Equality and Social Justice Committee

Good afternoon, Lord Timpson. We're very pleased to welcome you as the Minister for criminal justice, as we discuss something this committee has a lot of concerns about, which is the jagged edge of criminal justice in Wales. We have, I'm told, nearly 6,000 places for prisoners in Wales. With just over 5,000 Welsh residents who are currently in prison, I wondered if you could explain why over a quarter of those prisoners are being kept in English jails.

Well, first of all, thank you very much for having me today. The capacity problems that are well known are across the whole estate, and that means that, today, our prisons are 98.2 per cent full. And that includes the category D prisons, which are about 92 per cent full. The reason why that is the case, so far as Welsh prisoners held in English prisons, is that a number are held on remand close to the courts where the hearing will be at and where they were arrested. Obviously, there are security issues, which I don't really want to go into too much detail on now, about how we manage various organised crime groups and how we do that as safely as possible for security reasons around the estate and use the different prisons in a sensible way.

Obviously, when people are nearer release, we want them to be in prisons near their families and where they're going to be resettling to, and that's really important, but, obviously, Wales does not have a category A prison, and Wales does not have a women's prison as well, which means that, where we have those prisoners, they can't be located in Wales. We have four approved premises in Wales, but it really comes down to capacity pressures and where we get people in the right place. So, I hope that's given an explanation of why I think that is the situation at the moment.

Okay. I accept that category A prisoners and women can't be held in Welsh prisons, but, once somebody has been sentenced for an offence, surely they should be rehomed to Wales, given the importance of family connections to any successful rehabilitation.

Yes, you're completely right: family connections are absolutely vital and one of the really important factors in successful rehabilitation. One of the things that I really look for is the ability for people to, when they're in an open prison, do home visits and go out and get work. But the nature of the prison estate that we have, and the complex nature of the prisoners that we have, means that we need to use the estate really efficiently, and that means, unfortunately, that some Welsh prisoners are not in prisons in Wales. I live just over the Welsh border near Chester, and I can see HMP Berwyn from my house, and it's a vast prison; I think it's one of the top three biggest prisons in the estate. And obviously, there are a number of people there from Manchester and Liverpool as well. So, we've got a number of people technically not in the prisons that they would probably wish to be in, but the nature of the estate that we have, we've got to just make—. We've got to make use of all the capacity that we have.

Jane Dodds wanted to come in briefly.

Thank you. Just following up on the question around the big picture here for us in Wales, we understand that Wales has the highest number of imprisoned people—that is, they have a Welsh postcode—than anywhere else in western Europe. We are extremely concerned here in the Welsh Parliament that we have those numbers, and I just really wanted to know what your reaction was to that, and what you feel the steps can be, given that the powers are reserved to the UK Parliament, in order to reduce the numbers and to look at those figures so that we don't end up continuing to have those high numbers. Thank you.

Obviously, our independent judiciary decide who goes to prison and who doesn't go to prison. But one of the things that, when I was appointed, I specifically asked for was, in my job title, to have 'reducing reoffending', because 80 per cent of offending is reoffending. And clearly, something has been going wrong for a long time in the fact that our prisons are growing—we're going have more people in prison by the time of the next election than at any other time in our history—and, more specifically, it's around how do we reduce reoffending, and then your point around the Welsh data, which I have seen as well, and this comes down to: what are we going to do to tackle the long-term issues on why so many people are entering the criminal justice system, and how we can divert more people away from the criminal justice system? We need to look at the data and make sure that the policies that we put in place are not just short-term fixes, but have a long-term, credible, evidence-based plan. That, to me, is what's really important.

Thank you. Mick Antoniw.

Thank you for that answer, and, in terms of evidence-based plans and issues around dealing with reoffending, there have been volumes of evidence produced: the Thomas commission, a former Lord Chief Justice, with a very high judicial input; a recent independent commission by Dr Rowan Williams; the Welsh Government justice paper on delivering justice; and of course the Gordon Brown report dealt with some of these in respect of calling for devolution of youth justice and probation. When nearly all the levers around the issues of reoffending, so many of them, are actually devolved functions, do you agree with the conclusion of nearly all those reports that the devolution of probation is something that needs to happen and needs to happen quickly?

You raised a point on the—. If I start on the youth justice point, I think the local delivery options are something I know that colleagues have already had one meeting on, and I think that is something where there is a significant amount of evidence that we need to look at, but I think it could be really helpful. So far as probation goes, I know colleagues are visiting the greater Manchester probation team on 8 August to look at how their co-commissioning works. I've been to see the Manchester probation team and I think they've got a really interesting model, and I think, despite the fact that they've got a number of recruitment challenges and other challenges with the complex nature of the cohort they're working with, it's a really good model.

So, I think the current position we are in is there is a huge amount of pressure on the system, and what we need to do is to make sure that we get some stability in that system, and that's where the sentencing review that David Gauke did comes into play, because that is going to give us a long-term sustainable justice system, which is what we're desperately aiming for, because, as I said previously, if we lurch from problem to problem to problem we are just going to put sticking plasters over everything, but what is needed and why I came into this job is to make long-term, sustainable, sensible, evidence-based changes. I think, so far as the co-commissioning model, that's a really interesting one on probation. But I just think, before we make any decisions on exactly where we're going to go on this, we need to stabilise prisons and probation.

Lots of people talk with lot of—. People have read a lot in the papers, there's a huge amount of data, about what's going on in prisons. I have a bigger concern about the challenges in probation, and that's not in any way making the problems in our prisons less significant—they are very significant—but probation is really where the heavy lifting of the justice system is done, and we have a number of challenges, which I'm addressing on every front, whether it be recruitment, retention, training, how can we introduce more technology to make the whole thing more efficient. Because what I want is to make sure that—. At the moment the average case load is 35 cases per probation officer, and that is too high, but to do that we need to make sure that we carefully and safely protect the public, and the technology is the key to that, because we need more face-to-face work, but we have a huge amount of pressure on the system.

Just to follow on from that, you talk about an evidence-based system; we have been discussing this issue for over 10 years. The Probation Service and probation officers union has had a position that’s much more long-standing—the justice unions, et cetera. Nearly everybody that’s involved in this session has seen the evidence, has been involved in giving evidence. The last decade for probation has been an absolute disaster. I don't think anyone would dispute that. And the argument in respect of the devolution of probation is that nearly all the key elements in terms of keeping people out of prison and supporting them are devolved functions, and it seems to me there's no logical response to that other than we've had a decade of delay on actually looking at the enormous accumulation of evidence. What you seem to be suggesting is that we need to go through that process of just continually looking at the evidence without ever really coming to a proper conclusion.

Well, I look at it slightly differently. I think I'm quite unusual in the case of being a prisons Minister who has run complex organisations in the past, and I am very aware of how much an organisation like probation can take change. There has been, as you as you quite rightly said, a huge amount of very, very difficult change that has happened as a result of transforming rehabilitation. I don't think the organisation has recovered. I still think it's very bruised, and I think we need to be in a much more stable position before we can start talking about further changes. I also think that diverting people away from prison is where we really need to be focused on, and that is where the intensive supervision court model, which in the Gauke review they fortunately and quite rightly said is something we need to push on, because I think it has a huge amount of potential—. And I think there are a number of areas where we need to work hand-in-hand with probation and linking in with Department for Work and Pensions, mental health, accommodation, because, if you take accommodation as an example, far too many probation staff that I speak to say they really feel like housing officers rather than probation officers. So, I think the whole heartbeat of the organisation at the moment is still in difficulty, and I think what we need to do is to make sure—. I see it as my job to stabilise and improve and get it into a much healthier place.

Okay. Adam Price, you indicated.

Am I right in interpreting what you're saying, Lord Timpson, that you think that—if I can put it in these terms—the full devolution of Executive and legislative power over probation to the Senedd, which is the policy of the Welsh Government, was set out in the Thomas commission report, that, you think, would inject instability into the system at a time when you believe that stability is important?

