Bill. We do that, firstly, on a regular basis, and secondly, in response to any particular issues that they have that they want to consult us upon, which, hopefully, will result in an eventual Bill that already takes into account most of the points we would have to make in relation to the issues raised by the Bill and, consequently, it will need less input from us. I have regular meetings with the Counsel General. I've had three in recent months, certainly over the last six months. I've met the First Minister, and I'm due to see the First Minister, the Deputy First Minister and the Counsel General in the first week or so of January. And always on the agenda, as, if not the first, an important item, is tribunal reform. I'm told by the Counsel General and believe that the Government are still committed to the reform programme, still committed to the Bill and still determined to have a draft Bill ready by the end of the session.

So, in that case, how are you preparing for the potential future reforms to ensure that the Welsh tribunals can effectively implement the changes? What are you doing in readiness for that?

Implementation is now still going to be probably three or four years away. What we're trying to do is take some preliminary steps that will certainly be necessary in terms of implementation, but can be done now. In terms of budget, which I've already mentioned, I think the way in which we now deal with the budget is a lot more realistic and a lot more coherent from a tribunal system point of view. Similarly, next year I'll be preparing a single report on all of the tribunals. So, my annual report will include a report on all of the tribunals rather than the tribunals preparing their own report. So, we're trying to bring some consistency and some coherence to the system as best we can without a Bill, without implementation, all of which will be very valuable for the purposes of implementation.

And I'm pleased to say that, although there's been quite a loss of judicial leads over the last year or so, I think four have retired from post and been replaced. The new judicial leads in those four tribunals have brought a great deal of energy and enthusiasm to their individual jurisdictions, but also to the plans to create a coherent justice system for the Welsh tribunals under the proposed Bill.

Thank you.

Thank you, Chair.

John Griffiths.

Diolch, Cadeirydd. Prynhawn da. Some questions for me on training, and, first of all, an overview, really, as to what you are doing, Sir Gary, as president to support our existing members of Welsh tribunals to carry out their work.

As I mentioned, I think, in last year's report, a particular frustration we have is that the Judicial College's remit does not cover devolved tribunals, does not cover our tribunals, and we're doing what we can to try and remedy that in two particular ways. One is we've talked to the Judicial College about ways in which we can share their written materials, which has been valuable. And also, although we can't often have places on their courses, we have been allowed to observe their courses. So, our two salaried tribunal judges in mental health went on a two-day course on the new legislation and then brought back that learning to the annual conference of our tribunal. I've also raised with the Lady Chief Justice in our regular conversations, this difficulty we have with the Judicial College, with a view to trying to resolve it so that we can have better access directly to their courses. That is particularly pointed at the moment because the Mental Health Review Tribunal changes, where the statutory changes apply equally to England and Wales, are implemented by our separate tribunals. The training will be identical. The Judicial College are putting together a major training programme on the new legislation and it would be really, really helpful if we had access to that.

Secondly, we have now a judicial lead for training within our tribunals. Richard Payne resigned from that post when he became a salaried judge in mental health. That judge is now Judge Meleri Tudur and she is looking at ways in which we can get better value for our training budget. For example, two of our tribunals this year had a joint annual conference. I spoke at that conference. It was the day before the Legal Wales conference, it was held in Caernarfon and it worked extremely well, I think.

There's also making better use of training other than at a face-to-face conference, either electronically or training through paperwork. So, I think the important thing that we do, over and above the Judicial College, is to make sure that we get the most out of our limited training budget, and that's the main role of the judicial lead.

Okay. Thanks very much for that. Just in terms of feedback that you might've received from Welsh tribunals members with regard to training sessions, is there anything particular there that the committee could usefully know about? Are there any identified gaps in training where additional training would be useful?

