Item 5 on our agenda is a statement by the Cabinet Secretary for Education on post-compulsory education and training consultation. I call on Kirsty Williams to introduce the statement.

Deputy Presiding Officer, earlier this year I made a statement to the Assembly announcing the Government’s response to Professor Ellen Hazelkorn’s report, ‘Towards 2030: A framework for building a world-class post-compulsory education system for Wales’. That report made significant recommendations for reforming the post-compulsory education and training—hereafter I shall call it PCET—system in Wales. The two primary recommendations, which the Welsh Government has accepted, were that we should develop an overarching vision for the PCET system and that there should be a new arm’s-length body as the sole regulatory, funding and oversight authority for the post-compulsory system.

I was delighted by the cross-party support given in January to the direction of travel set out in Professor Hazelkorn’s report, and I am pleased today to announce the publication of ‘Public Good and a Prosperous Wales’, our White Paper, that sets out our proposals for reforming the PCET system, covering further and higher education, research and innovation, work-based learning and adult community learning, and which seeks the views of stakeholders on the way forward.

At the heart of the White Paper are our proposals for a new body—the tertiary education and research commission for Wales—which would replace the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales and provide oversight, strategic direction and leadership for the whole PCET sector. This model draws on best practice from successful tertiary systems and economies around the world. We propose in the White Paper that the commission’s functions would include: the strategic planning of educational and skills delivery across PCET; funding; quality assessment and enhancement; managing performance and risk across the system; overseeing and co-ordinating Welsh Government’s research and innovation expenditure; and providing a step change in available data, including measuring educational progression, destinations and outcomes for learners.

A key focus of the commission would be protecting the interests of learners, ensuring that vocational and academic routes are equally valued, and helping to impart the skills needed to succeed in an increasingly competitive economy. Through its strategic planning and funding activities, the commission would also be responsible for aligning PCET more closely with the needs of employers, helping to build a stronger future economy.

We set out in the White Paper three potential models for managing the relationship between the commission and providers of education and training, based on the core principle of registration. The three models are: (1) a registration of provider model; (2) an outcome agreements model; and (3) a regional compacts model. The consultation seeks views on each of these.

Research and innovation is integral to the future success of our universities and economy. The commission would be responsible for co-ordinating research and postgraduate research capacity funding in a more strategic and dynamic way. It is proposed that a statutory committee of the commission, to be known as ‘research and innovation Wales’, would lead on this. This would protect and promote Wales’s interests in the context of UK Government changes, which are likely, I believe, to blur the difference between UK and English interests.

This consultation proposes a ‘made in Wales’ approach to post-compulsory education and training so that it’s easier for people to learn and acquire skills throughout their careers. Our lives and economy are undergoing huge technological change—it was referred to earlier in First Minister’s questions. The knowledge and skills needed in a transformed workplace mean that average is over. Doing nothing or maintaining the status quo is not, in my view, a viable option.

We also need to encourage and support increased research and innovation activity in companies and other organisations. We need to build on our strengths—and we do have strengths—but align them where possible and appropriate with the needs and aspirations of business and the broader community. By doing so, we hope to attract increased research funding from UK investments over the next five years. Moving in this direction will be increasingly important if we are to manage the process of leaving the EU with the minimum of disruption to our research and science base. The new commission would be charged with overseeing these changes and developing research, innovation, and enterprise activities in universities, colleges and with other providers.

Deputy Presiding Officer, I’m pleased with the progress that has been made in embedding student representation into the governance structures of institutions in Wales. But there is still more to do. I would expect to see students’ involvement, both in the commission and at individual institutions, extended further within our new system. The consultation also sets out the opportunities and challenges of including sixth forms within the remit of the new commission. This includes the possibility that the commission might be established initially without sixth forms in its remit and that legislation might allow for them to be brought within its ambit at a later date. The paper seeks views on this approach and the wider position of sixth forms.