No. What I'm saying is, at the moment, the organisation is unstable. Our staff are doing an amazing job in difficult circumstances. They're making significant progress on their public protection work. But I need more time, and we need more investment, and the £700 million that the Lord Chancellor managed to secure from the Treasury at the spending review will go a huge way in enabling me and others to put all the building blocks in place to get that stability.

Do you envisage that those powers, as I described them, will be transferred in this Westminster term, by 2029?

No, what I'm saying is I think we need to explore, for example, co-commissioning and other models. But my priority at the moment is to make sure that the massive pressure on the system stabilises, and I think we need to do that before we should consider anything else.

Yes. Co-commissioning, of course, isn't devolution as we understand it. It means that power over budgets, legislative power and, indeed, employment would remain within the existing service. So, are you saying that the full devolution of Executive and legislative powers, that's not something that is on your agenda or that you are focusing on at the moment?

What I'm focused on at the moment is sorting out the pressure on the prison and probation service to make sure that it is sustainable and does the job of protecting the public.

As a politician asking a politician a question, I know how this works, but I'm just seeking clarity. Are you ruling out for the foreseeable future the full devolution of Executive and legislative powers because you believe the way forward that you want to focus on—in exploring, even—is the Manchester model of co-commissioning?

I'm not ruling anything out; I'm not ruling anything in. All I'm focused on—and I've been doing this job for just over a year now—is trying to sort out the crisis in our justice system. And what the system needs is stability. It needs the investment that we've now got, and this is going to make—. We need to make sure that we explore all the options. I'm really pleased that colleagues are going to greater Manchester in a month's time, and I'd be really interested to hear feedback on that, on how that goes.

Okay, thank you. Julie Morgan, you wanted to—. Quickly, if possible.

Adam has covered some of the things I wanted to say, but could you say something about the—? What do you see as the timeline of this restoring stability? And couldn't stability be restored by having the devolution of probation so that it would then be working with all the different other agencies that are so crucial to the rehabilitation of offenders?

As I said before, I think—. Look, how long this is going to take, I don't know, but I'm keen to be in this job long enough to try and sort it out. That's why I'm a bit of a one-trick pony when it comes to this, because I think it needs consistency. We need to really make sure that we get the delivery right. I think we work really closely and really successfully across organisations—whether it's accommodation, mental health; I think the way we're working is really positive. I've been fortunate to have done two days of Welsh prison visits and met a number of colleagues there. We've had a number of conversations with Jane and others, and I think we're working really well together.

Good. I'm concerned about stabilising a completely broken system, because it's costing a fortune to the taxpayer and the individuals who are caught up in it. We've been talking for 20 years nearly, since the Corston report was published, on different models of punishment for people who break the law who are female. And yet even a year into the UK Labour Government, there's still absolutely zero sign of progress on a single pilot residential centre for women in Swansea. I wondered if you could explain why there is no progress being made on things that have been discussed endlessly for decades.

One of the first things we did was we set up the women's justice board. I have my third meeting with the board this week. Our job is to come up with concrete plans and evidence-led plans of how we can divert more women from the justice system and close a women's prison. Part of that work is around residential and non-residential centres for women. It's an area that I have a huge amount of interest in, as someone whose parents were foster parents. A lot of the kids that came to live with us had mums in prison. So, I've been going down this route for a long, long time.

There are a number of really good models of residential centres, but there are also challenges around that as well. I think we need to look at the options, we need to look at the cost. One of my concerns is always around cost, being a commercial person. For example, Hope Street in Southampton is a really interesting model. Willowdene in Shropshire, again, is a really interesting model of part residential, part non-residential. But, really, the key for me is how do we divert women away from the criminal justice system in the first place. I went—

That concerns us all. But are you saying you're abandoning the residential centre in Wales, for a mere 12 women?

Not at all. What we're saying is we've got the women's justice board, we're hoping to produce a report by the end of the year. We've also got the allocations process that the Lord Chancellor will be going through in the next couple of months, which is as a result of the spending review that we had, where we're going to work out where we spend the money. I think, having been to Eastwood Park a couple of weeks ago, what is clear is that there are many women—and I met many Welsh women in Eastwood Park—who are clearly very ill, very vulnerable, victims themselves, and would be far better diverted away from prison into a place where they can be protected and helped to overcome the issues that they have. They need a safe space to go to, and women's residential centres and day centres are often a really good place to do that.

This committee has also done its own inquiries into women in the criminal justice system, and we're of the same opinion. What we're trying to find out is when change is going to happen, because at the moment we're throwing money at a system that doesn't work. Your 80 per cent reoffending is testimony to that.

The average length of stay of women in Eastwood Park is 46 days. I met one very, very—. I didn't actually meet her—she was too ill for me to meet her. I wanted to meet her, but it didn't work out. There's one woman there who, on average, tries to take her own life over 20 times a month. We need to make sure we really help a lot of these very vulnerable women.

Indeed. But we need to see progress on change. Mick Antoniw.

Just a couple of further comments in terms of trying to achieve stabilisation. You will have seen the interview Leveson has done recently, which really shows that the evidence we have is that the number of cases that are coming into the criminal justice system are exceeding the capacity of the justice system to deal with them. That means that that equal pressure there is increasing month by month on the probation service as well. I suppose my concern is this: we hear the term 'stabilisation', it doesn't really answer very much until we know what stabilisation actually means. But the problem is being able to utilise all those resources that deal with the issues around the probation service, to deal with health and education in the prisons. These are areas where there is a practical ability to deal with and take part of that burden.

It seems to me that the devolution of probation—. All it requires, actually, is the removal of the reservation, that could then be a memorandum for how you go on. It seems to me that that would be the most effective way of formulating a partnership, if we really want to quickly and to radically start developing policies to deal with that—to deal with it on a Welsh basis or whatever. But my concern, and I suppose the concern of this committee, is that what you're saying is what other Ministers have been telling us year on year, et cetera. As a member of the inter-ministerial justice group in a previous role, you're not saying anything different to everyone before you. So perhaps you'll understand there's a concern as to where we are going in practice.

I think I'm probably the first Minister of State for Prisons, Probation and Reducing Reoffending who's actually, with colleagues, got a plan to have a sustainable justice system. We're doing the difficult yards on the Gauke review, the Leveson review, the spending review that has obviously completed; we haven't done the allocations yet. So, we have an evidence-based plan that means that we will have—obviously, we've got to work hard to make sure we run the organisation effectively—a sustainable justice system. We cannot run out of prison places. If we run out of prison places, it's incredibly dangerous. We got to within 470 spare places one day, and that is no way to run things. So, I am an operator. I am someone who's been involved with prisons and probation for over 25 years. I think I know what needs to be done. We have the evidence and now the money to do it. This is like a turnaround job, but we need to get to a point where we're sustainable.

Tell us what that is.

Sorry, was that a question for me?

Yes, please. You said there is a plan for a sustainable justice system. I'm just wondering what the detail of that plan is. It's quite important to us in understanding where we're going.

The first one is we're building 14,000 more prison places. The previous Government built a net 500, which is clearly not enough, when the prison population is going up by 3,000 a year. We're building more modern prison places. We're also doing a lot of work to make sure, within those prisons, that the focus is on reducing reoffending. So, when people leave us, they get a one-way ticket, not a return ticket, because, for far too many people, they're going back around and around again. And this is where Leveson comes in. For example, the intensive supervision court model, I think, is really important.

Because if you look at the Texas model, which the Lord Chancellor has been personally to see, they use the idea of incentives to encourage people to turn their lives around. David Gauke went as well. This is where the progression model comes in. So, if people behave when they're in prison and they do all the things they should do, they don't assault officers, they don't behave badly, then they have a guaranteed release date when they then go into what I term 'heavy probation'. But if they behave badly, then they will stay in prison for longer. If you look at what's happened in Texas, where crime levels have reduced dramatically, and they've even closed 16 prisons, there is international evidence that we have seen that works, and we've taken a number of those ideas and are using them.

