Can I just take a brief moment to thank everybody on the committee, including my fellow committee members, as were, and members of the clerking team? I really enjoyed my time on CWLC, and, even though I'm delighted to be speaking on education now, I'm going to remember those two and a half years, not just with fondness but for the fact that I learned so much there that's going to be valuable in my new portfolio, and I'll come to that as I make my contribution today. 

This inquiry happened because the people of Wales asked us to do it, and I know it was of particular interest to the Chair, but I didn't realise there was such an appetite for shedding light on what turned out to be a Wales-wide situation until we made this appeal to the Welsh public. And I still think this very innovative way of deciding at least on part of what the committee's work was is very valuable and genuinely worth other policy committees considering. Just with this particular inquiry, the process helped us identify a need for some expert advice, for example, which perhaps you wouldn't have been aware of previously, and that helped us understand that we needed to take another round of evidence, which we did, after we found that matters of importance arose from the original round of evidence gathering. So, very much a moving feast, but a new way of doing things that I think left us all as committee members feeling properly informed before we signed off the recommendations of the report.

I'm just going to focus on a few of the recommendations, beginning with the first two. Really, someone has got to take responsibility for the existence and the success of music services, and we think that it should be the Welsh Government, not least as a result of statutory well-being goals that now affect government as well as other public services. We were interested in a range of delivery models, which I'll come back to, but what we were clear on is that this cannot be left to cash-strapped councils trying to rescue these services themselves—the pressure on funding non-statutory activities in all councils is acute these days—and nor can it depend on the interest of key officials within councils, or indeed within school leadership, for these services to exist at all, it seems to me. It's just not a safe way of securing those services. We were also—I think you mentioned it, Bethan—pretty disappointed that no really significant headway had been made on pretty useful recommendations made by the Government's own task and finish group on music services a couple of years ago.

Now, having said that, I firmly believe that the design of the delivery of music services is a co-productive activity. I don't think that should be down to Welsh Government. It's not for civil servants, and that's actually why I was very happy to support recommendation 1, because I think the Government's role is to set out strategic objectives for music services that, in my view, go beyond the core purpose of music services, which is growing our next generation of musicians. I think by looking at music participation as a tool in achieving a whole range of well-being and education objectives, even beyond the creative learning plan, if needs be—a tool in tackling poverty, for example. We've got the Kay Andrews report. I'm hoping there'll be some work done on that pretty soon to see how delivery's looking against that. But these are all ways of building a need for music services.

So it's not just the core purpose. Music services can do so much more, and other people need to accept that there's a responsibility for ensuring that we maintain those services beyond the core purpose. It means more than one income stream, for a start, and I think there may be some purists out there who think maybe this is a slightly transactional way of looking at music services, but the way I'm looking at it is building on the committee's underlying conclusions that things will fail if we carry on as we are. So, if other policy sectors can start looking at how music can be of value to them—and you did mention some examples, I think, Bethan—then I think its existence becomes more of a political priority. The more people that have a vested interest in it, the better.

I think a national body, albeit one that is very regional and local facing, is the best way to ensure that provision is equitable, that standards are maintained, that all parts of Wales are covered, and of course standards of pay for music service providers. I think a national body's got to be the best place for that, as well as to co-ordinate these alternative income streams. So, if that means beefing up the role of the National Youth Arts Wales, or something separate, I really don't mind, but I think we do need that.

Then just briefly I'll come back to the question of recommendation 4. One size fits all—we don't need it, it's unwelcome. We had fantastic evidence from, I think it was, a co-operative group in Denbighshire. Why should we reinvent the wheel when the music providers themselves are quite capable of designing services that work well?

Just finally I want to say, as an untalented person myself, I rely on others to make music to make me happy, but then so do the lonely, the isolated, those with additional learning needs, communication problems, dementia, those with mental health problems—they rely on music in some cases to help them participate in life, and all of us need it to participate in our national culture. Thank you.