Therefore, we move to item 5 on the agenda, which is a debate on the Children, Young People and Education Committee’s inquiry into the education improvement grant: Gypsy, Roma and Traveller, and minority ethnic children. I call on Lynne Neagle to move the motion.

Motion NDM6296 Lynne Neagle

To propose that the National Assembly for Wales:

Notes the Children, Young People and Education Committee Report on the Inquiry into the Education Improvement Grant: Gypsy, Roma and Traveller, and Minority Ethnic Children which was laid in the Table Office on 21 February 2017.

Motion moved.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. As I outlined in my statement to the Chamber on 25 January, the Children, Young People and Education Committee is engaging with stakeholders on what the main issues that we should be looking at are, and we are designing our work programme accordingly. The report we are debating today is another example of the committee undertaking an inquiry identified in our consultation on stakeholder priorities last summer.

Gypsy, Roma and Traveller children have the lowest rates of attainment of any ethnic group in Wales. Just 16 per cent achieved the level 2 threshold inclusive—i.e. five or more GCSEs at grades A* to C including maths and English or Welsh—between 2013 and 2015. Statistics published during the committee’s inquiry showed some welcome improvement, to 24 per cent between 2014 and 2016, although the gap with all pupils is still too wide at 35 percentage points. The gap with pupils eligible for free school meals, themselves a disadvantaged group, is 7 percentage points.

Black and minority ethnic learners are less of a homogenous group and the attainment picture varies considerably. Many minority groups outperform their peers, but some groups, such as black Caribbean, black African and mixed race Caribbean, attain lower than the average. These groups of learners were previously supported under two ring-fenced grants paid to local authorities—the Gypsy and Traveller children grant and the minority ethnic achievement grant. These were two of 11 ring-fenced grants that were amalgamated into a new education improvement grant, introduced in financial year 2015-16.

The EIG, as it is known, is administered by the four regional consortia. The Welsh Government’s intention at the time was to be welcomed. It wanted to create greater flexibility and realise administrative savings. However, there is clear concern about whether there is now the same level of support for Gypsy, Roma, Traveller and minority ethnic learners, and particular concerns about how the impact of the funding change is being monitored and evaluated.

A lack of proper monitoring and evaluation was the biggest concern that came up repeatedly through the evidence the committee received. The previous grants were both subject to robust monitoring and accountability systems. These have been lost with the introduction of the EIG. The Cabinet Secretary has placed considerable emphasis on the role of the regional consortia and local authorities themselves in monitoring and evaluating impact. However, the committee saw little evidence that this is happening. In fact, we were disappointed with the evidence offered by the consortia on how they monitor use and impact of the EIG, something the Cabinet Secretary acknowledged herself in oral evidence. I will come back to monitoring and evaluation shortly.

I very much welcome the positive approach the Cabinet Secretary has taken to our inquiry in her response to our 14 recommendations. I am really pleased she accepted all of our recommendations, either in full or in principle, except one, which called for an updated impact assessment on the decision to amalgamate the grants. I am disappointed that this recommendation has been rejected, as there was considerable criticism levelled at the robustness of the original impact assessment.

What concerns me and the committee, Llywydd, is the fact that no clear assessment can be made of whether the move to a single grant has had any positive or negative impact. The total value of the EIG in 2017-18 is around 13 per cent less than the last year of ring-fenced grants in 2014-15. We just don't know exactly how much of the EIG is spent on Gypsy, Roma, Traveller and minority ethnic children because expenditure is no longer tracked or monitored in this way. Our overarching recommendation is, therefore, that the Welsh Government keeps under review the funding model it uses to support these learners and reports back before the end of this Assembly.

In the meantime, the committee has recommended a number of improvements to how the EIG is monitored and evaluated. We believe the Welsh Government should issue more detailed guidance on how the grant can be used to benefit Gypsy, Roma, Traveller and minority ethnic learners beyond that which exists at present, which is not much more than high-level objectives in reference to the ‘Qualified for life’ improvement plan.