I believe the proposals in the White Paper will enable us to raise standards, support learners in Wales to achieve their full potential, whatever their background and circumstances, and make our PCET system one of the best in the world. But we have to acknowledge it will take time to implement these changes. The formal consultation will run until late October. This will be followed by a more detailed technical consultation towards the end of the year. And these far-reaching changes will also require legislative reform. During the period of transition, the Welsh Government will be seeking new members for the HEFCW board with experience of a wider range of areas, including business, to help guide and support the move to a new system.

Deputy Presiding Officer, I recognise that to make a success of these ambitious reforms we need to work closely with our stakeholders. So, if you are a learner or, indeed, a potential learner, an education or training professional, a learning provider, a researcher, or a business person with strong views about the skills of your workforce, then we want to hear from you. We need your ideas about how best to ensure that the system can work well, both now and in the future. We will also be holding engagement events throughout Wales this autumn. I will also be undertaking a separate young persons’ consultation. I hope I can count on Members from across all parties in the Assembly to encourage engagement in these consultation exercises, so that we can have the very best ideas to draw upon in developing a PCET system that will meet the needs of learners, communities and the businesses of Wales for many years to come. Thank you.

Thank you to the Cabinet Secretary for her statement this afternoon and for the way that she’s engaged in giving briefings to opposition Members in respect of her plans. I’m delighted to see that Professor Hazelkorn’s recommendations have been supported and taken on board and, as we have done in the past, I think it’s important that we move together on this as a nation because we need to get it absolutely right. The Cabinet Secretary will be aware that I’m a firm believer that education underpins how Wales responds to the new challenges of the future, and it’s very important that we recognise also that education is a lifelong journey and that people’s careers and personal aspirations will change, possibly, over time, with people going from one career to another, and education is absolutely key to helping to make that happen.

I’ve obviously got a few questions on the statement that she’s made this afternoon. First of all, in relation to the commission’s functions, I’m very pleased to see some clarity in terms of the functions that you want the commission to fulfil, but I do note that one of those functions includes quality assessment and enhancement. I just wonder to what extent some of these functions might overlap with some of the functions of the other statutory bodies that we already have in Wales. So, in terms of the quality of education, of course, we have Qualifications Wales, we have organisations like Estyn that will also have some role to play, particularly in further education institutions. So, I think it is important that we’ve got clarity on this, going forward, so that we don’t have too many cooks spoiling the broth, really, when it comes to our education system—our post-compulsory education system.

I also note that the commission’s going to have this responsibility in terms of investing in research and innovation, and I think that it’s right that it has that role to play, because we all know that there are lots of commercial reasons why people should be investing in research and innovation, and sometimes there’s research and innovation that is going to require investment that has to come from the public sector, or has to be supplemented by the public sector. So, it’s absolutely right that the commission has got this role. But clearly, particularly with those commercial opportunities, it will be important to ensure that people with sufficient commercial expertise and experience have a role to play on that new commission, and I note that you’ve referred to the need for business people, if you like, to get involved in HEFCW in the interim period, but I would be grateful to know what sort of shape that board—this new commission—will have, and what engagement you expect it to have with the commercial sector, particularly in terms of that research and innovation.

You refer to the three proposed models that are outlined in the White Paper, and I think they’re three interesting models: the registration and provider model, the outcome agreements model, and the regional compact model. But I see no reason, actually, why they need to be three separate models. I think that elements of all three, personally, should be within the remit of the commission. I think it’s absolutely appropriate that, obviously, HE and FE providers and other trainers are registered with the new commission. I think it’s entirely appropriate that, in return for the public investment that they receive, there should be some outcome agreements around that, that they can be held to account to. And I think also, particularly with the FE sector, that there ought to be regional compacts about what you expect them to be delivering on the ground. So, I don’t think it should be an either/or in terms of those options. I actually think that elements from all three should be included, in terms of how the commission operates, going forward. I’d appreciate, Cabinet Secretary, whether you could tell us whether that is something that you’ve also considered, or whether you are wedded to this either/or approach that is set out in the White Paper.

