The next item is the debate on the Thurley review of Amgueddfa Cymru, and I call on the Minister for Culture, Sport and Tourism to move the motion—Dafydd Elis-Thomas.

Motion NDM6627 Julie James

To propose that the National Assembly for Wales:

1. Notes the publication of the review of Amgueddfa Cymru—National Museum Wales.

2. Welcomes the report’s positivity regarding the standard of our National Museum and the quality of the work carried out by staff.

3. Recognises the issues identified and acknowledges that Amgueddfa Cymru and the Welsh Government must work in partnership to address the recommendations within the report.

Motion moved.

Thank you very much, Llywydd. It’s a privilege for me to open this discussion on a matter within my cultural responsibilities, and in so doing I use the Government time at the Assembly to celebrate the development of cultural institutions—important institutions—and also to give Assembly Members and the public the opportunity, following the publication of this report, to discuss its content further and to help us in the process, as Government, in collaboration with the museum to strengthen our national institutions.

The national institutions dealing with heritage and history are institutions where, without being too nationalistic or romantic here, the heartbeat of the nation is to be heard, because these institutions offer a special experience for visitors to Wales, and they offer a sense of place and pride for communities in Wales. They are institutions that can be very useful in welcoming new arrivals and to explain the histories and the aspirations of people of Wales over the centuries, and also to offer experiences of history and evidence for people of all generations.

National Museum Wales, as you know, has seven locations scattered across Wales, and this institution is a vital part of the work of providing cultural experiences on people’s doorsteps almost, and the work of providing experiences also cares for our heritage. Apart from four visits to Llandudno, the place I have visited most since I came into this post is St Fagans, and the opportunity to revisit this location often recently has helped me to understand how much development and redevelopment has been made in supporting an investment of over £7 million by the Welsh Government. I was hugely impressed by the new facilities in St Fagans, and it’s clear that there is a long history of very hard work, passion and commitment from everyone from the skilled historic buildings unit, through to the general director and all of the staff who are so enthusiastic.

But, in the history of that institution, as with all institutions, there have been problems and there continue to be challenges. In response to the challenges and at the request of National Museum Wales itself, my predecessor, the Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Infrastructure, Ken Skates, commissioned this independent report that we are discussing today back in 2016. The ambition was to find a way that the Welsh Government and National Museum Wales could work together more effectively.

I’m very grateful to Dr Simon Thurley. I’m familiar with his work in English Heritage for many years. I’m very grateful to him for the responsibility he took for the review and the readable way that it was written. Indeed, it’s unusually readable in my experience of reading public reports, even in the field of culture. The report has succeeded to discuss the strengths and weaknesses, to note the issues, to consider opportunities and to put forward ideas of how the museum can move forward in several different areas.

As you see from reading the report, there are 17 recommendations. I don’t want to discuss all of these individually, but I welcome all contributions directly on these recommendation.

I think there are three main areas of recommendations and I’ll try refer to these in turn. They include the need for Amgueddfa Cymru to maximise income to improve sustainability and to decrease its significant dependency on public funding, to develop links and relationships, especially with the Welsh Government, and to develop the interpretation offer in the museums across the entire institution.

Several recommendations identify the need for Amgueddfa Cymru to work differently to maximise its potential for income generation. I acknowledge that it’s not easy for a large and complex organisation to change its business model, but it is important that this does happen and, in the substantial discussions that I’ve had with Amgueddfa Cymru, it’s clear that there is a willingness to accept and embrace the need for change.

In addition to this, the museum is already involved in the Historic Wales partnership, and I certainly appreciate the collaboration between different aspects of heritage work, especially Cadw’s work, which continues—as you’ll remember from a previous statement that I made here—as part of the Government, although it has greater independence in its work and its management. So, I look forward to seeing further development in the partnership and closer collaboration between the institutions in the Historic Wales partnership. I also appreciate the willingness of the unions to take part in the discussions, and the assurance that I can give here publicly that the points of view of staff are a vital part of the process of making decisions.