We are concerned that there has not been enough progress on producing an outcomes framework, which was intended to inform how the EIG is spent, and we urge the Welsh Government to get a much firmer grip on monitoring and evaluation to ensure that consortia and local authorities know exactly what is expected.

I am pleased that the Cabinet Secretary has committed to putting in place a more robust outcomes framework in 2017-18. I also welcome that the Welsh Government has taken on board our recommendation for Estyn to undertake a thematic review of this subject. However, the committee does have reservations about the Welsh Government’s emphasis on meeting the needs of specific groups of learners through an all-pupil approach to school improvement. As witnesses told us, inclusion doesn't mean treating everyone the same. You have to recognise that people are different and have different needs.

We believe the Welsh Government must fundamentally strengthen its focus and target funding more specifically on Gypsy, Roma and Traveller learners and ethnic groups that have lower-than-average attainment. We have made two recommendations on this, and expect to see more reference to these groups in the updated ‘Qualified for life’ plan and the ‘Rewriting the future’ strategy that is due to be published soon. In closing, Llywydd, I want to emphasise to Members that this is not an issue that can be addressed by a one-size-fits-all approach to educational improvement. Support and interventions must be tailored to the learner if we are to support every child and young person in achieving their full potential. Thank you.

Can I thank the Chair for her opening speech and commend her for the way in which she led this inquiry, and also thank on the record the clerks and the witnesses who provided evidence to the committee? I think it was important that we undertook this piece of work, and that's why the committee agreed that this should be an early priority in terms of the committee's work programme. I know all too well, and I've often criticised, the large number of grants that have been available, particularly when I was Chair of the Public Accounts Committee, and used by the Government in order to direct and deliver on their policy objectives. So, I can completely understand why the Government sought to amalgamate these grants in order to reduce the administrative burden on local education authorities and, indeed, on the Welsh Government in terms of taking things forward. But I am concerned that there’s been a lack of follow-up in terms of the Welsh Government trying to determine whether the outcomes that it wanted to achiever are still actually being delivered on the ground. That’s why we undertook this piece of work as a committee, and I was very happy to support it.

We know that educational attainment, particularly for Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities, are not as good as they should be. They have improved recently, which is a positive thing, but there’s still this huge attainment gap with their peers in schools, and that’s not good enough. We’ve got to address that. And that’s the purpose of part of this grant, as is the need to close the gap in terms of some of the different ethnic minority groups and the educational attainment and achievement of them too.

I think what really struck me was the fact that we have a patchwork of provision in Wales that is very inconsistent. I was very taken with some of the evidence that we received from Gwent, where, quite clearly, they have pretty much a gold standard in terms of what they’re able to provide in terms of support particularly for those from ethnic minorities who are moving into the locality. And I was really taken with the fact that that is adding significant value and supporting individual schools, particularly where they have no expertise available to them. But the situation was very different in other parts of Wales, and I think it’s fair to say that some of the regional consortia just do not have a grip on what’s going on in their areas and that this has been a very low priority for them. That was very concerning indeed.

I was also particularly concerned about the evidence that we received from Estyn. Estyn were very helpful in providing evidence to us; they’ve obviously done some work in the past, particularly on the Gypsy/Traveller community and their attainment levels. But what was abundantly clear was that they had produced a couple of reports with some clear recommendations in them but they had not followed those reports up. Now, frankly, for the education inspectorate not to have followed up their recommendations is completely unacceptable. They said that it was a resource issue and that’s why they hadn’t followed it up, but, frankly, I think there can be no excuse for the inspectorate not taking up this issue more vigorously both with the Welsh Government and local education authorities. So, I’d be grateful if the Cabinet Secretary could just outline what role she expects Estyn to play in the future in terms of making sure that some of the policy direction of the Government is actually being delivered on the ground and that they’re taking their responsibility as an inspectorate to do just that.

