Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and I would like to associate my own comments with the comments of the Deputy Minister. I think we're all saddened by the tragic incident involving rail workers this morning, but I'm sure that all Members here would want to pass on our thoughts and condolences to the families who are involved.

Deputy Presiding Officer, I move the motion in my name. After reporting on the rail franchise and south Wales metro in June 2017, it was a natural next step for the committee to take a closer look at Transport for Wales’s governance arrangements. Back in 2017, we had at that time said that while arrangements were appropriate at that time, they would need to change in the future. So, in this inquiry, we looked at how other transport delivery bodies worked and listened to the concerns of Welsh stakeholders. Our report highlights the unusual way that Transport for Wales was set up—as a wholly owned subsidiary of Welsh Government—and that this decision has created some confusion for stakeholders.

I'll give you an example of this. Shortly after we started our inquiry, the Welsh Government launched a consultation on legislative proposals for public transport. But it was Transport for Wales that engaged directly with stakeholders on developing the White Paper, not the Welsh Government. So the lines of responsibility for policy development and for operational delivery have seemed blurred, and after the confusion, I think there is some confusion there, and I don't think that that is at all surprising. The Welsh Government tells us that Transport for Wales is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Welsh Ministers, but at the same time that there is a distinct separation between the Welsh Government and TfW, allowing TfW to make independent operational decisions. It is notable that in front of us today, we have a response from the Welsh Government to some of our recommendations, and a separate response from TfW to others.

This particular report focused on the governance of Transport for Wales itself, not the performance of TfW rail services. Despite some difficulties and some teething problems with autumn rail disruption, which the committee has reported on separately, many transport stakeholders have seemed encouraged by Transport for Wales's initial engagement with them on a one-to-one basis, which I think is positive. However, the need for much better transparency and engagement, and clearer lines of accountability, were key recommendations. While transport stakeholders were developing a better understanding of Transport for Wales through direct contact with them, it was not being communicated clearly enough to the public.

There is, I think, much to welcome in Transport for Wales's response to the report, such as the commitment to creating an advisory panel to give customers, stakeholders and interested groups the opportunity to advise TfW on its activities. TfW also says it will publish a high-level summary of its communications plan for 2019-20, but it would be helpful to know when we could expect to see that plan.

We also made a number of recommendations to the Welsh Government and Transport for Wales about publishing an organisational chart; being clearer about the role played by consultants; ensuring its board is representative and diverse; publishing a complete register of interests of its board members and directors; and demonstrating a strong and open partnership approach to engagement with trade unions. The committee was concerned by evidence from two trade unions about a lack of partnership working. TfW’s chief executive made a commitment to listen to the unions' concerns, and the response to recommendation 11 describes TfW’s

'keenness to work with all partners and formalise any agreements as soon as possible.' 

This is not, of course, the same as saying that agreements are in place. So, I think further progress is needed in that regard.

Transport for Wales's response to recommendation 3, unfortunately I think, misses the point. The committee asked to see an organisational chart published for the whole organisation, not just the board. Transport for Wales says publishing details of its senior team is in line with practice elsewhere, including Transport for London. But Transport for London's transparency strategy extends far beyond publishing board members' biographies. It also publishes a much more substantial organisational chart with details of staff roles and salary bands for senior staff, as well as Transport for London's board members. Transport for Wales's proposals to publish details of contracts of over £25,000 on a quarterly basis may help a bit, I think, to understand the role of consultants, but in light of concerns about the significant use of consultants, the response I don't think goes far enough.

We do welcome the gender balance on TfW’s board and the Minister’s commitment to ensuring that the next chair of TfW will be subject to a pre-appointment hearing with the committee. The recommendation is, of course, no reflection on the suitability of the current chair, but it does recognise the committee’s important scrutiny role.

I very much look forward to hearing the views of colleagues this afternoon, and also, of course, the Deputy Minister's response. And, of course, I commend our report to the Assembly.