Amgueddfa Cymru has a real opportunity to consider the excellent improvement made by Cadw in terms of income generation and to learn relevant lessons. While many Cadw sites have an admission charge, this report does draw attention to other national organisations in the United Kingdom that provide free entry to their permanent galleries while charging for admission to see special exhibitions and to receive additional services. So, I’d like to emphasise that Amgueddfa Cymru is considering other opportunities too, including, for example, car and coach parking, improving the catering offer, looking at the opening hours and considering whether it would be possible for some sites to open at particular times of the year.

A recommendation that is also made in this report is vitally important in recommending the appointment of an experienced commercial director. The museum, certainly in its discussions with me, has accepted this idea gladly, because the skills that would be provided by such an appointment would drive change and improvement across the institution.

May I refer again to the particular success of St Fagans? The museum has raised over £30 million to bring the new projects at St Fagans to fruition. The majority of this funding has come from the Heritage Lottery Fund and the Welsh Government, but the rest of the funding, which is a substantial amount, has been raised thanks to the hard work of the trustees and staff of the museum. This funding has come from a variety of sources, which demonstrates that the museum can identify opportunities and attract funding to projects. Even though this process has been successful, it’s important that I acknowledge here today that it has taken considerable time and effort and that I appreciate that time and effort. 

Now, there will always be a balance to maintain between our hugely successful policy, which has been long established, of offering free entry and the need to be more commercially minded, and I’m eager to hear Members' views on how we can ensure that that balance is struck.

The second series of recommendations that I referred to by Dr Simon Thurley revolve around relationships, particularly between the Welsh Government and Amgueddfa Cymru. The report does raise concerns about what it considers an unwarranted level of control. I understand that concern, and, as someone who has been involved in a number of public institutions over the years, I think that it is important at the same time to have stricter scrutiny processes for expenditure and institutions, as well as to ensure that there is a way, in so doing, of looking at other institutions within the United Kingdom that are willing to take advantage of the possibility of generating additional income. There is no opposition in principle to this additional income being generated, as long as it sits alongside the fundamental principle of free entry in general to the institutions. 

I hope therefore that these recommendations will be considered further, and I look forward to the full debate on that in this place. But I'd also like to say one further thing before I conclude my opening comments. Reference has been made in the report, which made very painful reading for me, to a breakdown in the relationship between senior management teams and the unions representing the workforce. Clearly, this isn't a healthy situation for any public body or for any commercial organisation or partnership to be in. I don't want to make any specific comments about management issues here today. That wouldn't be appropriate. I respect the arm's-length principle in cultural institutions and I believe that the Welsh Government must maintain this distance in order to be effective in its scrutiny function of bodies that it funds. I encourage collaboration, including the Acas negotiation process if necessary, and in that situation I hope that we won't fall into the trap of repeating history that would repeat that failure to understand each other.

The third area that I wish to deal with in these opening remarks conveys the importance of developing the particular offer of the museums. I am very grateful for the careful and detailed comments that have been made on all of the locations, but particularly the National Slate Museum, a museum that is very close to my heart, of course, because of the familial link with the industry, and also the National Roman Legion Museum, which I had the huge pleasure of visiting in Caerleon yesterday. Again, the example of St Fagans is before us, and it shows how these smaller museums can take advantage of the experience of St Fagans and at Cadw to develop their offer, demonstrating that a museum isn't a static body but a body that continues to grow as the understanding of the nation's history also grows.

As I said, I have met the museum's officials several times to discuss this report and the recommendations, and I continue to look forward to collaborating with them, and I'm eager this afternoon, and from today onwards, to hear your contribution as the National Assembly that has responsibility for our national institutions in the process of reforming them. Thank you very much for listening.

May I thank the Minister for bringing the review to the Chamber today?

It's a pretty punchy review, I think, although its recommendations, I think, need to be considered alongside the conclusions of the group chaired by Justin Albert on the possible shape of Historic Wales and, of course, your recent decision that Cadw would remain wholly in Government. I just want to speak very briefly about that part of the report that refers to the industrial dispute that affected activities during the museum's recent past. I don't want to dwell on it much, but I tend to agree that this is not a matter for Government to intercede in directly, when it comes to industrial relations of a non-Government body, but I do believe it's right for both parties to inform AMs of their views, because every person involved in this is somebody's constituent, and we, as representatives, can highlight those views to a point where they bring pressure to bear. But that is not the same as the Executive stepping in and influencing.