I noted your comments in respect of the UK approach to research and innovation as well. You seem to be suggesting that an England model would be muscled, if you like, upon the rest of the UK, going forward. I don’t see any evidence that that would be the case at all, actually, and I think that it’s entirely appropriate that we have UK models in terms of research and innovation sometimes, so that our Welsh universities, which have expertise in things like engineering and medical sciences, should rise to the top and actually receive investment on a UK-wide level. So, I’m not sure why you’re ultra-cautious about that. I think it is appropriate that we have some UK-wide mechanisms in terms of investment in our research, and I’d appreciate it if you could point me to some evidence to substantiate the concerns that you have about Wales’s research voice, if you like, being drowned out by this new approach that might be taken at a UK level.

Just also on the subject of student voice, I’m very pleased to hear you make reference to the fact that students’ voices must be listened to, and obviously there has been some progress in terms of student representation in governance structures, and I acknowledge that, in recent years. But, I think it’s also important to note that there are different voices within the student bodies of organisations that also need to be heard. The voice of adult learners and the voice of part-time learners are very often drowned out by the voice of full-time learners. I wonder what assurances you can give us that the new commission will have to listen to the varied voices of the student community, so that it can get things right for all learners, not just those who are full time.

Finally, if I can just turn to sixth forms, I am very cautious about this body having any remit and responsibility for sixth-form education; I believe that that sits best with those local education authorities. Clearly, there are some parts of Wales where there are arrangements in place for tertiary education between local authorities and further education providers in a different way to the traditional school sixth-form model, but why should we intervene in something that is working for many learners and provides that choice for many learners across Wales? I don’t think that it’s right at all—I don’t think that the evidence supports this—that we ought to move forward with sixth forms being part of the remit of that new commission.

Could I thank Darren for his broad welcome for the direction of travel outlined in the White Paper? In response to many of the questions that he has raised, the whole point of having a White Paper and a consultation is because we want to canvass a wide variety of views on these areas.

First of all, if I start by going backwards, I’ll start with the sixth forms and you’ll be aware that the question in the paper does not give a hard and fast proposal for where sixth forms could sit. Ellen Hazelkorn, in her report, said that in most systems, sixth-form provision would sit outside PCET, but it is a part of post-compulsory education and training. So, the question is: do we want to subject that particular part of PCET to a different type of regime, one that is fundamentally monitored by Estyn and very much part of the school system, or do we see it as what it is—as part of post-compulsory education and training? So, there’s a genuine debate to be had about how best sixth-form provision can be regulated.

But, let me be absolutely clear that this is not about saying that we’re not going to have sixth forms, and this is not about saying that we’re moving to a tertiary model. This is about saying, for those particular groups of learners: how can their interests—how can we look after them and provide opportunities in that way that will have quality assurance and the issues around destinations, making sure that people are doing the right course at the right time? There’s a genuine opportunity to feed back in that.

Student voice is very important to me at all levels. I think in the past, politicians of all stripes have been guilty of regarding students as your typical 18-year-old school leaver, perhaps, who completes their A-levels and goes off to university. What we do know, and what our economy demands, is that people need to have access to training and educational opportunities for the entire period of their life, and people will make different choices about when studying is right for them—they will have to combine it often with caring responsibilities, perhaps. So, diversity in the student voice is very important, and we recognise that, as a Welsh Government, as we try to move towards a new system of student support that will give parity to undergraduates whether they study full time or part time, or whether they are undergraduate or postgraduate. We recognise the diversity in that.