Yes. We introduced this last year to have feedback forms in all of our training sessions, and those have been collected, they have been analysed and they were used to inform the content of this year's annual conferences. And they were helpful, because although we judicial leads think we know what training would be helpful—and sometimes it's obvious, for example, if there are legislative changes and training is needed in the new legislation—sometimes I think it's been very helpful to get feedback from our members, particularly, if I might say so, our non-legal members in terms of training that they would consider useful—for example, the medical members in mental health. And the feedback, as I say, has been valuable in informing this year's sessions, and again this year, we will have the same feedback, which we can feed into next year's training programme.

Okay. Diolch yn fawr.

Adam Price.

Thank you very much, Chair. I'd like to start with work by the tribunals on diversity. Your annual report says that you found it challenging to put together a questionnaire on the different characteristics of Welsh tribunals members. Can you outline what the nature of those challenges were exactly—namely what was behind that comment?

We collected data on diversity across our membership this year. The return for the questionnaire was just below 60 per cent, which, I think for members who are mainly fee paid, was not a bad return—statistically significant, and a return that enabled us to look at the statistics properly. We have that data, and we're now in the process of analysing the data and identifying any diversity issues that arise from the data. That's something that is on the agenda for my meeting with the judicial leads next Thursday. What we haven't yet done, or I haven't yet done, is identified from the data that we've collected diversity issues, diversity gaps, if you will, that we should be addressing, but we hope to do that very soon. What I suggest, if this would be of assistance, is that, once we've done that piece of work, I'd be very happy to write to the committee setting out the data and also the steps we've taken to address any identified issues arising out of the diversity data.

I'm sure the committee would welcome that. In terms of that level of response, how does it compare with the response level to corresponding questionnaires, for example, that the Judicial Office are using, or the Judicial Appointments Commission?

The answer is 'I don't know statistically'. I think that, where responses are sought from salaried judicial office holders, one would expect a higher response rate, because they can be subject to quite proper pressure from judicial leads, because they're salaried, to return questionnaires. I would expect salaried judicial office holders' responses to be higher in terms of the rate, but that's purely anecdotal, not based on any data.

Once we look at the data and analyse it, we can give a more informed view on the robustness of the data that we have. The date for the return of our questionnaires was extended during the summer to ensure that everybody who was willing to come forward with responses could do so. Reminders were sent on a regular basis from the Welsh Tribunals unit to all of our judicial office holders to respond. That doesn't answer the question, because, statistically, I can't do that, but we hope that the data we have will give us a sufficient database to enable us to look at diversity properly within our judicial office holders from Wales.

One of the characteristics that you have gathered data about is socioeconomic background. Can you tell us a little bit more about how you measure that? For example, do you ask for information regarding whether people have gone through private education or received state education, or, if they are legal professionals, are they first generation lawyers, for example?

It's a very good question. From recollection, and I'll have to go back and look at our questionnaire, the questionnaire did ask questions about education and did ask questions about professional background, because, for example, for lawyers, generally speaking, those who come through the professional route of legal executives or solicitors tend to be more diverse than the bar. So, a variety of questions were looked at. But again, when we analyse it, we can take a view on how robust the data we've obtained are with regard to social mobility issues. Social mobility issues are, probably for obvious reasons, the most difficult, I think, of all the diversity issues to obtain good data and reliable data on upon which judgments can be made. But we'll have a look at the data that we've got.

And looking forward, therefore, to the point where you will have had an opportunity to analyse the data and identify any gaps that there are, what levers do you then have to address those gaps? That is, to the extent that much of the influence, even within this context, is with the Judicial Appointments Commission, how can you foresee a way for you to respond to any gaps that you identify?

Again, a very good question, because it requires, in some ways, a cultural change, which may not be amenable to simple levers. There may be things we can do within the appointments process to ensure that, as a process, it is not discriminating against various minorities, including those based on social characteristics, but, otherwise, it does require a cultural change. Therefore, what one would like to see is an outreach programme, to ensure that those who may want to come into the Welsh judiciary, or, ultimately, those who want to come into the relevant professions in Wales, are properly diverse. That's something that may require an effort on a broader front than just currently the Welsh tribunals. But we are closely linked to the other judiciary in Wales—the reserved judiciary, if I can call them that—both in courts and tribunals; they have now opened their arms to the Welsh judicial office holders in a number of respects. So, I think that it would mean an outreach programme that's on a broader front. As I say, it applies not just to reaching out to the professions who may want to become judicial office holders, but, earlier than that, reaching out to students and young people, to get the professions from which we take our judicial office holders themselves more diverse.