Whether Dr Thurley has adequately or accurately represented the relationship between staff, management and even Government, I genuinely can't say, but I do think that the need for realistic modernisation of the national museum and the appropriate recognition of staff expertise, commitment and flexibility is not a binary choice. But the fact that it's come up as an issue is illustrative of a theme that has emerged from discussions about the museum in the last year or so. And that issue is the place of Government and its relationship with the independence of the museum.

On the strength of recent scrutiny, not least in this report, the museum's had to face criticism about its ability to manage the concerns of the workforce properly, and, of course, to manage the changes in its financial circumstances and support. Now, as far as I'm concerned, that is about gaps in management skills that can and have to be addressed, and not a reason for Government creep into the independent space of the museum.

That looming prospect of merged commercial functions with Welsh Government was a very successful project in holding up a mirror to the museum so that it could see and begin to plan to overcome its shortcomings, particularly with regard to its commercial activities, and it's exploiting those potential commercial activities that are at the heart of this Thurley review, after all. Now, I have no problem at all with the museum working collaboratively with Cadw to improve commercial, or, indeed, any other, opportunities, but that's just one relationship that will improve their prospects.

And I just want to be clear, since we've had that confirmation that Cadw will remain wholly within Government, that I can't see my party supporting any closer integration between those two bodies. While each should co-operate for mutual benefit—. Actually, Cadw and Visit Wales have cropped up in this review and the Justin Albert report. That's one thing, but I think Government really needs to back off anything that hints at operational interference, or even those elements of the museum's strategy that don't speak to the remit letter or the collaborative work streams.

The review was very effusive about the museum's existing offer and even more effusive about the potential offer, and I think it would be hard to disagree with that. Since it's had its rude awakening, the museum has already raised £10.3 million through earned income—nearly twice as much as any other national cultural organisation—and slashed the dependence on Government income to two thirds in just one year alone, so it can do it. And they're now actively recruiting for a commercial director, although maybe they want to revisit expertise on staff relations as well.

Minister, I'm always a bit sceptical about drawing comparisons with London institutions when we talk of funding our culture and heritage offer, but I hope that the new commercial director will consider even the most controversial ideas put forward by Thurley, just to throw them around and really examine if there's anything that Wales can learn from them. I'd say, as Welsh Conservatives, we support the general principle of free entry to core collections, but we also support the principle to charge for headline exhibitions if the museum chooses to do that, because the evidence points both ways on attendance, and I think some of that can be overcome by allowances within charging schemes, for example. But the decision to charge should be for the museum and not for Government, and it should not be used by either body to argue for cuts or for extra money from the public purse.

Minister, you've said an awful lot about what is impressive about the museum already. I just wanted to comment on something that Dr Thurley raised about changes to some of the sites and where differences could be made, not just to the income potential for the museum, but the coherence of the story, and I think that is a story that needs to be determined by the museum, not by Government, or not, indeed, by Thurley. This is why commercial independence is essential for the museum and its ability to set more priorities for itself. That is not to diminish the importance of the Government's remit letter and its priorities, and, of course, the funding, conditional, to a degree, on those priorities being met, but it needs to be free to grow its finances outside the relationship with Government without the risk of cuts to public support being the main driver for priority setting. Thank you.

It's a pleasure to participate in this important debate on the Thurley review. As Suzy had mentioned, this builds on previous reviews, and the rather troubled history of the institution over the past two years.

Now, we are very proud of Amgueddfa Genedlaethol Cymru. It was established by royal charter back in 1907. It was to promote public education—that was the purpose of the charter—and it's true to say that the museum has delivered that laudably over the years. Educating the world about Wales and educating the Welsh about the nation—that was one of the key aims back from 1912. Educating the world about Wales and educating the people of Wales about their own country. People are still discovering things about their own nation—people who have lived here through their lives say, 'Well, jiw, I never knew that.' That's the importance of visiting the various sites of the national museum. There are historical facts that continue to surprise you about this nation.