Some of the other things that are referenced in the report are the lack of support for young people post 16 who want to continue with their education. We know that having older peers is often a very important factor in supporting young people in taking an interest in their learning, and, again, particularly Gypsy/Traveller community-background young people are not going on to further education or higher education, and yet there’s no specific support for them at the moment. I’d be very interested, Cabinet Secretary—and I know I raised this during the committee proceedings with you—but I’d be very interested to know whether there’s anything that can be done within the review of student support that is under way at the moment to specifically target these groups in order to encourage active participation in post-16 learning by young people from black backgrounds in particular, Afro-Caribbean backgrounds, and the Gypsy/Traveller communities—those ones that fall well behind in terms of some of these particular outcomes.

And I think all the recommendations in the report, if they’re taken as a whole, will actually deliver some sea change in improvement in this area in the future, and no doubt the committee will want to continue to look at this in terms of outcomes in the future to see whether our recommendations have been implemented in full. I acknowledge that one of them has been resisted, as it were, but I know that the Minister’s heart is in absolutely the right place in terms of wanting to deliver some sea change. So, I would be grateful if particularly you could talk about the post-16 issue and the role of Estyn in response to the committee’s report today. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Julie Morgan.

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer, for calling me to speak in this debate on the impact on Gypsy, Roma and Traveller and minority ethnic children of merging former specialist grants into the education improvement grant. I am a member of the committee, so I’ve been able to take part in this inquiry. I’m going to concentrate my remarks on Gypsy, Roma and Traveller education, as I chair the cross-party group here in the Assembly.

Incidentally, we’ve just had a cross-party group here this lunchtime where we had children from the Gypsy and Traveller community from all over Wales, including Pembrokeshire and Torfaen, questioning the Cabinet Secretary for children and social cohesion, Carl Sargeant, about the availability of sites, about why Gypsies and Travellers are moved on and lots of very challenging questions. I think any of you who would’ve heard those young people doing those questions would know what huge potential those children have. It’s obviously our duty to ensure that they reach their potential.

At the time the grants were merged to become education improvement grants, members of that group did lobby strongly against this move, as I did myself, and my view, after taking part in this inquiry, is that it was the wrong way to go. I’m glad the Government has accepted the proposal that it should be reviewed, although of course, it has rejected, as the previous two speakers have said, the way this came about—by looking at the way the equality impact assessments were carried out—that has been rejected. Because there was strong evidence given to us that they didn’t feel that equality impact assessments had been properly carried out and we do learn a lot by looking back and seeing how things happen. So, I know that that has been rejected, but I wondered if the Cabinet Secretary could take that on board—that maybe a mistake was made here.

I was actually shocked by some of the evidence that was brought forward and I was mainly shocked by the lack of knowledge of what was actually happening in this particular area. Individuals who worked at the grass roots were passionate and they were knowledgeable about their work; people who had direct experience of working with the groups of children we were looking at—they felt very strongly that things were not going in the right direction. But the wider bodies I felt had much less knowledge and much less commitment to knowing what was actually happening. I know the wider bodies—I think the consortia, which the chair of the committee referred to—I know this is one tiny bit of their work, but if we’re going to be a fair society and if this Assembly is going to deliver for all, we have just got to look at this bit. I have to say, as I say, I was shocked that their knowledge was so poor.

It also appeared that there were no monitoring mechanisms in place to see what had been the effect of the change, and I know that the Government has said that it will agree to review the monitoring arrangements, but I think we absolutely need reassurance that this will be a meaningful review. What does it mean: ‘Yes, we will look at it again—look and see what the monitoring arrangements are like’? There has to be a specific commitment to see that that actually happens, so how will they review and how much of a priority will that be?

The last point I want to make, really, is that recommendation 14 proposes that the Travelling Ahead project, ‘Good Practice in Education: Peer Research Project’—that the Government should take forward its recommendation. The Government does agree in principle and does say it will publish it on certain websites. I really feel that there is evidence in this peer review that people need to know about. I’ve been looking at some of the recommendations in the peer review and some of these are very important. The children said, ‘We need a Gypsy teacher’. So, we need role models and we know that Gypsies do achieve very highly in many roles and the public don’t often know about that. And then, ‘I won’t be going to camp next year, because mum and dad say the school is too far away and they don’t want me to go on the bus on my own; Mum thinks I will see and learn bad things’. So, I think it’s important to understand the community background of the children that is as a result of care for the children.