Also, if you take the point on probation and around technology, at the moment, I would estimate about 70 per cent of a probation officer's time is spent doing administration. That should be 30 per cent, not 70 per cent. Far too many probation officers leave the service because they get so frustrated about the repetitive administrative tasks they're having to do because the technology doesn't link up. Those are just two examples around an incentive model for people to change, and that's where the intensive supervision court model is really powerful, and also on probation as well, so we can help our probation staff get to a position where they spend far more time face to face with offenders, managing their risk, protecting the public, ensuring we've got fewer victims, rather than doing admin all day.

Ruth Jones.

Thank you, Chair, and good afternoon, Lord Timpson and Ian Barrow. Good to see you again. You've mentioned your plan and your review, which obviously can only be based on sound data, and we've heard in the previous session the Cabinet Secretary, Jane Hutt, explain the difficulties that have led to the Welsh Government setting up their own data or information collection procurement, if you like. But we've already heard from the Welsh Affairs Committee that in terms of data collection, the information that's required by the Welsh Government is already available within your statistics department, and I just wonder where's the partnership working here. Why is this not being shared?

Also, as part of the data question, there have been a lot of concerns about Dr Rob Jones and the so-called vexatious claims, which I thought had been ironed out. I seemed to have received confirmation that it had been ironed out, but in June this year, I note another letter has gone back to him and his PhD student citing vexation again. Can you give me the answer to those two particular questions?

I think it's a really important question. Where I think we're up to is the priority areas that you provided us with, you'd like to see more on, I thought I'd just give you an update on what I've got. Forty per cent of the asks on data are already published, so that's all happening, and then there's another 40 per cent that we publish as management information, so it's not official information, but it's management information, and then the remaining 20 per cent, the numbers have such low data that it's unpublishable. I think we need to make more progress on that, and I'm led to believe—and correct me if I'm wrong, Ian—that the Welsh definition is someone who has a Welsh home address pre charge. Is that correct, Ian? Yes. So, I think we're making some progress on that. I understand the desire for more data. We just need to make sure that we can get it and it's accurate, because one of the things that I think the team do a really good job of here is being very thorough on the data, but it needs to be right. But hopefully that answers your question.

In terms of pre-admission data, everyone understands what a postcode is, so I don't understand why there's been a five-year delay in this. I'm not quite clear on that.

I've only been around a year, so maybe I'll ask Ian to fill in the gaps on that one.

I think, in all honesty, some of the work that was taking place in relation to data did get disrupted by the pandemic. Priorities changed during that time. I've been in post 18 months or so, and in my time in post, it's been an area of focus for me, and we work very closely with Welsh Government officials, and indeed with Dr Jones in terms of determining what data we would like to see shared properly, and how we can find a way of doing that. As Lord Timpson has set out, where we've got to so far in terms of the priority Welsh Government asks feels to me like significant progress, particularly when we start the publishing management information that covers the second 40 per cent that the Minister referred to.

In terms of Rob Jones and the vexatious element, we know that it was not vexatious; it was the only way to gain information, using FOIs. So, I'm just concerned that that relationship is strengthened and developed going forward, because he's part of the solution, not part of the problem.

I completely agree with you on that, and indeed, we invited Dr Jones to the most recent meeting with Welsh Government officials within the last two or three weeks, I think that was.

In relation to the second vexatious letter, it's just probably worth me clarifying that 'vexatious' is a legal term, set out as part of the Freedom of Information Act 2000, as part of this, and the second reference was not connected to the first vexatious letter that Dr Jones received; it was because of other campaigns that were going on that were deemed as being, for want of a better description, legitimately vexatious.

However, unfortunately, the information procured by Rob Jones highlighted the disproportionate number of ethnic minorities who are imprisoned from Wales, and that's not something that's vexatious; that's something that should cause great concern to all of us. So, I'm still confused as to why this information is not being made public, so that we can rectify a system that's potentially discriminating against people based on race.

If I can just come back in to clarify that, a lot of that information is shared and it's made public. We do share the information via FOIs and we’ve done that on a number of occasions within the last 12 months for Dr Jones, and, indeed, we’re now moving to a position where we’ve agreed that we will publish that as management information.

It's as important for me, I think, as anybody else, in my role as a director of HMPPS in Wales, that that data is publicly available, and it allows the sort of engagement and conversations that we need to make sure that we are able to address the issues that are raised.

Okay. Well, I think we need to move on. So, Altaf Hussain, do you want to briefly discuss HM Prison Parc?

Yes, thank you very much, Chair. To what extent is the decline in standards at HM Prison Parc attributed to inexperienced staff struggling to meet prisoners’ needs? What assessments, if any, have been made of the workforce, and what actions are being taken to improve the recruitment and retention of more experienced staff?

Okay. So, I'll start and then I'll hand over to Ian, if that's okay. Having been to Parc, and had a number of ongoing conversations about progress there, I thought I’d just give you my view, having been to lots of prisons over many years. I think we’ve now got strong leadership there. I think they’ve got a strong plan—'six to fix'. I think they have obviously had a terrible number of self-inflicted deaths at the prison, but I think things feel far more stable.

I think one of the biggest issues has been the access of drugs into the prison. And when I was last there, I spoke to the governor, and I said, 'What percentage of all your problems in this prison come down to drugs?' And he said, '98 to 99 per cent'. And when you’ve got drones being able to drop drugs off at windows that aren’t drone-proof, that is a significant problem. So, a lot has been invested in replacing windows. It will still take another year, I think, to August next year, for all of the windows to be updated, but that will make a significant difference.

So far as the training goes, one of the projects I did before I came into Government was I led a review into prison officer training for the Government. And, fortunately, now I’m in this role, the review will hopefully get more of a look-in. And we’ve already started a number of the ideas that I put in place, to make sure that when people join the service, they’re properly trained, not rush trained, and they have people in the prison who are there to support them with their training. So, it’s much more of a 12-month programme than a seven-week programme. And I know when we do that, we will see—. And we’ve already seen, where we’ve been trialling various parts of it, much improved retention rates, because retention is something that really concerns me, not just in Parc prison, but other prisons as well. Because, to be a really good prison officer, you need to understand the complex nature of the people you’re dealing with, and have the confidence to deal with them. And those subtle conversations that people have on the wings often take a long time to develop. So, I think we need to focus more on training, and we are doing.

Recruitment is getting better. I don’t think—. Ian will give us an update specifically on Parc. The windows are really important, and a significant number have been done. The ground floor ones have been done, for example, and we need to do more. But I’ll hand over to Ian for some more of the detail on the staffing and updates.

Thank you. So, staffing is—

Ruth Jones had a specific question about windows. So, before we hear from Ian, I wonder if we could talk to you about that.

Okay.

You’ve mentioned the windows being the main problem. Most of us in this room have been to HMP Parc, and we know the issue is the windows in terms of the drones' access for the drugs. And the annual report by His Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Prisons, 2024-25, highlighted the problem. You know the problem with the windows. I just can’t understand why it’s taking so long to fix the windows, which are the primary cause of the drugs' ingress.

Okay. So, I think we’ve been really quick on the draw on this. We’ve been in Government for a year now; these things take a long time to order. But also, one of the issues has been the design of the windows, because there are a number of windows that we've inherited that were deemed to be drone-proof, but they’re not drone-proof. I can’t go into all the details for security reasons, but we needed to make sure we were not wasting public money on putting windows in that didn’t work. So, I think we’ve got on with it very quickly. Obviously, Parc is a—. We have a relationship with a private prison operator, and we needed to make sure that we worked through all that. But I think they’ve been doing that at pace. It's a complex job to do, because you need to have a specialist workforce who are security cleared to do it, and to make sure that we’ve got the right technology to make sure that it’s a long-term solution. But we do know that in prisons where they have a full set of windows that work, it makes a huge difference.

