Yes, I guessed that would be for me. Yes. I think the rhetoric in there is fine; it's nice to have some rhetorical guarantees, and there's discussion in the plans around that CT—community transport—can carry on with franchising as appropriate, but the question does become: what is 'appropriate' in that situation?
I think there are questions in terms of a lot of this is on trust, and there is the how it happens, whether there's a percentage of routes set out for SMEs, perhaps at each local authority level, because the diversity of the markets will be different in different parts of Wales, so there is a need to understand the capacity that's theirs. As mentioned earlier, there are places that struggle to actually get operators. So, we need to outline those opportunities, and for that to happen, we need to be quite clear on what the offer is. And I think, at the moment, I'd have to say, given that the timeline by TfW is that in 2027 the franchising will go out in south-west Wales, well, in order to prepare for a franchise, a small business doesn't have that much capacity.
There needs to be a clear timeline and there needs to be a clear idea of what's expected and what they need to build towards. And I think that's perhaps not there at the moment. It might come separately, in guidance, but I don't think a small bus operator in south-west Wales, at the moment, would know how to engage on this. So I think there are questions around that, and TfW have a key action point in developing the most appropriate mechanisms for SMEs, but we need to see what that actually looks like.
I think it's important as well to ensure that the routes for smaller operators are decent routes—they're good, profitable, valuable routes, that they're not the cast-offs, if you like. They're perhaps not the words I should use, but you know what I mean. And I think that's really important.
I guess, there are a few other questions around franchising, about how the seven years work. Do those operators have a huge cliff edge where they can lose a contract, or they have to work for one time in seven years to get to a contract? And I think there are questions around the flexibility within that seven-year period as well. So, in terms of that side, CPT have mentioned, for example, different contracting arrangements, the differences being the gross-cost or net-cost version, and that the operator would have to follow the route as set. Whereas in the minimum-subsidy model, there's an element—they were pointing towards Jersey; they will be the experts on this—where there is room for them to make proposals to change routes.
That's important to use the local knowledge and embeddedness of those smaller companies, perhaps, to actually be able to identify, locally, what's needed, where the needs are, what the business needs are. One of the advantages of small businesses in disparate parts of Wales is actually that local knowledge. So, I think having that flexibility to be able to do that, with the checks and balances—you can't just change everything willy-nilly—is important as well.