And on the final three points, they said they have three top tips for schools on how to work with Gypsy and Traveller pupils. Number one is: ‘be aware of our culture’, and I think that’s got a long way to go, but that’s very important. ‘Be aware of our differences with the settled community’, and as our Chair said, one size does not fit all. We’ve got to be aware of the differences that are there. And thirdly: ‘flexible education and part-time attendance options for all pupils around Wales’, which, again, I think is something that perhaps the Cabinet Secretary could respond on.

I’m contributing instead of Llyr Huws Gruffydd, although I appreciate that Llyr would have been much more involved in the discussions than myself—I’ve actually just read the report today. I do appreciate many of the comments that have been made here today, but I think, having read the report, I may come from a different perspective on many of the issues. I agreed with what the Cabinet Secretary said about the fact that the groups are not homogeneous, and I think sometimes some of the recommendations may look upon ethnic minorities and black and other groupings in a more negative light than you anticipated. For example, it says in the report from which the Minister quoted that Indian families and similar families—. I’ve got a strong connection to Indian communities in Cardiff and I think that if we potentially nurture the fact that they are very hardworking, they’re driven, they often go into very highly driven careers—I think, perhaps, we can turn it around and say, ‘Well, how can we use the ethnic minority pupils in a positive way to share those experiences with those who may not be as successful?’, as opposed to saying, ‘Well, yes, they’re not doing as well as other pupils’ and that we need a specific thing to target them alone.

I’m conscious of wanting everybody to have fair play within the classroom, coming from a family of teachers, and I’d want to be able to allow those teachers to teach in a way that they feel that the collective in the classroom can be part of the same type of educational proposals. So, yes, I think teachers should be aware of Gypsies and Travellers and their communities; yes, I think, of course, we should be aware of different cultures, but I don’t think that we should be saying they should be taught in a different way or that they should have potentially—well, I don’t know what the specific is because I couldn’t see what the specific recommendations were in the committee report to say, ‘Well, actually X, Y and Z needs to be done for those particular groupings’.

So, for example, I’ve worked quite a lot with refugee children in Neath Port Talbot, and I’ve said to the headteachers there, ‘Well, little Johnny can’t get to school because the parents can’t afford to get there’ and they said to me ‘Well, yes, I’d like to put in extra provision for them to get here, but if I do that I have to do that for everybody.’ And I think that if we’re going to be making changes, I think we have to look at it in a wider way so that we don’t exclude anybody from any changes. I totally acknowledge that there may be very fundamental issues with different groupings of people, but I don’t know if we want to facilitate difference. I think we want to facilitate trying to collectively work together. Perhaps I’m wrong, perhaps Llyr will be annoyed with what I’m saying here today, but I think sometimes we can focus on negatives. We have to see the wealth of experience and the family backgrounds that people come from, from other countries, where, actually their work ethics, dare I say it—controversially—are better than ours. They want to get out and work, and they want to engage positively with society.

Like with any grant, I think, in a general way we need to be able to ensure that we track how positive it is and we track where the money is going. And I think if I agree with anything in the report, I agree with that. We have to understand, now that change has been made, that we are able to say, ‘Well, actually, this will lead to improvements for our young people’. But we have to acknowledge that teachers are under massive strain, and if we’re going to be putting specific proposals in as a result of this report, then it has to be done with that work pressure in mind.

Can I commend the children’s committee—the Chair in particular, but also the other Members—for producing such a lucid and apposite report? I think this is very high-quality scrutiny, and just the sort of thing that Assembly committees should be doing. The key issue, obviously, is what happens when you approach questions to increase the mainstreaming as above ring fencing. This is something that we often face in the choices we make here. In an ideal world, you do want as mainstream a system as possible, which, I think, the previous speaker, Bethan, was hinting at.

