8. Will the Minister make a statement on the north Wales speech and language therapy service? OAQ53968

Thank you for the question. It's the responsibility of Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board to ensure it provides adequate access to therapy services, including speech and language therapy, taking account of relevant best practice. I am happy to confirm, though, that within north Wales no-one waits beyond the 14-week target for therapy services, and that of course includes access to speech and language therapy.

Diolch. I've been, since 2017, in touch with a constituent, a former therapist, who was among staff who decided to blow the whistle on concerns they had relating to Betsi Cadwaladr's speech and language therapy department. The concern is two fold: firstly, a clinical governance issue, with real concerns about workload pressures, negative workplace culture, dilution of services and a risk to both staff and service users, they believe. But there is also a deep feeling that, in their own words, the whistleblowing process in Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board is broken.

Now, we know that children who don't get the help they need with their communication can experience lifelong impacts—education, employment, mental health, well-being and so on. I've dealt with a number of cases where children have had prolonged waits for therapy, or have experienced unsuitable therapy—one case identifying a prolonged wait for therapy in Welsh, for example. I'm pleased that we are finally at a stage where an external, independent investigation has been completed. 

Now, whilst it's clear to me that there needs to be a review of the whistleblowing process, based on my constituent's experience, will the Minister agree with me that, in the interests of transparency, the independent report, which I'm told won't include any recommendations as such, is made readily available to my constituent and others with similar concerns, and that opportunities are then given to those who have raised concerns to work with the health board to discuss their needs and how to improve services?

I think there are two points that I would make in response. The first is to recognise that, in making sure that the current performance of people being seen within a reasonable time continues, it is important to continue to look at how the service is organised. And there are times we underplay the efficiency or inefficiency that we build into the healthcare system by continuing to run a system in the way it always has been run. For example, the place an appointment takes place—is it easier and more convenient to see people in community settings? What do we need to do to make sure those settings are appropriate for people to have appropriate assessments made, rather than potentially asking people to travel to hospital-based services? So, there is something about the community footprint as well. Your point, really—in terms of the focus of the constituency issues that I understand you've been dealing with, I'm not aware of all of the details, so I won't claim to be, but I know you say there's been an independent investigation. I don't think I can give commitments to publish an independent investigation that I'm not sighted on—I believe it's the health board that have agreed to appoint someone to undertake an independent investigation—but I'd want it to be properly transparent and also to make sure people do want to work together to try and improve the service. So, perhaps you'll want to write to me or talk to me afterwards. I want to make sure there's a maximum amount of transparency to help further improve the service.FootnoteLink

Information further to Plenary

Finally, question 9—Hefin David.