So, when will the windows in Parc be completely finished?

I think it's August next year. Is that correct?

Yes.

August 2026.

Yes.

Okay.

I think that involves windows being replaced at a rate of 60 per week, starting in August this year. As Lord Timpson says, it is a complex piece of work, as you'll be aware, obviously, in terms of the sorts of issues around security concerns, and the need to keep the prison operating whilst that work is undertaken.

Jane Dodds, you had a quick question.

Yes, thank you. Just to really come in again on Parc, we're here as the Welsh Senedd asking questions specifically about the Welsh prison population and a Welsh prison that has sadly been in the headlines nationally as well as here in Wales. Parc prison doesn't just have a problem with drugs; the prison inspectorate reported that there's not enough food to eat, that prisoners are stuck in their cells for 21 hours a day, that self-harm has gone up by 60 per cent. So, I just really wanted to give you the opportunity to put on record how you are approaching that, particularly in relation to Parc prison. Diolch.

We inherited a prison system in complete crisis. Having been around the system for 25 years, I've never known it so bad, and every day you peel back another layer, I was seeing more and more problems. I'm in the business of fixing the problems, and I think over the last 12 months we've made big strides very quickly to make sure we have a far more sustainable and healthy prison system.

When it comes to Parc and your comments on food, when I went around the prison—I always try and spend time one-on-one with prisoners in their cells talking to them—food was raised as an issue then, and I remember talking to the team about it, and I think they're exploring options to maximise the efficiency of the main kitchen. I think there are issues around storage and where they're going to keep the food. I think the food available in the prison shop is improving, with fresh fruit and vegetables and so on. And the 21 hours in cells, I don't think that's for all prisoners, but one of the things that's really important is that we get people out doing purposeful activity—education, getting out, doing fitness and visiting family members as well—because what we want to do is to work with people so that they turn their lives around, and we need to make sure that we use all the tools that we have at our disposal to do that.

Even though all these are important, we've got to make sure that drugs don't come in as readily as they are doing, because it completely undermines the way a prison operates. Drugs come in; it creates violence; it creates debt; it undermines the stability of the prison; it leads to assaults on staff, assaults on prisoners; and it completely undermines what I'm trying to achieve.

Nobody's arguing against that. One more question from Altaf Hussain.

Yes. Thanks very much, Lord Timpson, and coming back to illicit drugs, has the Ministry of Justice provided funding for advanced drug detection technology? And given the widely reported use of drones—as you said yourself—to deliver drugs, what consideration has been given to the use of technology to establish drone exclusion zones around prisons, and what are your experiences of other prisons? Do you have the same types of problems in those as well? Thank you very much.

Sorry, can I just ask you what was your first part of the question before you came on to drones?

It was around drug detection technology.

And drone exclusion zones.

Okay, so we do have no-fly zones over our prisons at the moment, and that's legislation that we inherited. We have a number of ongoing investigations and prosecutions of people who have failed that test. But when it comes to the technology around it, I'm afraid this is not an environment where I can really talk about what we're doing. There are a number of security reasons why I can't say what we're doing, but what I can tell you is that we recognise the importance of drones. We recognise that the rapidly changing technology that we deploy and the people who bring the drones in are rapidly changing, and we need to keep on top of that. But we also recognise it is things like windows, it is things like netting, it is things like grills.

Also, you've got to come back to the point: why are people wanting to buy drugs? It comes down to serious organised crime who make a huge amount of money from very vulnerable people in the prison system, and they sell them drugs at inflated prices because that is their business. What we need to do is, also, when people come into prison, around about half of men who come into prison, and I think it's nearly 60 per cent of women coming into prison, have drug and alcohol addiction issues, so let's deal with that when we've got them in our prisons, and work with our health partners to make sure that people have the opportunity to overcome their addiction issues. That's where intensive free-living wings are really important to help people make that choice and to turn their lives around.

Okay, thank you for that. Can we now move on to progress that's been made on reducing the numbers of women in prison?

Right, thank you very much. I know that the commitment is to try to reduce the number of women in prison, but in 2023, nearly one in five women sentenced to immediate custody at Welsh courts received a sentence of one month or less. So, you have covered this to some extent, but what steps are being taken to reduce the reliance on short-term sentences and to promote community-based alternatives, and what is actually happening now in order for that to be achieved?

Well, obviously, as I said before, it's up to our independent judiciary to decide how people are sentenced, but what was clear from being at Eastwood Park, when the average stay in prison is 46 days, that a large number of women—I think it's 75 per cent of women—are sentenced to less than 12 months in prison, and we know the implications of that. Over half of women in prison are mums, and what happens to their kids, whether they go into care or go and live with relatives, but that makes it even more challenging for the children. And going back to when I was growing up, a lot of the foster children who lived with us were very challenging because of issues around attachment and the fact that their mothers weren't there to love them and care for them.

So far as the sentencing review that was led by David Gauke, there's a clear presumption against short sentences in less than exceptional circumstances, and this has a significant impact, I think, on women, and this is where the Women's Justice Board also comes in. Obviously, we've got more work to do; we've got to publish our plan, we've got to make sure the allocations from the spending review are considered and evidence based, but I think our goals of closing a women's prison and making sure we divert more women away from prison are really sound and very important.

Can I give you the example of the intensive supervision court in Birmingham, which I think is fantastic? It is just for women, and what happens is it's a way of encouraging women to not go to prison, and instead to work with the probation staff, mental health support teams, accommodation teams, and to get more robust, and to overcome their challenges, so they can stay out of prison once and for all. So, basically what happens is they work with one judge, who they often see, what starts off once a week, once a fortnight, then it goes to once a month. But if they don't stick to their side of the bargain and work with all the key support team around them, then they go to prison. The results, whilst it's still early days, are really, really encouraging, and from having seen women who come up from the cells looking pretty broken and very ill, to seeing those who've been working with the intensive supervision court for six months, they look like completely different people. These are people who are still on a journey, but they're making huge strides. And for a number of people, and especially some women, working with an intensive supervision court and not being in prison can often be far more challenging than having a respite from prison. We always need to think about domestic abuse and also how that links with their families, but we are very clear: we want to see fewer women in prison, we want to divert more women away from the criminal justice system, and we want to help women who are often victims themselves to overcome their challenges, so we don't see the revolving door go on and on and on.

Perhaps if I could add a couple of Welsh elements into that. I don't know whether the Cabinet Secretary referred to it earlier, but in Wales, we've got a joint Welsh Government and Ministry of Justice women's justice blueprint. That is in place across Wales. We have got diversion schemes in all four police force areas in Wales. We co-commission services, including the One Wales service. We've got seven unique women's partnership integration co-ordinator roles across Wales and many other initiatives. So, there is quite a strong element, I think, of work on women in Wales across both the Welsh Government and HMPPS.

But nevertheless, the number of women who are anticipated to go into prison is going up. I was in Westminster when Jean Corston produced her report, and how many years ago is that? And we haven't made substantial progress. So, I'd like to have some sort of concrete way of hearing how you're going to go forward.

Well, I don't think any other—. We've been in Government for a year now. I don't think there's ever been a women's justice board set up. I don't think there's ever been a Lord Chancellor who stood up and said, 'I want to close a women's prison and I want to see fewer women in prison.' Jean Corston's report is still something that resonates and is very, very important today. What is clear is we do need to have a very evidence-based plan, which I think the women's justice board will deliver us, that is very clear that there are too many women going to prison, they need to be diverted away and then they need to be supported, and they need to be able to have that opportunity to overcome what are often severe mental health and addiction issues, so they can look after their kids and be at home.

I think we need to move on. Are there any further questions that need to be asked on probation? We have touched on—

Yes, just the one question about the recruitment drive to have 1,300 new probation officers by 26 March. I wondered how many of those would be in Wales and if you could tell us whether there are any particular issues in recruiting probation officers in Wales.