With regard to the issue of changes in England, I have to say to the Member that I am very concerned about changes arising out of new legislation in England and what that might mean for us. So, for instance, with regard to UK Research and Innovation, the Member says, ‘Give me an example of why you should be worried about this’. The absolute intransigence of the previous Minister, and I think he still is the Minister—Jo Johnson has been reappointed—to acknowledge having a Welsh representative on that body, and, indeed, having a Scottish representative on that body, fills me with concern. The fact that each devolved Government will not be represented on that body gives me cause for concern.

We’re asking an awful lot of these people involved in UKRI. For most of the time, this will be an England-only body—they will just be thinking about the needs of England. But, occasionally, they will have to switch mode and they’ll have to think about a UK model. And, this is a lot to ask of somebody. This is a lot to ask of people. I think we need to make sure that we protect our interest. We also have to recognise that in making moneys available, maybe the strategic direction and the priorities for that body might well serve the English economy, but that isn’t necessarily the same as what we need for our economy and what the research needs are for our economy. We can’t abdicate responsibility for that and that’s why I am extremely cautious and why I feel we need to look to protect Welsh interests in this particular area.

I’m not saying for a minute that our institutions can’t compete for this funding. But I’m just saying that we need to protect Welsh interests and to put ourselves in the strongest position to take advantage of these issues, because research is absolutely crucial to us as a Government, and crucial to us as a nation. We need to make sure that research is integral to the work of this particular body. Can I make clear that this is not about stepping onto the very important principle of institutional autonomy or guaranteeing academic freedoms? Those are very dear to me. But the commission will build on current strengths and encourage increased research and innovation activities in companies and other organisations, because if we’re honest, we’re not where we would want Wales to be, especially when it comes to private sector investment in research and innovation. We’re not where we want to be. We need a new focus on this and that’s why I’ve invited, along with my colleagues, the Reid inquiry to look at what best we can do and this sits alongside this particular piece of work.

The Member also raised the issue of duplication. Well, the purpose of having one body in this way is to try and make sure that we move away from issues around duplication and confusion. And issues around quality, again, let’s be absolutely clear: because of changes that have happened across the border, we have to take this opportunity to see whether we need to protect ourselves to assure quality. So, for instance, at the moment, a student can apply to an institution in England that doesn’t have degree-awarding powers. So, you could start, as a student at an institution—. Because of the marketisation of that particular sector, you could start on a course without knowing that that course will lead to a degree because that institution doesn’t have degree-awarding powers. We need to make sure that issues like that and quality and student assurance are underpinned in our system, and this White Paper gives us the opportunity to make sure that we’ve got that.

I welcome in broad terms the statement from the Cabinet Secretary today. Before I go into detail on the statement, I just want to, as the Cabinet Secretary is here, mention one thing to her and bring to her attention. There’s a very misleading article in ‘The Guardian’ newspaper today on Welsh language education. I can see that the Cabinet Secretary is aware of it. All I can say to her is that I hope that she responds or the Government responds officially to that article, because it is wrong in fact and it is wrong in its implications as well.

Can I turn to the report—the White Paper, I should say—now that we have before us? As I said, Plaid Cymru has long advocated a parity of esteem between vocational and academic education, and we set out in our manifesto how we wanted the Hazelkorn review to work towards the elimination of duplication and unnecessary competition and more collaboration in this sector. In fact, I have been so enthusiastic for it that the Cabinet Secretary has accused me perversely in the past of wanting to take money from universities and give it to sixth forms. But, I think we know where we are. We want to see a real choice for our young people that really rewards them in the decisions they make, whether it’s education through university or through apprenticeships or through training or through sixth form or through post-sixth-form or whatever it may be.