Thank you very much. May I turn now to questions regarding the Welsh language within the tribunal system? Can I just ask first of all what you have done in your role as president of the Welsh Tribunals to encourage and increase the use of the Welsh language in tribunal proceedings?

This is not only an important issue, it's an issue that is very close to my heart. Firstly, we've ensured almost—. I'll come to the caveat in a moment. We've ensured that we have sufficient judicial office holders who are Welsh speaking to enable us to put together a panel on any of our tribunals that is either Welsh speaking or bilingual. The exception is one jurisdiction, small in numbers, within the agricultural property tribunal [correction: within the Agricultural Land Tribunal]. It's the land drainage jurisdiction in which, at the moment, we could not do that—we could only deal with those cases by way of interpreters. But, everywhere else, we can have a truly bilingual panel.

Secondly, in terms of our administration, we have more than sufficient Welsh-speaking administrative staff, for example, to deal with not only correspondence but any inquiries in the Welsh language. So, I think, in the Welsh Language Commissioner's annual report, we are now at a 100 per cent level for responding to any enquiries in Welsh, compared with, I think, about 67 per cent across all institutions in Wales, which is obviously pleasing.

In terms of the parties themselves, this has been a real conundrum within the justice system in Wales, both devolved and reserved, for at least the last 20 or 30 years, which is as long as I've been involved in it. Within the Welsh-devolved tribunals, the use of the Welsh language is very small indeed. So, of about 2,000 applications last year, in only about 26 cases did the applicant respond to the question as to which language do they use. This is nothing to do with the language they want to use in the proceedings, but they do use. The numbers were under 30. And in respect of the question, 'Which language do you want to use in communicating with the tribunal or at the hearing?', the numbers were below 20, which does not reflect anywhere near the proportion of people who use the Welsh language, both in daily life or even in an institutional setting in Wales.

To try and address this, from I think it was April 24, we added a question to the application form that asked applicants why, if they were Welsh speaking, did they want to use English in the proceedings, both in terms of communications with the tribunal and at a hearing. Even to that question, the response has been disappointing, both in terms of numbers of responses—the numbers of responses are only about 20 over 12 months—and also disappointing in not producing a pattern of answers that suggests that there's one thing that we can do to try and correct this anomaly. For example, answers have included, 'Well, I'm Welsh speaking, but my spouse is English speaking, and I want them to be at the hearing, so I want the hearing to be conducted in English so that they can understand', or that the applicant doesn't have sufficient confidence in Welsh to be able to use Welsh during the hearing or in correspondence. We've tried to address that by changing the form of questions that we ask about the Welsh language in the application form not simply to have the binary choice between English and Welsh, but to have a third choice, which is both, because we want to encourage those people who have some Welsh but are not confident, for example, in technical terms in the Welsh language, to be able to use Welsh during the course of a hearing as much as they want, and then move into English when they feel the need. We have the capability in terms of panels, of course, to be able to deal with that.

Therefore, in terms of the changes that you've just outlined, there is reference in the annual report to changes that you've introduced to the application form for the Education Tribunal for Wales, which has led, according to your report, to an increase—some increase, at least—in the number of hearings that are held in Welsh. Could you therefore confirm that that's what you're referring to, but that that increase is smaller than you'd hoped for?

Exactly. And, again, on numbers—and I can correct this if these numbers are out, but they're not wildly out—I think, in the education tribunal, the numbers increased from a tiny number, just a couple, to eight over a year. That statistically is a large increase, but, in terms of the numbers of cases, even just looking at education, eight is a tiny proportion of the whole corpus of applications, of which I think there's certainly over 100 per year. So, the data suggests that the steps taken in the education tribunal have had some impact, but, overall, relatively little from a statistical point of view.