I'll hand over to Ian for the details on that, but I'll just give you—. Our first goal was to recruit 1,000 probation officers in the first year in Government. We recruited 1,054, so now, you're right, we're recruiting 1,300. I think it's a fantastic job for people to do, and when I meet our probation staff, they are so passionate about what they do, but also frustrated because of the clunkiness of the technology and also the number of complex processes that we've put in place to make it more difficult for them. But I also think it's important not just to keep recruiting really good people, but also to retain really good people as well. So, when it comes to those specific points, Ian, on Wales, do you know the details?

I won't give you a number, with the danger of being wrong, so we can confirm that if that's okay, but we are getting a proportionate amount as part of the recruitment—those 1,300 training probation officers, and indeed other recruitment that's gone on in relation to training probation officers. What I would say, though, is that in Wales we are quite well blessed in terms of our staff in posts. We do not have significant vacancies against staff in post in Wales, particularly in probation officer roles.

Can you let us know how many have been recruited in Wales?

How many have been recruited to date?

Out of the 1,300?

How many in Wales?

It's a very difficult question to answer like that. Over the course of the last five years, there have been in excess of 5,000 training probation officers recruited. They are recruited based on where vacancies are lying—[Inaudible.]

I think we meant out of the 1,300. Out of the new recruits, the 1,300—

Perhaps you could write to us. I appreciate this is a detailed question you wouldn't have to hand.

Yes. Clearly, I have got those numbers, but I don't have them at my fingertips, I'm afraid. But we can confirm that anyway.

Okay, thanks.

Thank you. Jane Dodds.

Thank you. Lord Timpson, we're incredibly grateful to you for your time, but I think one of the frustrations, certainly, I'm feeling, and I don't know if this is the same with my colleagues on this committee, is that many of us know a lot about the justice system here in Wales—we've visited the prisons and some of us have worked with the youth justice system. There are two areas I just really wanted your final comment on. We did expect more information on the devolution of youth justice and probation, including executive powers, and we are a little bit stunned to hear that there may be a bit of backtracking over what has been a very evidence-led position on the development of the women's residential centre in Swansea. So, I just really wanted to allow you just one final comment, if that's okay. We really are grateful for your time, but we really want to see how these things are going to move on. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Thank you. On youth justice, the youth justice team and the Welsh Government teams are working well together. I know one meeting has been done, and then I'm not sure when the next meeting is, but we can confirm that in writing to you. Insofar as the Swansea residential centre is concerned, I've had a number of conversations with colleagues about it and I've been really clear that we're waiting on the allocations process to go through on this and a number of other issues. But the Women's Justice Board—even though we haven't published what the plan is yet because we're still working on it, we're very clear that residential and non-residential centres have a very important part to play for very vulnerable women, often to keep them with their children. And if you look at the example of Hope Street down in Southampton, that is a world-class establishment that is making a big difference to a small number of women. And we just need to make sure that we can secure money in the allocations process and that it is value for money and it does the job that we need of supporting very, very vulnerable women to help them live a normal life.

Thank you. Adam Price.

I'd just like to comment very briefly. One of the key recommendations of the Thomas commission in relation to probation was the creation of a Welsh national probation service. Do you accept the logic of the Thomas commission's argument that, actually, the people who are best placed to run the probation service in Wales are the people of Wales and their representatives, both professionally and democratically, and that we have relevant knowledge, and also the integration, as we've heard, across health, housing, education, and that's best run on a Welsh basis, rather than from Whitehall?

Well, we are really clear that, you know—. I'm pleased we're exploring the co-commissioning and you're talking to colleagues in greater Manchester. I'm also clear that I need to stabilise what is a very challenging service at the moment. We need to stabilise it, then we know where we are, and then I think that's when we can consider what our further options are.

The Welsh Government, in its own youth justice blueprint, women's justice blueprint, has stressed the importance of bringing what you might call, I suppose, Welsh values to bear on the justice portfolio, and particularly talking about a public health approach, talking about a trauma-informed approach to justice. Are you on the same page as them in relation to their vision of a different kind of justice policy in the future?

I think we've been very clear that what we're trying to do is have a sustainable system. We've had the Leveson review, which we're considering and has just been published last week, the Gauke review, and we are hoping to adopt the vast majority of that, as long as it goes through legislation. So far as trauma-informed—. I'm a big fan of the work of Stephanie Covington and her work around how we support the most vulnerable women in the justice system who are affected so much by trauma, and having been on the other side of it and seen how it affects their children, I know how important it is to do that.

I've come into this job to try and reform the system I'm so passionate about. I am very assured that we're following the evidence, that we have got these two big reviews done, we've had a successful spending review and what we are doing is trying to develop a sustainable justice system that makes sure that it operates in a way that when people join us, when they come into the system, they only come in once, and that's really what I'm passionate about and what I'm trying to deliver.

Will you provide us, as part of your commitment on data, the reoffending rates for Wales, so we can actually hold you to account, and also to help us to devise our policy in future, when these policy areas are devolved finally?

Yes, sure. I'll ask officials to sort that. One of the reasons why I asked for reducing reoffending to get into my job title is because, basically, that's what we're trying to do. We need to have a system that reduces reoffending, because if we don't do that we're not getting anywhere.

Okay. Thank you very much.

Thank you. I wondered if we could have specific focus on HMP Berwyn, because that was set up originally as a rehabilitation prison. But I'm afraid it's just descended into being the same old holding centre for people who then go on to reoffend.

Sorry, do you mind if I just ask a point of clarification on how much longer you require me for?

We understand that you've got to go and vote in the House of Lords, so we appreciate that you're unable to stay any further. But I just wanted to say in the written response—

I'm happy to answer your question on Berwyn. Would you like me to answer your question on Berwyn?

Yes. I'd love you to, yes.

I've been to Berwyn probably more times than any other prison, apart from Styal, over the years, and I've seen it from when it was a building site to now it's a very full prison. It is a challenging prison. We've had a number of very capable governors running it, and there is a new governor there who starts in August. And, in fact, one of the foster children who used to live with us, she's actually a prison officer there. So, I still get a bit of inside information on what's going on. There are a number of challenges there, with the challenging prison population we have and the capacity issues that we have. I think there's been some really, really good work on employment. The employment advisory board there was one of the first I set up four years ago, and is making big inroads on employment, but we do have issues with instability and drugs, and violence levels.

Okay. It would be very helpful if your officials could give us some more detail on the numbers. That would be very helpful—

Yes, sure.

I thank you both for your time. We will send you a transcript of our questions and your answers to ensure that you're happy that we have captured your information correctly. Thank you for your time. We hope that this is going to be the first of several, but we appreciate that, as Minister for criminal justice, you have a large portfolio.

Thank you very much, and thank you, Ian, too. Thank you.

We now have four papers to note. Are Members content to note them? Yes.

Can I ask that we now move into private session for the rest of this meeting and, indeed, for the meeting we are holding next Monday?

The Equality and Social Justice Committee is very pleased to have this pre-appointment hearing for the national adviser for violence against women, gender-based violence, domestic abuse and sexual violence. I'm very pleased to welcome Johanna Robinson, who is the candidate selected by the Welsh Government as their preferred candidate. Thank you very much for coming along and for also providing us with the paper that you have outlining your current role and your intentions for the future. I'll ask Jane Dodds to start the questioning.

Thank you, Chair. I'm going to ask my questions in Welsh. Thank you very much for your time. So, a question, hopefully, that will be easy for you to answer: in the time that you've been in your role, in your opinion, what have you achieved during that time?

Okay. Thank you very much. Yes, hopefully that's easy. I don't know if any of it's easy in a situation like this, but I'm really, really pleased to be here today. I'm really grateful for the opportunity to have these questions put to me and to be able to respond. I think I've achieved a number of things. I think this is the third term, isn't it, that I've just completed of the national adviser role, so still I think it's relatively new in terms of testing some of the areas of the role.

