I'd just like to say, first of all, thank you to all the people who came in to give evidence because I thought it was a good cross section of society and it was interesting to hear their experiences of the regional skills partnerships. Some were pretty positive, others were not so, and I'm sure I'll go into that here today.

From our inquiries on the Economy, Infrastructure and Skills Committee, it's clear that an assessment of future skills needs is the gap that needs to be filled by said regional skills partnerships, and that's why we recommended in action 10 that Welsh Government should no longer request regional skills partnerships—or regional skills advisory boards, as we propose to call them—to make operational recommendations on learner numbers at further education institutions, even at the current sector subject level. Instead, Welsh Government should require further education institutions to have regard to the more strategic and intelligence-based reports that could be produced by the board instead. This, of course, would empower and incentivise institutions to respond to the issues identified in those reports. Along with the other recommendations, a stimulation of employer demand for higher skills can be created, beginning to close down the low-skill traps found in parts of the Welsh economy.

But despite the evidence and input provided to us on the committee by crucial stakeholders, it's very disappointing, as has been said, that the Welsh Government have chosen to reject action 10, stating that to move away from having the regional skills advisory board make operational recommendations to the Welsh Government would, and I quote,

'weaken the new strategic planning and funding process.'

Instead, they insist on focusing on learner numbers, and according to ColegauCymru, this approach is overly prescriptive and intensive, generating unnecessary work that does not lead to tangible gains. Through the new curriculum, there is a significant focus on building trust in leadership and capacity within the pre-16 education system in schools. The Welsh Government doesn't dictate their level of post-16 provision. Equally, Welsh Government is completely hands-off when it comes to higher education, too. Meanwhile, in further education, what is lacking is the independence and respect, I would say, to that particular sector. This doesn't seem right to me and it doesn't seem right to ColegauCymru. Why is it that an injection of micromanagement in course numbers is needed here unlike any other educational level? 

It's also particularly puzzling that the Welsh Government has rejected this recommendation as it's not only our report that concluded that planning activity should take place at a more strategic level, but also the Government's own commissioned report from SQW, which came to the same conclusion. On a related note, I do express frustration at the timing of the Government-commissioned report as it took place in March 2019, months after the Economy, Infrastructure and Skills Committee commenced its own inquiry. Arguably, an expense of £9,918 was wasted on a report that risked duplication rather than waiting to hear the findings of our particular committee findings.

Going back to the role of colleges and regional skills partnerships, the colleges' perspective is summed up pretty well by what David Jones of Coleg Cambria told us, and I quote:

'We can't just let universities crack on and do their own thing—because ultimately there's public money going into universities; that's where it's coming from at the end of the day—and then just focus on some sort of regional economy-driven planning just on FE and work-based learning. It's flawed if you do it that way.'

There must be a way for regional skills partnerships to collaborate in a more equal way across sectors. By no means did the committee receive evidence arguing for the abandonment of partnerships—but I did feel a sense of hesitancy in praising them outright when we did take scrutiny—but that a regional skills co-ordinating body was necessary and useful. So, that was the element that they saw fit to promote.

Another issue that the committee focused on is to what extent the partnerships truly represent the societies that they live in and how people can interact with those skills partnerships. It’s clear that they're not reaching their full potential. Some are business heavy, some are college light, and how does that reflect the societies they're living in? Some are very weak on gender balance and some are not very inclusive in terms of the diversity of the communities that they represent. There's also a lack of engagement with Welsh language aims, and of meeting the Cymraeg 2050 target. And we did question many of them about their relationship with city and growth deals: how do the plans of the growth deals align with the skills agenda of the regional partnerships?

There is more reason to move away from the top-down structure and move to a horizontal approach. And as further suggested by Universities Wales, improvement could be seen by wider engagement and specialised use of data. More work is needed to engage with the learner and graduate voice so that the experiences and motivations of those both entering and already in the workforce in Wales can be reflected. Steering their study is one thing, but dictating their study based on what the economy needs all the time may not suit what people actually want to do in their educational careers.

So, thank you for the support that we've had in this particular committee inquiry, but again, reflecting what the Chair has said, we're not as happy with some of the responses from Welsh Government and hope we can work positively from here on in.