But we also know that you need very specific actions, sometimes. I have done a lot of work, over the years, on the issue of looked-after children, and there are many echoes here, particularly about the gap in achievement at GCSE and then for the future opportunities that these young people have. But I think what this committee report has really nailed is that if you do move to mainstreaming approaches, you do need very clear and effective monitoring and evaluation. Otherwise, you can lose the whole purpose of the intervention—the intervention is still desired. We may be moving from a very specific grant to a more general approach, but the need for intervention is clearly accepted. I have to say I agree with the Members—both Darren and Julie’s very eloquent contributions—that it is very worrying that the approach has been quite so slipshod amongst those who are responsible for ensuring this change occurs effectively, which, at the moment, we just don’t have the evidence to conclude that it has. So, I think it’s very, very important that we can demonstrate effective monitoring and evaluation.

There is a danger, I think, that the specific needs of minority children can be overlooked, even when there’s a clear political priority for special attention. This is something we need to be very aware of. Can I just repeat the point about the gap in achievement? I think it’s always appropriate, when we look at specific groups, to compare them to the peer population, because—and, again, reflecting earlier contributions—I think our expectations should be the same. Why on earth should we stand in front of people and say, ‘Well, those with particular needs and special circumstances—we start by just lowering the bar and the expectations that those people can be expected to achieve’? I think that’s really, really poor. The gap at the moment, with 24.5 per cent achieving the basic level at GCSE, compared with 59 per cent in the peer population, is too wide. It has closed, and it may be because the consortia are, in their own way, which we cannot demonstrate, working productively. But we’ve got to have evidence, and, anyway, I think we would all agree we want that gap closed much more considerably than that.

I do think that, in measuring the effectiveness of public policy, there is always that moment when we hear from those who have the executive responsibility to implement change that we sometimes need to move to an approach that aims at general improvement, rather than being tied down to very specific, targeted outcomes. There are times when that is the appropriate way—to be more expansive. But I do think that there’s a lot of evidence that we’re at the stage here where we need to be more targeted, and, frankly, when you’re more targeted, I think you need very good evidence to move away from a more ring-fenced funding system. But I do congratulate the work that’s been done here; I think it’s a very important contribution.

Thank you very much. I now call on the Cabinet Secretary for Education, Kirsty Williams.

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. Could I begin where David Melding left off, in thanking, most sincerely, Lynne Neagle and the members of the committee for their report? As stated by the Chair, the committee focused this inquiry on the impact of the new grant funding arrangements that were introduced in 2015-16, following the rationalisation of a number of education grants. Now, much of the evidence provided to the committee covers, in my view, long-standing issues, a number of which predate the new funding arrangements through the education improvement grant. The diverse range of opinions provided in the evidence to the committee perfectly highlights that this is a complex area where one single, consensual approach to how the challenges should be taken forward and managed does not prevail. There is validity in the various points of view expressed, and I am grateful to the committee for their hard work in drawing together the issues in such a coherent fashion for debate here today. In seeking to understand the challenges that some minority ethnic and Gypsy, Roma and Traveller learners can face in achieving their educational potential, the committee has embraced a difficult but very important area of work.

It is no surprise to Members, I hope, that I am committed to equality of opportunity and equity of provision, ensuring that all children and young people are supported to achieve their potential, regardless of their background or their personal circumstances. In opposition, as now in my role as Cabinet Secretary for Education, I have always prioritised action to ensure all children and young people have the opportunities they need and deserve to achieve that potential, and much has been achieved. But the challenge remains, as we have heard from David Melding, for some groups, significant, and there is much more to be done. It’s no exaggeration, Deputy Presiding Officer, to say that we are embarking on the single greatest educational reform since the 1960s. We’re delivering a new curriculum and assessment arrangements, and a clear strategic focus on the supporting factors that will help all our learners achieve.

In ensuring our most disadvantaged learners are supported to achieve their potential, I will be releasing a revised plan of action for education in due course, which will demonstrate my commitment to an inclusive education system, with equity of opportunity for each and every learner at its heart. I welcome the committee’s recognition of the recent improvements in performance for the vast majority of these learner groups, and that is something to be celebrated. And I thank Darren Millar for highlighting some of the good practice that exists in our education system. Yes, in Gwent, I recently had the pleasure of visiting Lliswerry school. I saw for myself the hard work that they do, but it extends beyond Gwent into, for instance, some of the work done at Monkton in Pembrokeshire, who are exemplars in how they support their children.