In those dark days pre devolution, the national museum was a pillar of inspiration and was firm in its Welsh identity. It cast a shining light, representing Wales when similar structures didn't exist to express our national identity, our history and our traditions, giving backbone to every nationalist and patriot. That's the importance of the independence of Amgueddfa Cymru: to tell the story of Wales without it being negatively influenced by external influences, and being entirely independent of any Government. As we've heard, we've had the discussions on Historic Wales, with the original intention of the Cabinet Secretary of attempting to merge our heritage and large organisations. It's a wonderful thing that that absurd idea has been cast aside. But confirmation that there is no intention to merge our national arts institutions would be another clear signal that the Welsh Government takes the independence of the sector seriously.

Turning to another element, funding is crucially important. Since 2012, there have been substantial cuts in the funding of Amgueddfa Cymru, cuts of around 11 per cent. This led to arguments between the museum and the unions—we have heard about it repeatedly—about terms, conditions, wages, and there were strikes. They were difficult times; they were dark times, indeed. We don't want to go back to those days, but that was partly because of cuts in funding. We've also heard about the commercial successes that have been achieved recently by the museum, and we should also recognise the agreement between this Government and Plaid Cymru. As a result, the museum will receive a financial boost for the next two years. It would be good to hear assurances from the Minister this afternoon about financial security for the future, following that period, for Amgueddfa Cymru.

The Thurley report strikes a very positive note, as Suzy has mentioned, with praise for the quality of Amgueddfa Cymru and the quality and commitment of the staff. But, of course, there's also room for improvement, as has been noted, and it's included in the report. The report recognises that Amgueddfa Cymru is one of the major museums of the UK. It's not simply a narrow, Welsh issue, because, and quote from the report,

'In its collections, the expertise and knowledge of its staff, its support of social and community development and its contribution to a knowledge of Welsh history and culture its achievements have been outstanding.'

'Hear, hear' I say to that. Amgueddfa Cymru continues to inspire patriots of today, and stands firm for Wales. Thank you very much.

I'm very pleased to take part in what I think is a very important debate today. I would like to start my contribution by making three, I think, non-contentious statements: museums are an important asset to our communities; the national museums are very important to every nation, and Wales is no different; to make them successful, we need well-paid and well-motivated staff who are committed to the Welsh museum service.

We've talked about who should control it, but can I ask this question? I do not know the OCS classification of the museums of Wales. I would expect to see them classified as Welsh Government controlled. I'm happy to be corrected on this if somone wants to correct me. I think that if they were a business, they'd be described as wholly owned subsidiaries of the Welsh Government. [Interruption.] I'll take an intervention.

The whole point of the museum's structure, as we heard earlier, is that their history is very much based upon their own independence, guaranteed in the case of the original—[Interruption.] Guaranteed by the royal charter in its original inception. That is essential to maintain its independent structure, just as the arts council maintains an independent structure through that model, and I entirely endorse that model for the future. 

I think there's a bit of confusion here between the two of us. I was talking in financial terms. I'll ask this question: if the Welsh Government withdrew funding tomorrow, would the museums continue, or would they be forced to close their doors? If they are wholly dependent, or substantially dependent, on the Welsh Government in operational terms, the OCS I'm sure classify them as Welsh Government-controlled bodies. 

One of the things I've argued against during the whole of my time at the Assembly is exploitative contracts: zero-hours contracts, flexible low-hour contracts, annualised hours, agency staff—there's no shortage of ways to badly treat people. I also believe that everyone should be paid the real living wage. The museum staff deserve not to be subject to these employment practices. I am pleased that Mr Thurley acknowledges the high quality of all the museum sites and the impact many of them have for their local communities, both in terms of a museum presence in the locality and providing a source of regular employment in often marginal areas.

Free entry to museums has been a long-standing policy of the Labour Party in Wales. Do not exclude people on price from viewing their history. On charging, I have no difficulty in charging for specific exhibitions, with caveats that anything relating to Wales must be free. I do not believe the people of Wales should have to pay to view their own history. Also, it should not be a back-door method of charging for museum entry. I believe the report is correct in its final section addressing the need for financial stability for the museum and clarity on its funding position over the next few years. In addition to the areas outlined, I would also add that the museum is still in the process of negotiating the 2017-19 pay offer with the trade unions. Any funding settlement needs to take account of the costs associated with this and ensure a period of stability for the organisation going forward.