First and foremost, I think I have personally raised the profile of the role. I think I've been quite broad in my engagement with that, with the specialist sector, with public services, with survivors across Wales, and also within the media space. I have always responded to any media calls regarding reports or anything, but I've also worked with journalists to create stories as well. One of those centred on my own experience, but expanded to the issue of violence against women, domestic abuse and sexual violence across Wales, and included areas of work that are happening in Wales. It also looked at strangulation, and also looked at other areas creating pressure. I responded around issues that we've seen within the public arena where violence against women has happened in institutions across Wales, sadly.

And then, within my role, I think we need to understand there are limitations to the role—a lot of the powers within the role are those gifted to you by Ministers within Government. So, a lot of it is by negotiation, is by reputation, is by developing relationships. I believe that I have been open in developing those relationships for the purpose of the role, and for furthering the issues and the understanding of the issues, and I have been challenging around that where necessary.

I think, very specifically, the seeing of the progress of that has been more towards the end of this current term, which I hope to further push on in the second term. We now have the women's health plan, which is a huge opportunity. That's a 10-year plan. I believe that I personally ensured that there was violence against women and domestic abuse within that plan; it's priority 7. When I first started within the role, I looked across Government for opportunities for where violence against women, domestic abuse and sexual violence should be placed. Health is so important to survivors that we have to have it there. Survivors will tell you that is where they most frequently seek support; that is also most frequently where they're failed. We know that women's health and violence against them is so intrinsically placed together. I saw that there'd been the quality statement for the women's health plan. There was mention of violence against women, domestic abuse and sexual violence at the very end of that. That was hugely disappointing to me, when I looked across the stakeholders to see who'd been part of it, who I would have thought would have brought the expertise to that. It hadn't happened. But I was very fortunate, as there was a huge openness to that. So, when I engaged with officials around the absence of that, I was invited to write a paper, and that paper was taken into the group, to work on this, and I formed part of that. So, that became the foundation for that priority 7, the work around that, and I continue to be involved in it. I presented at the women's health plan conference.

Also, I did some work around the relationships and sex education curriculum—that being something that we talk about: healthy relationships for children and young people being a foundation for us if we're going to make progress against the Act and our ambitions more broadly in Wales for children and young people. So, I engaged with regional advisers for VAWDASV—violence against women. They were having some work around the RSE curriculum, with it being raised to them that the offer was not as consistent as they would like it. The Welsh Government funds the Spectrum programme, which is very good, but it isn't available everywhere and it would be too expensive. So, I did a piece of work to engage with teachers, RSE leads, went into schools, went across different areas in Wales, to find out what was happening. The biggest thing I was told was that teachers didn't have confidence in this area, and some of them were refusing to teach it because they didn't have the training in this. I shared a paper that provided some recommendations to the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice, Trefnydd and Chief Whip and the Cabinet Secretary for Education, and now we will see that there is a £4.4 million investment in the RSE curriculum. So, I believe that I've contributed in that way.

Maybe another area—. My own experience was in university, so, for me, that's been a bit of a passion and a push. We've had an opportunity with the creation of Medr, for the regulatory body and funding body as translating from the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales, to go further in this space. If you're a university student, a young woman, you're four times more likely than somebody in the general public—a woman generally—to be sexually harassed or have experienced sexual violence. So, it is a significant area. We are now working very closely with Medr around a framework, around improving the guidance that will hopefully protect that.

So, those are a few areas I think I can show where I've demonstrated some impact in this sphere.

Just one further question. Looking back, and now looking forward to the future, what lessons have you learned from the past that you would take forward into the role in the future, if you do get appointed?

Yes, if I get appointed. Obviously, as you grow in a role, and you grow with your own confidence in this. Some people will come into roles like this and they will be bold and brave from the beginning perhaps. I'm different, and I think, whilst there will be weaknesses, that there are also strengths, because I'm very human. And I think, to be the adviser in this capacity, with who you need to engage with, that's really important.

I think I now understand the approach to persuade Government and public services. And, actually, if I am to do this role, I will only have the four years; I won't have another opportunity. That is where I would want to make the greatest impact—that we have a true cross-Government approach to this and that we also have our public services that are really engaged in this. So, that's where I will be centring my commitment, my energy, and I think that comes with a requirement for more challenge. So, I think that I now, particularly as I won't be job sharing anymore—. There's been a benefit to sharing the role; now it will only be me. Having worked in the blueprint structure, and there's been a lot of evidence building, and that kind of thing, we have to now look at—. This committee did its inquiry and came up with 'How we must all play our part'. We have to see that now. Now is the time. So, I think, for me, using all of the evidence and using my own, now, relationships, and the limited powers that I have, that's what I intend to do next, and that's my commitment.

I just want to follow up on how you're going to work with public bodies, because, obviously, you're applying for the role of national adviser as one individual, advising one Minister, endeavouring to influence the whole of Government on something that is endemic, unfortunately. I have a particular interest in pregnant women, and we, obviously, are all aware that your chances of suffering domestic violence increase massively when you're pregnant, which is such a tragedy. How well do you think that the NHS, and particularly midwives, are accurately pinpointing people who may be vulnerable to domestic violence?

I think we'll have varied practice across Wales. Some of this will depend—. We obviously have 'ask and act', through the Violence Against Women, Domestic Abuse and Sexual Violence (Wales) Act 2015, and the guidance with that. But, within health and with midwives and health visitors, they will also do routine enquiry. They should be asking every woman.

One of the issues, I believe, that exists with any of that is if you're not confident in the response, in the act that follows the ask, you won't be confident in asking, which will either mean you don't ask, or you ask in a way that doesn't really commit and convey that confidence that we know anyone who's experienced domestic abuse or sexual violence will need. Many women will need to be offered that many times before they will have the confidence to say it. We know that it takes eight times to report before we leave, but also how many times will a woman stumble and struggle to actually say the words? So, I don't believe we have it consistently, and we don't have the data that tells us that it's consistent. I'll be told, 'We don't have the resources, we don't have the time to record it', but we need to come up with something. So, for me, this is really important, going into the second term. But also, as we come to the end of the current strategy, what are we going to do to make that extra difference?

One thing I'm particularly interested in, which I think links in with your area of interest, is that, when we look at looked-after children who are nought to four, 30 per cent of those will be because of domestic abuse. The other children who are significantly in that group will be for mental health issues and substance misuse, where we know that domestic abuse or sexual violence will be in those numbers as well; it just might not be the primary presenting or it might not be the point of disclosure. I've just started to look at what the arrangements are that we have for those babies, for those families, and, actually, is it an all-family approach? Are we following—? So, we might follow the woman, because we also know that women will have babies to replace the baby they've lost. They won't just stop at one, because they will be grieving, they will look to replace that. So, we might be following the women, but we might not be following the men perhaps as much as we should—the perpetrators. But what are we doing to rebuild that family? What are we doing to make that strengths-based approach in that? Health will have a part to play in it, social services will have a part to play in that, our wider family services will have a part to play in that. It's about the ask. Of course it's about the asking, which, as I've said, I'm not sure that we're consistent in. I would want to see if the training is working. The national training framework is being reviewed at the moment. Are we actually asking the right questions of the functionality of that? But I think we have a distinct issue in the offer, which will affect the ask. So, let's have a look at that offer and make sure that professionals feel confident. Because I know that—I was speaking to professionals—they feel guilty if they get somebody to disclose and then they don't feel that they can—. You know, 'Oh, you're on a waiting list now' or, 'I'm not sure what response you're going to get'. They will feel a guilt with that, which will prevent them from asking again.

And how confident are you that the training that public servants should be doing to make them comfortable to ask this question, particularly if they may have experienced domestic or sexual violence themselves, how confident are you, or how would you test that, that all those who need to be keeping these issues in their minds when they're dealing with the public, that they've had enough support to enable them to overcome the trauma that they've had themselves, to ask that without reliving that trauma?