I had several questions coming in to the statement this afternoon. Though, as the Cabinet Secretary has usefully pointed out, these are all questions that are asked in the consultation and we don’t have any answers to them yet. So, I’ll try and elucidate some that I think perhaps the Cabinet Secretary can give some steer on at this stage. I’ll start with where we ended, actually, which is the UKRI and the relationship between this new body, the tertiary authority and other UK-wide bodies—they’re supposed to be UK-wide, but don’t include representation from Wales on them. We do have an establishment, the UKRI, we do have a real issue around Brexit, leaving the European Union, and European funds that were accessed directly by Welsh universities. A very successful ‘science at the Assembly’ day just a couple of weeks ago here showcased a lot of that work, and particularly showcased how successful international collaboration is amongst our universities, bypassing to a certain extent what’s been done at a UK level because of that direct access to European collaboration. So, is it the Government’s intention in this new structure to try and seek to ensure that we get more research money from the research councils? Because that used to be the Government’s intention and I’d like a restatement of that, because I’d like to see that that’s within a remit letter, or whatever is written to this new body at the end of the day. We really have to make up for some of the money that disappears from Europe, but also really press the abilities for Wales to act at that level.

I also wonder if the Cabinet Secretary could say whether, having now published the White Paper, she’s looked at the Diamond proposals and what’s in the White Paper, and whether she sees any need to realign any of the Diamond proposals or any of the timetabling or any of the issues around Diamond, or whether she is content that, at the moment, that is all aligned together. She’s also mentioned the Reid review, for example. These all need to come together.

Can I just draw the Cabinet Secretary’s attention to the Wales Audit Office report on the oversight of further education colleges in particular, which pointed out that, while generally sound, their finances would benefit from a more long-term and more integrated approach? I’m sure the Cabinet Secretary would say that this proposal here today is a more integrated approach. In terms of long term, however, I wonder whether there is any consideration of three-year funding for this body and for this sector. That’s something we now have at least offered to health bodies. They can’t take it up because they’re inefficient and can’t meet the standards, but it’s offered to them and I wondered whether we wouldn’t be looking at that for this sector as well, which would give some assurances and some interesting ideas that perhaps could emerge in terms of investment going forward.

Now, we touched on sixth forms, and I very much accept that this is a consultation question, but what’s not quite clear to me is whether the Government has a particular preferred option, if we can put it that way, about the actual governance of sixth forms. I’m not talking about the strategic role—because, clearly, this new body will have a strategic influence on sixth forms—but whether the governance should still reside at a local education authority level, or whether she wants to go further and take that governance level up to a national body as well, which I think is where perhaps there’ll be more questions askedit’s an interesting proposal.

And, of course, it also leads us to the almost final point—the final point but one that I have—which is whether the Cabinet Secretary has considered, in looking at implementing Hazelkorn and looking at this new authority, whether we should raise the age of compulsory education in Wales. I should say ‘education and training and everything else’, because we’re not talking about sticking reluctant people in sixth forms; we’re talking about the expectation that you stay in education until you’re 18. That’s happening in England and is moving ahead, in effect, and perhaps it’s something that we should consider in the light of this White Paper as well.

And my final question is around something else that I think has just been touched on but I’d like to hear a little more about: what relationship this new body will have in terms of quality assurance in university education. We have had suggestions in the past of changes to the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education that would have affected Welsh universities and affected the UK nature of this. This is all very—. Perhaps it’s no longer on the cards, following a very strange general election, but how will quality assurance be maintained within this new body? It won’t have, I think, the direct control, because that’s still elsewhere within a UK university sector, but, clearly, it will have a role in ensuring that that does happen, and a reputational role for universities as well.

Thank you very much, Simon. Can I begin where you began with regard to ‘The Guardian’ article? I am absolutely dismayed by the misleading headline and by the factual inaccuracies that pepper that particular so-called piece of journalism. It is very disappointing and it is a gross mischaracterisation of what is going on in that particular community and, indeed, the Welsh Government’s ambitions for Welsh-medium education. It is a matter of huge regret for me, and I can assure you, whenever these issues around the language come up, whether that be the University of Warwick and how they view Welsh-language A-levels, or articles like this, then we will look to correct and give the correct impression of what is going on in our bilingual education system.