The museum is at a pivotal moment where it can move forward with a well-funded model that seeks to engage with its staff and their recognised trade unions, and deliver a world-class service provided by professional and well-motivated people, able to deliver for the communities and the people of Wales. Over the last year, the Historic Wales steering group has developed ideas and programmes that it hopes will build and develop such a model, which involves the recognised trade unions in the process. I believe any recommendations should be considered by this group and the report should not derail the development of this work. I think it's important, and I sincerely hope, for the sake of the future of the staff and the cultural sector within Wales, that both the Welsh Government and museum management look to that option as a way to take it forward. 

If I can return to what I was talking about earlier on the financial side of it, you might have whatever rules you've got and whatever charters you've got, but where is the money coming from? There are lots of organisations throughout Wales—they want money from the public sector, but they want to run their organisations as if they're part of the private sector. That is one of the things—[Interruption.] Please, yes. 

I think part of the purpose of the Thurley review was to see how the museum sector—well, certainly the national museum sector as a whole—could raise more of its income so that that balance between public funding and non-government funding would change. 

I've got no problem with organisations raising money. The point I'm trying to get across—which I'm obviously failing with—is that these organisations are wholly dependent on Government money. If the Government turns the money off, these organisations close. That is the key to this. So, they can't go about pretending they're private sector organisations for the benefit of themselves. They're dependent on Government money, they're dependent on the public sector, they're dependent on money from the taxpayers of Wales, and, as such, they should be responsible to them.

Thanks to the Minister for bringing today's debate. I haven't yet had any formal contact with the new Minister, either in the Chamber or in committee, so I'd like to officially welcome him into his new role. I think we all feel, certainly in this section of the Chamber—by which I mean the UKIP seats—that he has shown a lot of promise, and I believe he could be a valuable addition to the Government's ministerial team. I have certainly marked his name down as somebody with a bright future in Government.

On to today's matters. I've heard what the other contributors have said, but I want to go slightly further than the Thurley review and float a more contentious idea. I appreciate that there has been a commitment from the Welsh Government to the principle of free entry to the national museum network. I don't want to unduly restrict people's access to these museums, but I think it is possible that we could consider stretching this principle slightly so that Amguedda Cymru can generate some income and operate more effectively. A token charge of £1 for adults to enter a museum, with children going free, would not, I feel, put off parents who are considering visiting a museum as part of a family day out. Of course, there could be an argument, then, as to what will stop this £1 charge from rising and rising until it becomes exorbitant. Well, as the museums are a public facility—and will still largely be publicly financed with a grant from the Welsh Government still being the main source of income—then, surely, the Government can draw up terms under which the charge can only rise annually in line with the consumer price index, the measure of inflation that tends to rise at a lower rate than the retail price index.

There is also the issue of special exhibitions. To get many of these exhibitions to come to Wales will take considerable effort in terms of time and cost, so I feel that Amgueddfa Cymru should be able to try and recoup some of this cost by charging extra for access to these exhibitions, or at least certain ones. I appreciate what Suzy said earlier—she didn't want to have a look at what happens in London—

Well, I didn't quite say that.

Okay, sorry. I might have slightly simplified what you said. Anyway, I'm going to have a look at what happens in London.

To get into the Victoria and Albert Museum is free, but entry to special exhibitions—and there are always numerous special exhibitions on at the V&A—currently ranges from £8 to £19. Now, we have to remember that entry to the V&A's general displays is free. So, they are perhaps having to charge fairly large amounts for the special exhibitions, at least in part, to cross-subsidise the free entry to the rest of the museum. Now, if you had the token £1 charge, you wouldn't perhaps have to do that. You could have a different financial model and you could perhaps charge £5 for the special exhibitions. You could raise money in other ways as well.

The museum in St Fagans, which I will persist in calling the Welsh national folk museum, has recently been refurbished—

Why?

Well, I'll go on to that, Lee. I will tell you later.

It has recently been refurbished with the addition of a new main building, a craft workshop and other facilities. The new building contains an enlarged cafe, activity and event spaces, some of which can be hired out to groups, and a bigger gift shop. So, this will hopefully help the museum at St Fagans to raise more revenue, and is therefore a welcome development and one that could be followed by the other museums under the umbrella of Amgueddfa Cymru.