Yes. As I understand it, we have issues with the numbers who will be trained to do the training, and then we're asking people to do this on top of their day job, so attending any training is hard. I don't know that we've actually asked people enough about the efficacy of that training once they attend it, and the arrangements that they have in place. We often talk about Live Fear Free being a go-to place. Sometimes, people need that in-the-moment support, don't they, which is going to be really hard in our NHS services. So, how do we enable that better? What else can we do? I think it's a really important question that we need to look at further.

It's a different arena to midwifery, but I have heard that in one of the health boards in Wales, around sexual health, they do a routine enquiry, and they record it, and they do full health assessments after it if somebody discloses. So, maybe we have an area of good practice there that can be teased out a bit and looked at, and see how we might replicate some of that good practice in other departments.

In the women's health plan, we have an opportunity to look at that training further, to gather further evidence. So, I have asked colleagues who are leading on that work to give suggestions of where we might look at some evidence to build on, because I also believe that health boards are not looking at this within their strategic planning processes; they're not looking at this in their broad needs assessments of their population; they're not seeing that the women might have these issues. So, we're separating it off to a very small pool of people, and not opening it up to that wider experience across health services. It happens, because survivors tell us that.

Okay. And just lastly from me, there was an issue with one local authority I'm familiar with where the support and training to reflect on the reasons why a child may be removed into the care system, to ensure that they understood the reasons for it, that was cancelled and they were planning to bring that in-house, which felt a really uncomfortable thing, given that they were also the organisation that had brought that child into care. How do you know that those women or parents who suffer that are getting the support they need to understand that there are particular reasons why it was thought that the child needed to be taken away from them?

So, the parents themselves?

Yes.

Honestly, I'm not confident that it is consistently explained. I think we will see varying practice across Wales. I know from work I've done around family court processes that some local authorities have invested in particular training, which is externally provided, that they have said, around explaining and understanding family court and the processes around that, which I think can be somewhat similar in that women were blamed in family court for their experiences of abuse, that that is particularly effective. So, we don't have the same practice across Wales; we don't have the same training for our social workers across Wales.

We also know, in some pockets, we have a higher number of agency staff. That's not to say that they're not trained effectively, but they're less likely to have had consistent training, aren't they, and the time they're going to spend in that local authority and their commitment to that local authority and development within that is going to be limited. So, I think we have some significant issues in making sure there is that consistency and that social workers understand the dynamics of this.

I know, again, through the family court work we look at now, in Wales, we had pathfinder projects for family courts. So, as compared with England, in Wales now we have these pathfinder services across the whole of Wales, and that has been significant in shifting culture both of social workers, of Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service workers, of judges, of people working within the courts. So, we need something that brings that consistent approach and understanding, so that we're not blaming families, that we are understanding some of the dynamics and the reasons, and also accepting their grief and their bereavement, and how that might translate.

In my engagement with women involved in the criminal justice system, a woman told me, 'They told me if I took drugs, they would take my children away, and they took my children away so I took more drugs.' And we could get caught up in a whole blame circle for that, couldn’t we, and that doesn’t help her, and it doesn’t help her children. And when that was removed—. And, actually, for her, going into therapeutic services within the prison environment—appallingly—was where she was able to take stock and make some different decisions, but also get the support to make those decisions, and that was when the judgment was removed from her.

So, we need to do those things that enable people to engage with services that they feel rejected by, I feel, quite often, and to open the door into them. And, actually, in engaging with the local authority in Swansea, what I heard there was the constant effort for social workers to continue to have a relationship with that family, recognising there will be continued vulnerabilities. So, even where women may feel that that service doesn’t have anything to offer them, that they are looking after the children of that family, and they will continue to try to work with the woman. And I think that’s what it takes. It takes that continued effort to make that relationship. Even when we feel that barriers are there, we need to continue to do that, but it has to be in a blame-free environment. And, I think, for too long, that hasn’t existed.

Thank you. Can I ask Julie Morgan to ask her questions?

Thanks very much. Prynhawn da. You’ve been working alongside Yasmin as a job share—

Yes.

—and I know she’s led significant work, working with black and minoritised ethnic women, in different areas such as female genital mutilation, forced marriage. And I wondered: have you been part of that work as well, or how will you take it forward?

So, not all of the work, but some of it, and I am aware of all of it, and I have the relationships that are required to be able to pick up the work that I haven’t done. So, for example, Yasmin has led on the honour based abuse leadership group, but in terms of engaging across the sector, I have frequently been with BAWSO, as our main specialist service in this area, at their conferences, at their seminars and so on, and presented on a range of areas.

I have equally made sure that we have good representation of black, Asian and minoritised women in our survivor scrutiny voice and involvement panel, and I’m confident that, again, I have the relationships that are required to be able to do this work further. I believe that I have the trust of those who are involved in this—and have been told as much—so that I can do that work, because it’s hugely important, obviously.

And how would you enable black, Asian and minoritised ethnic women to have a say in the development of policy?

So, it was really important to both Yasmin and I that we made sure that there was representation on the national survivor panel. And we have that. So, that’s one place where, obviously, the survivor panel is there to provide the survivor lived experience to policy, but also we have a lot of survivor forums across Wales, and it's making sure, for me, now, in this role on my own, that I engage with those.

But I also think that, for people, for survivors, who have barriers to accessing specialist services or engaging in things, the responsibility would be on me to make sure that I’m taking that engagement more widely. So, rather than only the violence against women, domestic abuse and sexual violence specialist services, there are other community organisations where I should be making sure that if they want to have links with me, and engage with me, I can be invited to their forums and so on. And when I have been around and about, and been in different situations, there is always an opportunity to engage.

I believe that I am—. That’s why I’ve spoken about my personal experience, because that creates a place to engage and to create trust, if you do it right. And I don’t do it because it’s about me; it’s about people having that confidence and trust in me, who have lived experience. And wherever I go, women will tell me of their experiences. And that will be women from many different communities across Wales, who we don’t see represented generally, and who often feel that they can’t go to certain services, particularly some of our public services, and disclose their experiences. So, I will continue to do that, and that’s very important to me to do so.

Thank you.

Thank you very much. Mick Antoniw.

I was very pleased to hear some of the comments you were making about the pathfinder project, and of course one of the functions of your role is going to be engaging with the justice system. That's essentially not devolved, although many of the functions and consequences of the system actually are. How is your relationship with the justice system? What are your experiences so far with pathfinder? And what views do you have as to how that might develop? We did have, for example, the family drug and alcohol court project in Cardiff. It sadly didn't continue for funding, but maybe that will get restored. Do you have a particular view of things that need to change within that system in order to fulfil your responsibilities?

Yes. For you to be aware, I sit on the Criminal Justice Board for Wales's victim and witness taskforce, so I have a way into that particular area. That's how I got involved in the family court work and the pathfinder work. I took part in a scrutiny process of the pathfinder before it extended across Wales.

I have relationships with all of the police and crime commissioners' offices. I used to work in Gwent, so I have a particular relationship there. But at the moment, the blueprint is run across policing in Wales and Welsh Government, so there is already that link there. I'm confident—. I've been to all of the forces. Also, we have the policing Wales team, so I can go to them and ask them for particular information, and I did recently regarding any possible prosecutions around abortion when that concern was raised recently.

When we consider looking at data, at the moment a lot of the data that we're looking at in terms of national indicators for this is around the criminal justice arena. We need to look beyond that. So, exactly as you've said, there's an interconnection between the two, so how do we make sure that our data tells us everything about what's going on for people in Wales, not just in one arena? I also sit on the UK violence against women and girls strategy advisory board, because that's where criminal justice sits, and I also engage frequently with the Domestic Abuse Commissioner for England and Wales, because justice sits within her responsibilities for Wales. So, I think across all of those areas, I have engaged and can and do engage.