If I could move on to the substantive points with regard to the statement—yes, it is absolutely the Government’s intention to gain more research money into Wales. We have some absolute stars. Our Seren programme, for instance, gives us a really good example of what can be achieved, but we need to do better. That is particularly important given the consequences of an EU Brexit on the higher education sector. Obviously, so that’s—. I’m very happy to restate that is the Government’s overall aim.

With regard to alignment, I do believe that Diamond is aligned with the proposals that are set out here and I don’t have any intentions to change the timescales with regard to the implementation of the Diamond report. It is important that we see that and the Reid review as well as the Government’s White Paper on implementing Hazelkorn to dovetail together.

With regard to—I can’t read my own writing—. With regard to sixth-form governance—. The issue with sixth forms is a really interesting one, around the issue of governance, because, actually, Simon says about the role of local education authorities—in some ways sixth forms have become nobody’s child, because they’re not actually funded by the local education authorities. They’re funded from direct money from the Welsh Government. So, in a way, local government have almost washed their hands of them. Also, it has not been subject to Estyn inspection. So, when Estyn have gone into schools—even when that school has a sixth form—it has not been the job of Estyn to report on the provision within that sixth form. That’s not acceptable to me. If we want to see an increase and a raising of standards in all aspects of our education system, that has to include sixth forms. So, I’m very pleased to say that Estyn will now be looking at sixth-form provision in those schools that have them, because I think, in some ways, as I’ve said, they’ve become nobody’s child and maybe they have fallen through the net when it comes to really making sure that they’re doing a good job on behalf of the students that are in them.

The funding certainties—that’s what I can’t read: funding certainties and a three-year funding cycle. I recognise that sometimes institutions would make different decisions if they had a longer-term view of funding that was made available to them. In some ways, those may be better long-term strategic decisions. I am trying, in discussion with my Cabinet colleague for finance, to do what we can to provide certainty of funding wherever possible, in all aspects of the education system. That’s really been quite difficult because of, sometimes, situations out of our control with regard to when budgets and autumn statements are announced in London. Obviously, there’s grave uncertainty at the moment. I had hoped, following the election result and some of the utterances by the Prime Minister, that the foot would be taken off the austerity pedal. But, if one listens to the Chancellor’s Mansion House speech this morning, if any of us had any beliefs that that was about to happen, I think those probably have been dispelled by what Philip Hammond had to say this morning. I take your point, and we will look to see what we can do to provide that longer-term view for institutions, because I recognise how valuable that is for them.

I have no plans at present to look at raising the compulsory education age beyond 16. With regard to quality assurance, this body will have a key role. Unlike some of the changes that we’ve seen in England, for instance, we’re very keen to continue to involve the Privy Council, for instance, in quality assurance, degree-awarding status, university title. These things are very important to me and I’m going to use this opportunity to make sure that they are where we would want them to be and make changes, if necessary, to provide that assurance—to both students, international students, and would-be investors in research and innovation—that we have that quality underpinning our HE sector.

Thank you. Michelle Brown.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and thank you for your statement, Cabinet Secretary. I welcome the consultation on the reforms to post-compulsory education and training. I do have some questions. I appreciate that you may not have a firm answer right now to some of them and, if that’s the case, I’d like your assurance that the views of stakeholders will be sought on the points.

I note the intention to create a new tertiary education and research commission for Wales, which will replace the existing higher education funding council. Can the Cabinet Secretary tell us what the comparative costs are for the existing council and the new commission, and will the creation of the commission lead to a reduction or increase in overall cost of overseeing post-compulsory education? Approximately how big will the commission be and to whom will it be accountable? If the commission doesn’t fulfil its objectives, who will be responsible for this?

