Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. I'm very pleased to be speaking in the debate today, because, as you heard, the Finance Committee had an opportunity in its meeting on 3 October to consider the Assembly Commission’s draft budget for 2020-21, and we published our report on 17 October. On behalf of committee members, I would like to thank Suzy Davies and Assembly officials for responding to the committee’s questions and recommendations.

In May of last year, the Finance Committee recommended that any underspend from the budget for the remuneration board’s determination be returned to the Welsh consolidated fund. This issue had been a cause for concern for some time, so we are pleased that our recommendation was implemented.

The committee considers it a priority to ensure that the Assembly improves engagement with all the people of Wales and we were surprised that the draft budget did not include specific references to the Youth Parliament, the Citizens' Assembly or other initiatives. We welcome the commitment of the £250,000 engagement fund, but Members were keen to ensure that any engagement activity was meaningful and not tokenistic.

The committee is pleased that the legislation software project, as we heard, is being progressed with joint funding from the Welsh Government. However, we are concerned on another matter, that the cost estimate of £4 million for the Tŷ Hywel window replacement project is not included in the budget for 2020-21 or indicative budgets for future years. It is unclear as to how this work will be progressed as £345,000 had been allocated to the windows project in the budget for 2019-20, yet at that stage no feasibility studies had been undertaken. While we welcome the Commission’s acceptance of our recommendation to provide details of its long-term project plans, we are unclear as to why this information will not be provided in June next year as requested, but rather will be provided by 1 October.

The way the Commission is staffed has also been an issue for the committee in previous years. Whilst steps have been taken to increase transparency over staffing decisions, the committee is concerned that the draft budget did not include a more accurate estimate of staff costs for the year without the need for an estimate of churn. We have therefore requested an update on the churn provision.

The lack of transparency around staff numbers was a particular concern for the committee in light of the recent voluntary exit scheme. We believe that a scheme that releases 24 staff members and includes significant voluntary severance payments, such as the two in excess of £100,000, should only be used where substantial restructure or change is evidenced. The committee has yet to see sufficient evidence of this type of change, and is disappointed that the scheme will not result in savings, particularly in terms of staff numbers. Our report recommends that an annual report on the long-term financial benefits of the voluntary exit scheme is provided to the committee. The Commission has stated that the Finance Committee will receive a report on this by September 2020, but did not go as far as accepting our recommendation.

We have previously recommended that the Commission keeps in place a cap on staffing levels, which has been adhered to. However, the Commission recently increased this cap from 491 to 497 and we heard evidence that the posts may increase to 501, plus, of course, the two additional posts to support the standards commissioner. The committee recognises the requirement for the Commission to provide resources to support the standards commissioner, but concerns were raised about the creative accounting involved in the creation of these two additional posts outside the establishment cap.

The committee is grateful for the detail provided by the Commission on staffing and the voluntary exit scheme. However, it is difficult to comprehend how, in a time of austerity, a public sector organisation can release 24 members of staff but still increase the total number of posts. We also believe there is a need for increased transparency in terms of how the standards commissioner is funded, and we welcome the assertion that this will be clearly identified in the final budget for this and future years.

Given the planned additional work to raise awareness for votes at 16 and 17, the committee was surprised that the budget for election expenditure is not higher than the spend for previous elections. We are keen that the Commission prioritises funding in this area and works proactively with the Electoral Commission, the Welsh Government and local authorities to ensure a comprehensive awareness-raising campaign across Wales.

The committee is grateful for the information provided on the scenario planning that the Commission has been carrying out in order to prepare for a variety of Brexit outcomes. Finally, the committee wishes to acknowledge the considerable amount of work carried out by Commission staff over the last 12 months in relation to Brexit preparations.

With those comments, may I thank you for the opportunity to convey the views of the Finance Committee on the Assembly Commission budget?