One area of concern is the criminalisation of women who experience domestic abuse, so we need to look at that. That is something that's going to come up in the UK VAWG strategy, so we need to look at how that links in with our work in Wales. Obviously, we have the women's justice blueprint as well, and that's looked at things like brain injury and so on, so there are all of those links across those areas. I feel very much that I am aware of them, and I'm knowledgeable about them, and I know where to engage and have the relationships, and I have, during this time, been asked by HM Courts and Tribunals Service, by the Crown Prosecution Service and so on, to attend meetings and engage in that way. So, I think there have been lots of opportunities, because we all realise we've all got to work with this in some way.

Thank you. Some of those issues you raised are ones we've been considering. I suppose, ultimately, the success of your role is dependent on the extent to which you're able to engage with all those third sector bodies and maintain public confidence, I suppose Government confidence, and also, particularly importantly, victims' confidence as well. Of course, that requires quite a powerful role of leadership and, indeed, independence. How do you see that sort of analysis fitting in?

Yes. I think it's really important, isn't it? As national adviser, you're expected to be a leader. You're expected to be an expert in this area, and quite right too. I take very seriously, within my role—. It is to advise, and 'Ministers' is the language in the Act, and to engage with public services to also provide advice on behalf of Ministers. But that advice has to be independent, doesn't it? I can't be seen to be swayed to being a voice of Government; it's a different thing entirely, and it has to be based on the expertise I have, the experience I have, the work that I do to have that understanding. So, the engagement, most importantly, has to be in our public services, people working in public services with our specialist sector, who have the most frequent experiences with survivors, and with survivors themselves. And my job is to make sure that I am amplifying their voice, that I am bringing that expertise and understanding into our public services so that people are getting what they want.

I feel really proud that we've had the survivor voice, scrutiny and involvement panel, and they have been really good at making sure that the simple but really important questions are asked. And my job is also to bolster and support them. And I think that really helps in the independence, because they're not interested in Government, they're not interested in who is who, particularly, and they don't need to have the confidence of any one particular body; they want things to be right. Their commitment to the panel is around changing things for the future so that their children won't be facing the same things, that, in future generations, women don't continue to have the experiences that they have. And, for those of them who are mothers of sons, you can see that they feel very strongly. They want a different experience for their children. And I have found that hugely beneficial in keeping on track, really, as to where we need to head with this, and one of the things that they will persistently ask for is pathways. They want to know: if anybody goes in anywhere across Wales, what will happen? If they were to disclose, how would they be understood? How would their experiences be understood?

So, that's a really simple but powerful message, and I think, in terms of my leadership, that's what I want to find out very specifically in the next term: can we provide that reassurance? Can we be confident that if anybody—women, men and children—were to disclose this experience, that they would have the right response? It doesn't have to be a complicated response, but would they have the right response, would they have a trusted and confident response? And in my role, independently, I have to keep on the track of, 'That's the right thing to do.' Government and public services will need to consider resources, budgets and the 'how to', and obviously I can support that in best practice and all of those kinds of things, but I have to be resolute in, 'That's the ask.' We need to make a difference. The Act has been around for 10 years. We need to be far stronger in making sure that we can demonstrate the impact of that Act in the next 10 years, and that's the thing that I'm committed to for these next four years.

Thank you very much.

Thank you. Just briefly, we did an inquiry nearly three years ago on people who had no recourse to public funds and migrant women who wouldn't necessarily speak English or Welsh. How would you ensure that people who are in the most vulnerable situation who are suffering violence are still able to get support to be able to escape that violence?

The UK Government have provided some level of response, haven't they, to women with no recourse to public funds, and the Welsh Government have enhanced that offer. I think what we need to do is to make sure that that response is fitting with what women and families now tell us they need. Some of that, as I understand, is that we need more flexibility and that, sometimes, the arrangements are also too restricted—that we're asking women with no recourse to public funds to stay in accommodation that we wouldn't ask of a woman who was entitled to public services. So, we need to be really careful of that, that our response is not also an unsafe response, when we're talking about safety.

The violence prevention unit have also done a significant amount of work in looking at migrant women's experiences and asylum seeking women, and what we know is that barriers to support for them are still very strong, that they don't know how to seek services. I think BAWSO have a particular—. For me, it was really shocking, as it was something that I hadn't considered: a woman not knowing about 999. So, a woman coming here, she was on a spouse visa and the GP told her, 'Call 999.' She hadn't heard of it. So, we need to think about that. What happens if you have no idea of the framework, the services in which you live? How do we make that possible? Again, it will be health, won't it? We know, and for this woman it was; it was the GP. So, we really need to invest in the places where we know people are most likely to be, who are the least visible, because they will be kept away from community, they will be kept away from services. How do we find the ways to let those people know safely that services are available to them? And I think it really is understanding that reality, to imagine coming and knowing nothing. How do we step that? And I do think our health services are one of the most critical ways to do that.

Thank you. Altaf Hussain.

Thank you very much. When we hear the challenge, really, what new challenge or opportunities will the national adviser face over the next few years, and what plans will you put in place to address them? In particular, I'm interested that over 20 per cent of the population, males, are suffering domestic abuse. So, it doesn't indicate whether you're looking after the males as well, or it will be—. So, I'd be interested in knowing about that.

Of course. I was in a different role, obviously, when the Act was drafted and then implemented, but the reason that it is drafted, you know, and the title is the way it is, is to be inclusive of men, recognising that men experience domestic abuse and sexual violence. So, one of the challenges of being national adviser is the limited powers. I'm not a commissioner; I don't have a team. You know, if you look at the wording of the Act, a lot of what I can do is through the Ministers. So, I need the Ministers to be on board, and then when you ask about independence, that becomes a bit of a complicated picture, doesn't it? One of the few powers I have, I think, directly on my own is to be able to write to public services and ask for information, and that's something I'd like to consider early on in the next term, because I think a challenge for me is about how to get the public services to do more in this space. A challenge for all of us is how do we get the public services. It's something that is recognised by Government at the moment. It is something that's a priority within the work currently amongst officials. We've had workplace harassment conferences for public service leaders. We haven't had the leaders there; we've had delegated members of those organisations there. So, a challenge for me is how do I push that further, because, as I've said, we need to have our public services across Wales responding to this better.

Violence against women, domestic abuse and sexual violence doesn't sit in a vacuum. We've talked about health services, talked about school, local authorities. It happens on transport—young women have told me about being harassed. It happens in gyms. It's everywhere. It's in the workplace. It's everywhere. So, we need that entire policy work to be understanding and embracing of that and respond to that. For me, a challenge is how do I push that further, how do I challenge that with weight, with an understanding. I have ideas how to do it. Obviously, as I've said, within the Act, I can write to those public services, and I intend to do so, and that will give an evidence base for further response, and then I need to look to the Minister to work around that as well.

A significant challenge will be—. You talk about men, and we've talked about black, Asian and minoritised women. We haven't mentioned today that disabled people are more likely to experience, and LGBTQ+ people are more likely to experience violence against women, domestic abuse and sexual violence. We have a resource challenge across everywhere, don't we? And it is very hard to make a case for services when you have smaller numbers. We don't have enough services anywhere, and our services are facing more pressure and threats than they have ever before. We know that services are reducing the numbers who they support, or they are doing it in their own time. We have, you know, people who are deeply committed trying to do this work.

Have you had any chance of visiting Jonathan's House in the last three years?

Jonathan's House? No.

Thank you.

Okay. Thank you very much indeed. I think there are no more questions from Members, so we thank you very much indeed for your time, and also for the enthusiasm that you show for the position. We'll let the Welsh Government know as quickly as possible, so that you're not left hanging.

Okay. Thank you very much for your time. I really appreciate it. I don't know if you heard, but I thought it was—gosh, I'm going to get emotional—really important—. One thing I would say is I don't think we talk about it enough, so I thought it was really important to have this session today, so that we we keep it on the agenda. Because if we talk about silence, if it's never talked about within the chambers, within these halls, then it doesn't exist, because we allow the invisibility. So, it's really important. Thank you.

Thank you very much indeed. Thank you. Okay. If we could now agree to move back into private session.