Recent years have seen vocational training—what used to be called ‘getting yourself a trade’—reduce in status while academic qualifications have been treated almost as the be-all and end-all. This has resulted in generations of gifted young people almost being thrown on the scrap heap or encouraged to study for courses that won’t fulfil their potential because their skills and abilities don’t lie in traditional academic areas. Although academic graduates are needed, it’s the tradesmen who build our schools, hospitals, houses, and everything else and, without them, we have no buildings, no power, no roads—nothing.

The lack of qualified tradesmen and women in Wales needs to be addressed by Wales training its own. I therefore welcome wholeheartedly the Cabinet Secretary’s objective to ensure that vocational and academic training have equal value in our education system. In a work environment in which it is less and less likely that a person will leave school and then spend their working life either working in the same role or for the same employer, it’s vital that people are given the ability to retrain or upskill, so that they can take advantage of new work opportunities. If the Cabinet Secretary can significantly improve access to training and education for people looking to improve or update their existing skills or learn new ones, I’ll applaud her.

I would like to see the Cabinet Secretary making provision to give advice and guidance to Welsh businesses that are conducting research and development to assist them exploit the patents they create, as well as assisting universities and colleges to improve the quality of their bids for research funding. I note that sixth-form provision may be covered by the new commission, but that sixth-form provision may not be included in the consultation. I understand your reasons for that, but, if sixth forms are going to be covered by the new commission, when will that proposal be put out to consultation if it is not included in this present one? Young people need to be able to choose the right sixth-form environment for them. Some will want a school sixth form, others will want to attend a sixth-form college. Can the Cabinet Secretary assure us that young people will continue to have the choice of studying at a sixth-form college or school sixth form?

As regards the consultation itself, how have you publicised the consultation and how are you ensuring that the correct stakeholders have been notified of it? I welcome the consultation on the commission and the reforms being considered and I would encourage all interested parties to contribute to that consultation. Thank you.

Thank you very much to Michelle for her questions. Costs are currently being developed and will be published at the same time as the technical consultation, which will happen later on this year. The commission will be accountable to Welsh Ministers. Parity of esteem is a crucial issue for me. One of the reasons for having one single body organising and having a strategic overview for post-compulsory education and training is to achieve that parity of esteem and to recognise, as you quite rightly say, that the days of having a job for life and staying in one place when you leave school are over. That’s one of the reasons why we need to change how we plan and organise post-compulsory education and training. The Welsh Government recognises that, for instance, in its all-age apprenticeship scheme that it is developing over the course of this particular Welsh Government.

Michelle asks whether the issue around sixth forms is contained in the consultation document and when we’re going to consult on it. Well, it is in the consultation document. I appreciate—. I’m concerned that maybe the Member hasn’t had a copy of the White Paper. I think it has been e-mailed out to all Members. I certainly saw it in my own AM inbox and it’s quite clearly in there—the questions regarding sixth forms are in the consultation and it is a genuine question that we’re asking of people.

The Member also asks how we’re publicising the consultation. Well, this is part of the reason why we’re doing an oral statement today—to update Assembly Members following the statement I made earlier in the day. As I said in my statement, there are a number of stakeholder events ongoing until the consultation ends in October, and we will do a specific young persons’ consultation, because at the heart of this is getting it right for the learner and they need to be involved in this consultation exercise also.

As far as I can see on the HEFCW website, the current staffing numbers are 50 staff across four directorates. Can you confirm if that’s correct? If so, how would the future staffing and organisational structure compare to the current Higher Education Funding Council for Wales arrangements?

I would hope that HEFCW’s website is correct and is an accurate description of their employment practices, but I will double check with the chief executive, and confirm that to you. With regards to the size of the commission, I’m always a firm believer in the principle that form follows function, and at this stage, while we’re consulting on the form of the commission, we’re not at this stage in a position to say exactly how that will look, because that will depend on where we go forward. That is the point of having a technical consultation at the end of this White Paper process so that those more technical in-depth issues and the detail that you’re requiring will be consulted on at a later date. But at this moment, what is important to us is that we are clear and we get agreement on the functions of this body and then move forward on how effectively it will be staffed. What’s important is, of course, under these proposals, HEFCW will go and we will be working closely with HEFCW and hopefully new members of the board with a broader range of experiences to make a seamless transition from one organisation into the next.