Yes. It's the fact also that, even with the tribunal that is directly related to the Welsh language, the majority of those cases are held through the medium of English, which, symbolically at least, is striking. The tribunals come under the Welsh Language (Wales) Measure 2011, of course—some of those standards—but they don't come under the promotion standard. Is there an argument, therefore, that they should come under the promotion standard so that that work of promoting and normalising use of the Welsh language becomes a statutory duty or a legal duty, if you like?

Yes, that's a good point. That's obviously a political issue, as to whether the promotion standard should be extended to tribunals. We would hope that we did already promote the use of the Welsh language in our tribunals, whether or not we have a legal obligation to do that.

I think that, as I say, this paucity of the use of the Welsh language in most courts and tribunals in Wales, reserved or devolved, is a long-standing issue. It's a cultural issue. It seems to me to be linked to the historical use of English in certain formal aspects of Welsh life. But I think it really is a sort of cultural issue that we need to address.

I think what is important for the Welsh tribunals is that we do encourage the use of the Welsh language, and we take all steps to ensure that those who wish to use the Welsh language and would benefit from using the Welsh language, because they would feel more comfortable using it, are enabled to do so and encouraged to do so. And that is what I think we already do. But if there's anything else that we can do to encourage the use of the Welsh language, then you must let us know, and we will do it.

May I very briefly turn—I know that time is short—to retirements and appointments? Your annual report notes that the judicial leads for four of the six Welsh tribunals have left their posts in the last year—one of them had been there for a very long time. How have you dealt with the impact of that loss of experience? Has this been an opportunity to rethink how you manage succession planning?

We have been very unfortunate to have lost four out of our six judicial leads over a year, and, as you say, some extremely experienced, but we have been fortunate, I think, in all four of the appointments that we've made. Not all judicial office holder appointments are easy to fill. And we have, I'm quite sure, appointed four excellent judicial leads, all experienced in tribunal work, and all four have energy and ideas as to how the system can be improved, in things like processes, but also in things like reform.

An example that I've already referred to—Judge Jane McConnell, in mental health, is looking very carefully at the processes that have been used in the Mental Health Review Tribunal for Wales for a very long time. These processes are antiquated. They're not supported by any form of case management system. But she is looking at ways in which the processes can be improved before the advent of a case management system, to make that tribunal more efficient and more effective, and very much patient focused. So, I am not concerned about the loss of experience in this sense. I think we've been very fortunate in the recruits that we have been able to make to our four tribunals.

Succession planning, which was the particular question you asked, is very difficult in Wales, absent a reformed system in which there can be a real career progression throughout our tribunals. So, we do look as best we can to ensure that when people, judicial office holders, retire or move on to another appointment, we have individuals who can replace them, individuals of merit. But absent a coherent system, that's really quite difficult. We have to, as we've done with these four candidates, hope, and also encourage a breadth of applicants to apply, and hope that we have applicants who are good. And as I say, for these four competitions, we have been very fortunate in the appointments that have been made

Diolch.

It comes to me to thank you very much for coming along to speak to us this afternoon. I've found it very informative, and I'm sure my colleagues have as well. We're very grateful to you for coming in and giving evidence. I have to advise you that you will be sent a copy of the transcript to check for factual accuracy. And, again, thank you very much.

Thank you, Chair. Thank you, everyone. Thank you.

That takes us on to item 3, a motion under Standing Order 17.42(vi) and (ix) to resolve to exclude the public from the following items: items 4, 5, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16. Are we agreed? Thank you.

Item 6, instruments that raise no reporting issues under Standing Order 21.2 or 21.3. The Non-Domestic Rating Contributions (Wales) (Amendment) Regulations 2025. These regulations amend the Non-Domestic Rating Contributions (Wales) Regulations 1992, which prescribe the rules of calculating non-domestic rating contributions to be paid by billing authorities in Wales to the non-domestic rates pool. These regulations update adult population figures, to ensure that the basis for calculating contributions from billing authorities remains up to date and to enable billing authorities to calculate their non-domestic rating contributions for the 2026-27 financial year. Senedd lawyers have identified no reporting points. Do Members have any points? No.