And a number of ethnic minority learner groups, as we’ve heard from Bethan Jenkins, already outperform the national averages, and that is to be welcomed and celebrated, as Bethan has done today. As I have said, it’s important that we recognise this complex picture. Gypsy, Roma, Traveller and minority ethnic learners do not form one homogenous group. The individual needs and attainment levels of these learners vary significantly from some of our most able and talented children to those who are achieving well under the national average. The committee recognises this in the report, and, as I said, it’s an issue I am also very aware of. But as I’ve said, the challenge is significant, and in particular in relation to those groups who stubbornly remain below the national average, and that’s why I’m pleased to see the report recognises the positive contribution of our services and schools over the years.

Our schools, our local authority support services and our regional school improvement services should have, and do in many cases, extensive knowledge and expertise in supporting these learners. I firmly believe that our strength and future success is not grounded in my office in Tŷ Hywel, but it is in the sector, working as a whole, in partnership within a self-improving system that values our teaching profession and the diversity of our society.

Moving to the committee’s recommendations—it provided 14 recommendations in its report, which provide, I believe, a clear focus for action. I have responded formally and, I believe, positively, to the committee, outlining my agreement to all but one of the recommendations. I have rejected the committee’s recommendation to revisit the equality impact assessments undertaken some years ago. I understand why the committee is disappointed at this, but as the committee makes no explicit recommendation to change the funding mechanism, I feel a separate impact assessment at this stage would not be beneficial and our efforts and those of my officials and the service are better directed in supporting and delivering on all the other committee’s recommendations, which I believe will take us forward into the future.

One of the recommendations I am particularly very strongly in agreement with, and that is that the current education performance framework is not sufficiently robust. It simply is not, and there was no hiding from that during the committee sessions. And that is why, prior to the publication of the committee’s report, I have asked my officials to strengthen the framework for the education improvement grant for schools. Over the past few months, I am pleased to say that they have worked with the regional consortia to establish an improved and much more robust outcomes framework, which will provide a focus to challenge and support local authorities and consortia on efforts to improve educational outcomes for these learners from 2017-18. The education improvement grant outcomes framework articulates what our national outcomes are, and demonstrates how, through the EIG, regional consortia strategies contribute to the delivery of these outcomes, and ensures that the EIG is having a positive impact on learner outcomes. The intention through the framework is to move away from activity-led prescription to being outcome-focused, whilst remaining sophisticated enough to draw on the activity if required. The revised framework will be published alongside the regional consortia business plans for 2017-18. I’m also pleased that Estyn has agreed to revisit the subject through a short review in 2018-19. The review will focus on progress since 2011, and its report at that time, and will consider the impact of the current services and support for these learners. That review of that report is well overdue.

What this evidence has crystallised for me, Deputy Presiding Officer, is that there is a delicate balance between supporting all learners to access the opportunities to achieve their potential and respecting and valuing the diverse nature of our communities, which helps make today’s Wales the modern and progressive society in which I—and, I hope, the majority in this Chamber—want to live. Over time, attendance has improved, educational attainment has improvement, and expectations, which are absolutely crucial, have rightly increased. And we have listened to our communities. I will indeed publish the Save the Children Travelling Ahead project peer research report on Learning Wales, and I will make it available to every school, to every local authority and every regional consortia, so that our educational professionals and service providers can consider the views put forward by the young people in their provision.

In many cases, our services have done a good job, and I want to thank them for their determination. But I now ask them to increase their efforts to ensure that more of these learners and their families feel comfortable registering their characteristics on the annual school census returns, so that I can be assured that the support available for them through school budgets and our grant funding reflects their numbers.