Thank you very much for the statement and for the commitments that are in it. I appreciate that we’re talking primarily about structural change, but the purpose of the structural change is to improve opportunities for learning, and learning ready for a Wales that will be taking part in a global competition, if you like, as well as promoting the local economy. If the Welsh Government’s plans for a million Welsh speakers are to have any traction, further down the line we will have businesses looking for Welsh language skills—I won’t say necessarily fluency—but beyond that, other language skills as well, particularly post Brexit. Even though English is the international language of business, it’s certainly a help for people in Wales if they’re able to speak more than one language when they’re trying to engage in international trade. Can you tell me, then, whether the consultation in particular and the commission’s future work will be taking into account the place of deft communication skills in non-statutory education? Thank you.

Thank you very much, Suzy, for that contribution. As you will know, increasing the opportunities for students, school pupils and those in FE and HE to acquire language skills in the Welsh language and to be able to utilise those skills in their mode of studies is something that is very important to me. With regards to FE, we’re currently asking Delyth Evans to do a piece of work on whether the role and remit of the Coleg Cymraeg should be extended to the FE sector, and we expect to receive that report before the summer recess. Obviously, any organisation that is charged with the planning of HE and FE and work-based learning provision in our nation will have to think about how they deliver that through the medium of Welsh as well as in English.

With regard to wider languages, I’m not in a position to say at this moment the roles and responsibilities that this organisation will have with regards to that. But planning qualifications and planning and commissioning a range of language qualifications and courses, whether that be in modern foreign languages, in Welsh, or in the ability to express yourself confidently and coherently—perhaps better than I’m doing at the moment—obviously is something that we’ll be looking at in terms of commissioning courses that will be available. And I recognise that the ability to express yourself and communicate effectively is an important one, and of course that is why we have kept an oral examination as part of our English language GCSE, whereas that has been abolished in England.

Only in Wales could the answer to the exam question ‘How we as a nation become a world leader of innovation’ be the establishment of not just a committee—not even a committee—but a sub-committee, which is what Research and Innovation Wales is in relation to this new body. Can the Cabinet Secretary confirm that this is diametrically opposed to the advice to the Government’s own Innovation Advisory Council for Wales, and indeed of two reports of global experts in innovation policy, which recommended, in contrast, the creation of a dedicated innovation body for Wales? Could she say where this leaves the Reid review on research and innovation in Wales, set up as a result of the Hazelkorn review, whose purpose, and I quote, was to provide

‘advice in the form of a report to the Welsh Government on the governance…regulation and oversight of Government funded research and innovation in Wales’?

If the Welsh Government has already come up with the answer, why ask Professor Reid the question?

First of all, it’s not a committee, it’s a commission, and it will have the status of such. Perhaps the question should be: ‘Only in Wales, the answer to the problem is to have yet another body’, which is what I believe the Member is in favour of creating. We already have—[Interruption.] I think we already had, at the last count, 47 individual bodies in Wales that had some remit or responsibility for research and innovation. I would suggest that adding another one to those 47 is not what we need. What is really important to me—and I heard your question to the First Minister earlier—is that we don’t create individual fiefdoms, but that we have a systematic approach that means we can have the best of relationships with both the higher education sector and with the world of employment, and we don’t need to choose one or the other.

With regard to the Reid report, I am committed to getting the relationship of Government funding for research right, and to help that, Professor Reid is conducting his report, and his report will be integral to how we take these proposals forward. But I have to say again, Deputy Presiding Officer: when we’ve already got 47 bodies looking at this and Wales is underperforming with regard to innovation and research, simply adding another one isn’t the answer.

Thank you very much, Cabinet Secretary.