Item 7, instruments that raise issues to be reported to the Senedd under Standing Order 21.2 or 21.3. The Local Government (Standards Committees and Member Conduct) (Miscellaneous Amendments) (Wales) Regulations 2025. These regulations amend existing requirements of the model code of conduct for relevant local authorities, to ensure its requirements align with the protected characteristics and socioeconomic duty specified in the Equality Act 2010. The regulations also remove lifetime prohibitions on specified former members and officials from sitting as independent members on certain standards committees. Senedd lawyers have identified three technical reporting points, and a Welsh Government response has not been received. Jen, would you like to run us through the reporting points?

Thank you, Chair. So, all three points that are reported note potentially defective drafting regarding the defining of terms used in the regulations.

Thank you. Are we happy with those? Yes.

Item 8, instruments that raise issues to be reported to the Senedd under Standing Order 21.7—previously considered. The code of practice on the exercise of social services functions in relation to Part 4, direct payments and choice of accommodation, and Part 5, charging and financial assessment, of the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014. The committee considered this instrument at its meeting on 17 November and laid its report the same day. Members are invited to note the Welsh Government response to the report, which has since been received. Jen, do you have anything to add?

Thank you, Chair. Just to flag that the response acknowledges the points that were raised and provides a list of corrections that will be made to the code, prior to it being issued, and also provides some brief additional explanation where requested.

Thank you, Jen. Do Members have anything?

Item 8.2, the Children and Families (Wales) Measure 2010 (Commencement No. 10) Order 2025. The committee considered this instrument at last week’s meeting and laid its report the same day. Members are invited to note the Welsh Government response to the report, which has since been received. Jen, do you have anything to raise?

Thank you, Chair. So, the response states that the commencement of section 71 of the Measure, which is a general interpretation provision, was overlooked on the implementation of the Measure, which happened between 2010 and 2014, and that's the reason that this is being commenced now.

Thank you.

Item 9, instruments that raise issues to be reported to the Senedd under Standing Order 21.2 or 21.3—previously considered. The Procurement Act 2023 (Specified International Agreements) (Amendment) (Wales) Regulations 2025. The committee considered this instrument at last week’s meeting and laid its report the same day. Members are invited to note the Welsh Government's response to the report, which has been received. Jen, do you have anything to raise?

So, the Welsh Government acknowledges the absence of a definition in the regulations relating to the term 'below-threshold contract', but says it was of the view that the definition wasn't needed as its meaning is clear within the context of the Procurement Act. However, it does recognise that a definition might be useful to readers, and therefore will insert one in further regulations due to be laid in February.

Thank you, Jen. Do Members have anything? No.

Item 9.2, the Official Controls (Import of High-Risk Food and Feed of Non-Animal Origin) (Amendment of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1793) (Wales) Regulations 2025. The committee considered this instrument at its meeting on 25 November and laid its report the same day. Members are invited to note the Welsh Government's response to the report, which has since been received. Jen, do you have anything to raise from the Welsh Government response?

Thank you, Chair. The Government acknowledges the errors noted in the committee's report but considers them to be minor, and is therefore exploring with the statutory instruments registrar whether they can be addressed via correction slips. If not, then they will be considered for further amendment.

Thank you, Jen. Do Members have anything? No.

Item 10.1, a written statement and correspondence from the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs: the Biocidal Products (Data Protection Periods) (Amendment) Regulations 2025. Paper 11 is a written statement. Jen, do you have anything to add?

No, nothing to add, Chair.

Paper 12, a letter, 2 December 2025. The Deputy First Minister informs us he has given consent for the UK Government to make these regulations at our meeting on 17 November. We considered the Deputy First Minister's letter of 11 November, which informed us of his intention to provide consent. The regulations were laid in the UK Parliament on 25 November. If Members have no comments, we will move on to the next item.