Now, to raise Lee's point, I mentioned the old name of the St Fagans museum, which was what I knew it as growing up. It has since been called the Museum of Welsh Life, and is now, I see, named the St Fagans National Museum of History—neither of which are as evocative as the original name, in my opinion. Can I therefore issue a plea to the museums to keep their evocative, original names? Because I also noticed that—

Like the National Front.

No, not that. The maritime museum, as was, is now called the National Waterfront Museum. Before long, we will have the Big Pit National Coal Museum changing its name into the 'National Industry Museum' or some similarly anodyne title. I sometimes wonder who dreams these name changes up. Every time you change a name, you will lose potential customers because you are changing a well-known brand. I think there is a strong commercial case for sticking with the name that is already familiar to many people. However, I can see that I'm no expert in this field. [Interruption.] Yes, I do. These kinds of decisions certainly, though, should fall under the oversight of somebody like a commercial director. I see that the Thurley review is calling for Amgueddfa Cymru to bring in a commercial director, and I would strongly endorse that call. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

It's a great pleasure to take part in this very important debate. The first thing I want to say, really, is that I'm glad that this is getting us talking about National Museum Wales as I think it's of huge importance to us as a nation because we need to tell our story to our children here in Wales as well as to visitors who come here. And I agree that Wales should be telling its story to the world of how a small nation has had such a massive impact, particularly in terms of the industrial revolution.

This report by Simon Thurley does recognise National Museum Wales, Amgueddfa Cymru, as one of the jewels in the crown of the museums in the UK, and I'm particularly pleased that it praises the expertise and knowledge of the staff who work there. Because I think all our experience of the staff, and particularly the front-line staff, the people who welcome you when you go there, and the skills of the craftspeople, the people who split the slates, and all the craftspeople at St Fagans—I think it is absolutely great that they are acknowledged. The report also praises the rise in visitor numbers to the national museum in Cardiff, which were up 34 per cent between 2010 and 2015, to nearly 0.5 million a year.

Obviously, in terms of the commercial viability, it's obvious that the report is concentrating a lot of its emphasis on that, and some of his recommendations do make sense to me, such as asking visitors for donations. A donation of 20p per head is not unaffordable, and the report says that this has raised £300,000 a year. I see no problems at all in asking for small donations, and obviously other museums are sometimes much more forthright in asking for money. I don't see a problem with charging for special exhibitions, and I think it would be acceptable to have a member scheme, which would also help to raise funds. I think these options should be investigated, but I think it is absolutely essential that we keep free access. I think it's one of the great achievements of this Assembly, of the Welsh Government, that there is free access so that everybody, whatever their means, can benefit from the museums. And I believe that this huge rise in numbers is directly linked to the openness of the museum—the fact that people can go there and don't have to worry about paying. So, I don't think there should be any barrier, and I don't support Gareth Bennett's proposal of £1 to go in. I think it must be free.

I wanted to go on now about the relationship in the museum. I think this is pivotal moment. This is an opportunity to improve the relationship between the unions and the management. The report is correct in saying that there have been well-publicised difficulties with the staff and management relationship, and as chair of the Public and Commercial Services Union cross-party group, I am very well aware of all these difficulties. This report does look back at some of those problems, but what it doesn't say is that the reason for the problems was that the museums were seeking to slash staff wages for the lowest paid, whilst senior management pay was being increased. During this difficult time, the PCS actually balloted their members four times, and I, along with other members from this Assembly, were there speaking at rallies in support of the staff, and I think it's important to say that a resolution to this dispute was actually helped and brokered by the Welsh Government. So, I think it's important that there—. Although I support the idea of the independence of the bodies, when they can't manage things properly, I think it is very important that we are able to turn to the Welsh Government.

I just want to say about some of the things that are problems at the museum. There are the zero-hours contracts that Mike Hedges already mentioned. It's not acceptable to have these zero-hours contracts, and, certainly, there should be a formal agreement on how they are used, if they have to be there at all. I think that the use of fixed-term contracts should be limited. This is a real opportunity now, on the basis of this report, to restore good relations in the museum, because I think we all feel that the staff are the key to the success of the museum, and surely their terms and conditions and pay should be in line with Welsh Government departments. Certainly, there should be time off for trade union work.