Darren Millar, I am hopeful that our Diamond review, our continuation of EMA and support for FE learners to address barriers will continue to provide a financial framework to encourage people into FE and HE, but expectations of those communities are key. A valuable point was made with regard to the diversity of our teaching profession. Our teaching profession is not as diverse as I would want it to be, and I will be considering, with the Education Workforce Council, what more we can do to encourage diversity in our teaching profession.

Deputy Presiding Officer, can I thank Members for their contributions this afternoon, and thank the committee once again for this valuable report? It has strengthened my arm in being able to galvanise action within the department, especially with regard to monitoring. I look forward to working alongside committee members in future work in this area.

Thank you very much. I call on Lynne Neagle, as Chair of the committee, to reply to the debate.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Can I thank all the Members who have contributed this afternoon? I think it’s been an excellent debate. Darren Millar, thank you for your contribution and for your work on the inquiry. You quite rightly highlighted the quite alarming patchwork nature, really, of the provision and the fact that we were, as a committee, unable to actually identify what was happening on the ground, which was, in itself, very worrying. I, too, am grateful for the tribute that you paid to the Gwent ethnic minority support service, who I think made a big impression on the whole committee and who are doing an absolutely excellent job. But the problem that we have got is that, as far as we know, those cases of good practice are not being spread. And as you say, the evidence from the consortia was disappointing. I do share your concerns about the session that we had with Estyn. It was worrying that they came to us and said that they had done this review back in 2011 and hadn’t actually followed up on the recommendations. I think if the Welsh Government was doing that, we would have something very strong to say about it. I think, with the inspectorates, we have to expect that there will be that rigour in following up where they have invested the time in actually inspecting something.

Can I thank Julie Morgan for her contribution? Julie is a very passionate advocate of the Gypsy, Roma and Traveller community, and especially of the children, and I was really pleased that Julie, as a member of the committee, played such a key role in the inquiry. I share the concern that the equality impact assessment that was undertaken was not sufficient, and I know that the stakeholders felt that, and I hope that, although mindful of what the Welsh Government have just said, going forward, the Welsh Government will learn lessons from this in taking similar decisions in the future.

Julie made very important points about role models, and that was something that came out in the inquiry—that we're trying to encourage these young people to be in school, but yet they haven't actually got many role models, and that goes for Gypsy, Roma and Traveller children, but also for minority ethnic children. That was also an issue that came out in the inquiry. And thank you for highlighting the peer-review project. I think it's vitally important that we all keep the views of children at the centre of what we are trying to achieve.

Can I thank Bethan Jenkins for her contribution, for stepping up to the plate for Llyr today? It's much appreciated. Thank you for your comments. I don't think the committee was saying that these are a homogenous group. Particularly with minority ethnic learners, that is certainly not the case, but we have to make sure that where we have minority ethnic groups that are not performing, we ensure that the right interventions are in place, and that certainly wasn't clear from the evidence that we took. Similarly, we weren't in a position to recommend specifically what local authorities or consortia should be doing, because we just didn't have sufficient information on what was happening on the ground, which is why the key focus, really, of our recommendations has been on the need for there to be proper, rigorous monitoring and evaluation.

Can I thank David Melding for his contribution today, for highlighting the very important tensions between mainstream provision and ring-fenced targeting provision? I certainly agree with you that while we would all hope that everything can be achieved through a mainstream setting, there are clearly circumstances where that is not going to happen, and that's why we need this targeted approach. And I thank you, too, for your emphasis on the need for proper monitoring and evaluation, and also for your kind words about the committee's work in this area.

Can I thank the Cabinet Secretary for her contribution as well today, and for her very constructive engagement with the committee on this topic? I particularly welcome what you've said today about the need to strengthen the performance management framework; that is most welcome, and we will look forward to following up with you on that. And to thank Members generally for their participation today and just repeat what I've said in the previous committee debates that we've had: this isn't just a one-off that we're going to put aside and leave; we are intending to follow this up very rigorously going forward and to continue to shine a spotlight on this very important area of work. So, thank you very much, everyone.

Thank you. The proposal is to note the committee's report. Does any Member object? No. Therefore, the motion is agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Motion agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.