Item 10.2, a written statement by the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs: the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020 (Exclusions from Market Access Principles: Glue Traps) Regulations 2025. The Deputy First Minister again states that he has given consent for the UK Government to make these regulations. At our meeting on 3 November, we considered the Deputy First Minister’s letter of 30 October, which informed us of his intention to provide consent. The regulations were laid in the UK Parliament on 1 December. Do Members have any comments? No.

Item 10.3, a written statement and correspondence from the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs: the Control of Mercury (Amendment) Regulations 2025. And there's a letter. Jen, do you want to say anything?

No, thank you, Chair.

Members, nothing? Do Members have any comments? No.

Item 10.4, correspondence from the Welsh Government on the meetings of inter-ministerial groups. There's a written statement by the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs on the Inter-Ministerial Group for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs from 5 December. And a letter from the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs on the Inter-Ministerial Group for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs from 5 December. We have one notification on this item: the Deputy First Minister informs us that a meeting of the Inter-Ministerial Group for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs took place on 24 November. Discussions included water quality, the UK-EU common understanding agreement, the fisheries and coastal growth fund, and the autumn statement. Do Members have any comments?

Item 11 is papers to note. There's correspondence from Mark Isherwood MS to the Finance Committee on the British Sign Language (Wales) Bill. Mark Isherwood, as the Member in charge of the British Sign Language (Wales) Bill, has written to the Finance Committee in response to a report on the Bill. Members will be aware that the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee report on the Bill was laid on 5 December. Do Members have any comments they wish to make? No.

Correspondence from the Minister for Mental Health and Well-being on the four nations response to the Competition and Markets Authority market study into the UK infant and follow-on formula market. The Minister for Mental Health and Well-being informs us that the UK Government has published a response to the Competition and Markets Authority report on the infant and follow-on formula market in the UK, which states that Ministers in each nation have agreed to proceed at first with a package of non-legislative measures to address the issues identified in the report, and they will consider potential legislative change if required. Do Members have any comments? No.

Item 11.3, a written statement by the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Welsh Language on non-domestic rates support 2026-27. The Cabinet Secretary's written statement informs us that the regulations will be brought forward early in the new year to set the values of new differential multipliers for non-domestic rates. Subject to the Senedd's approval, these regulations will take place on 1 April 2026. To provide for transitional relief, he states that the draft Non-Domestic Rating (Chargeable Amounts) (Wales) Regulations 2025 will be laid as soon as possible, and are anticipated to come into force on 31 December, and apply from 1 April 2026. Members will recall that the Cabinet Secretary wrote to us on 7 November in relation to these regulations, which will require expedited scrutiny. Do Members have any comments? Sam.

Thank you, Chair. Just raising concerns that the increase in the rateable value of some businesses is within the 300 to 400 per cent. So, it's something for Members and the committee more broadly to be aware of, which I disagree with, for the benefit.

Diolch, Sam. I can't say I necessarily disagree with you on that. I think that things have been moving faster than I would have liked in looking at these, and we saw with Debenhams how easy it is for very large companies to fail.

Correspondence from the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs, an update on the UK emissions trading scheme. There's a letter from the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs of 4 December 2025, and a letter from the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs to the Climate Change, Environment and Infrastructure Committee of 4 December 2025. The Deputy First Minister informs us that, following a consultation exercise, the UK emissions trading scheme authority has decided that it will extend the scheme to 2040, in the form of a phase 2. The authority has also decided to retain and inflation-proof the auction reserve price in the scheme. Do Members have anything to say?

The UK Government will make the required changes in the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading Scheme Auctioning (Amendment) Regulations 2026. The Deputy First Minister states that the changes do not require the laying of a legislative consent memorandum or a statutory instrument consent memorandum, but he assures that Welsh Government officials will be involved in reviewing the drafting of the 2026 regulations. The Deputy First Minister has committed to write to us again when the regulations are laid. This is anticipated to be in March 2026. Do Members have any comments at this stage?

As agreed at item 3, we now move into private session for the remainder of the meeting.