I'm very pleased that the Minister said the points of view of staff are vital. He also mentioned that, perhaps, some museums would close for certain periods of the year. Well, obviously, that will make the members of staff who work permanently in those museums for all the hours in the year—their hearts are going to sink when they read that. So, I think these issues have to be taken into consideration when proposals are made about how this is going to affect staff, and make sure they're part of the dialogue, so that there are good relationships. 

So, I think that this is a great opportunity to try and start off on a new foot. Let's recognise the huge contribution that staff are making, and make sure that they're part of this dialogue.

I call on the Minister to reply to the debate.

Thank you very much, Llywydd, and may I thank all of the Members who have taken part in this debate, and for the general welcome that's been extended to the recommendations? We had opening remarks from Suzy Jenkins that emphasised that—why did I say Suzy Jenkins? It was Suzy Davies. I was thinking about someone else, Suzy Davies. We had remarks about the importance of Assembly Members expressing their opinions, and that was the reason for holding this debate and I'm grateful for that. I'm grateful for the support given to independence and the importance of growing capacity within the institution. I am confident, and I wouldn't be saying this unless it wasn't on the basis of the discussions that I've had and that I'm going to have again.

As emphasised already, the independence of the museum is important, but also, as Julie Morgan said, the Government's influence as the authority and public body that has national responsibility for the museum is part of the responsibility that we have as a Government and as an Assembly. So, both of those elements have to work in accord. It's a matter of establishing the difference between them that's important. I can give assurance that I will be striving to co-draft the remit letter so that we can discuss together how we want to set out the programme for the coming years. That includes, of course, the funding programme. We're restricted by the current fiscal regime established in Westminster as to how far we can go in the years to come to give assurance. But we will be considering that further. 

I am grateful to Dai Lloyd for his appropriate historic lecture on the development of the museum and its educational role. May I assure him that there's no intention by this Minister to merge national institutions? Cultural independence, if not full constitutional independence for the nation that owns the museum, is a vital part of the culture Minister's agenda. The devolved nature of the museum within Wales itself is a vital part of its interest and its difference, as I've seen in visiting these institutions recently. I acknowledge the importance of the agreement made with Plaid Cymru. This was part of the discussion that I had with museum officials, and the intention is that we will continue in that spirit of agreement over the coming years with regard to the budget.

Thank you to Mike Hedges, who always tells the truth in an amusing way.

I'm very grateful to Mike for providing us with lessons in public administration in a way that is so attractive and amusing to listen to, and that's supposed to be a compliment. 

We are certainly aiming for financial stability and, indeed, Welsh Government has already indicated that we are looking to ensure proper financial capacity, which must include meeting the need for effective remuneration. I would say, as a matter of principle, I agree with a longer term target of aligning the level of remuneration in terms of the conditions of those who work for us in the museum sector and those who work for us in other parts of our public services. That's something that we need to address.

I'm very grateful to Gareth Bennett for his generous remarks, and I can assure him that there is no intention to pursue a model of charging adults and not charging younger citizens. We need to look at the family visitors to the museum as a whole unit. 

With regard to names, the 'Welsh folk museum' always reminded me of something more folksy than even amgueddfa werin, although I do find, as I travel around that part of west Cardiff, that the brown signs take a bit of time catching up with the latest name. No doubt that will happen in the future. 

Can I here publicly thank Julie Morgan for her role, which I've now learnt more fully about in ensuring improved Government relations and the relationship between this Assembly, through her PCS cross-party group, and the trade union side, and, indeed, the management of the museums when there were the difficulties to which we've all referred? It is indeed my wish, as much as hers, that we do not return there.

As I say, we are seeking to ensure a steady level of funding for the future, and I'm certain that the degree of support that has been exhibited in this debate today will strengthen our relationship with the museum. 

Thank you very much for your contributions.

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? The motion is therefore agreed.

Motion agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Therefore, there will be no voting time at the end of this meeting, and that brings today's proceedings to a close.

The meeting ended at 17:55.