Hannah Blythyn

Millie Mitchell (MM): You first entered government as minister for environment in 2017, what was the conversation like when first minister Carwyn Jones asked you to take on the role?

Hannah Blythyn (HB): I would say I was surprised to get the call because I'd only been a Senedd member I think for around 18 months at that point. So, whilst obviously everybody would want to serve in the government at some point, I probably wasn't anticipating it would happen so soon. I was in North Wales, actually, because it was towards the end of the half term recess and I remember getting a missed call off the then first minister [Carwyn Jones]’s senior private secretary, saying that he would like to see me, and could I get to Cardiff for 2:00 PM? 

I think it's probably one of the longest journeys I've ever done to Cardiff, in terms of what was going through my head about what the conversation might be. I worked through all these scenarios and this big speech I would give in response if I was asked to serve in government. I think once I got in the room and Carwyn offered me this role of the minister for environment, I just managed to say “thank you” at the end of it. As you get more experience you realise to ask some more questions about your responsibilities and what that would mean. But I think, because it's very new, unless you've perhaps anticipated you may go into government at that point, it does come as quite a surprise. It's a huge change going from a relatively recently elected backbencher to being a member of the government.

MM: What was that first day in the department like then?

HB: I was asked to serve on the Friday and then it was the weekend and then it was the Monday when I came back and started. What was helpful, over the course of that weekend, was that even though you don’t have everything set up or your IT at that point, one of the civil servants (who was to become my first private secretary) reached out and got in touch. It was really good in terms of giving me the pointers of where I needed to go on the Monday morning. 

So, obviously, we have the Welsh government offices in Cathays Park. Then in the Senedd estate - in Tŷ Hywel - the fifth floor is the Welsh government area, but your pass only works as a backbencher to other floors. You can't get onto the Welsh government floor. I think from just a practical human perspective I was thinking about “is somebody going to be there to let me in or am I going to feel slightly foolish peering through the glass to get in the building?”. But because they had reached out beforehand, that gave me the reassurance. So, I think the things that can be done informally as well as formally are particularly important when you're a new minister, because it is a big change.

MM: As you said, this wasn't necessarily a role that you were expecting to come into, so how did you go about deciding what your main priorities would be within that post and how long did it take you to decide on those?

HB: Looking through the list of responsibilities, I found it quite helpful to meet with the different policy officials to just get that broad understanding to start off with. I think if I knew then what I know now, I'd be asking what were the most topical things, what were potentially the most contentious, what were the decisions coming up on the horizon. 

One of the things I would say is that there is no manual to go into government. If you could give somebody top tips for what to do when they are first asked to serve - those are some of the things I would look at now. But I think I was able then to focus on some areas that perhaps were topical but also that I had an interest in. It’s quite a broad portfolio to start off with but I ended up looking in particular at things like recycling and reuse. 

I think what helped me was that I was deputy to Lesley Griffiths [then minister for energy, environment and rural affairs] and Lesley is a fellow North Wales member. I'd actually known Lesley for a number of years prior to me being elected, so working under somebody I already had a relationship with and knew, I think made it … the correct word isn't easier, but it gave me the added support and made me feel comfortable about going to ask questions.

MM: How did that relationship work between you and Lesley Griffiths? Was there a clearly defined set of responsibilities between you?

HB: Yes, so at that point under Carwyn the responsibilities lists were different. Under Carwyn, it was very clearly defined what the cabinet secretary position’s responsibilities were, and then, as the minister working within the same portfolio, what my lead responsibilities were. That was very, very clearly defined. But clearly there were areas when you work together – areas where we would do joint events because there would be linkage and crossover. Actually, I found we worked together really well, I think because we had that relationship beforehand. 

In particular, it helped to have that extra support ahead of my first set of questions. Because it's one thing asking questions of ministers and it’s another thing answering them. Particularly when you're very new to a portfolio and perhaps there's only certain areas that you had that more forensic understanding of in advance. So to have somebody there, to provide that support and to talk you through ahead of your first set of questions, it is really valuable.

MM: You mentioned that you got to shape some of what your own priorities would be and that recycling and reuse was an area you were particularly interested in. How much progress were you able to make on achieving those policy objectives and were there any specific challenges you faced?

HB: So in the next position I held [deputy minister for housing and local government], I also carried on with the responsibility for the areas around recycling, reuse and the circular economy - even though it was a different portfolio. Obviously it's not always the case in government as people are in positions for a short time, but if you're able to have that stability, I think it's really helpful in terms of building the knowledge and expertise, for seeing things through, and for the relationships with the various stakeholders within those portfolios too both within government and outside of government. I was really pleased to continue that main trajectory of the global-scale success of Wales being one of the best recycling nations in the world, but also to take that further in terms of reuse and Refill Wales, going that one step beyond recycling as well.

MM: What was your approach to establishing and developing those relationships with stakeholders outside of government?

HB: There were some established forums already there bringing together, for example, local authorities and organisations like the national parks. And there were some relationships I had prior. As a backbencher, you would have had contact with them as well. I think as you progress through government, you find what things work for you and what things work for your particular group of stakeholders, such as whether you want to meet people individually or in larger groups.

One of the things I did find with my first brief is that, whereas there were certain areas of environmental policies and politics that I had been involved with, it wasn't the background I came from. I worked in the trade union movement before, so one of the things I did find I was able to do was apply some of that within the portfolio. When we were trying to work with the people that provided us with some of those services and also in terms of making sure these were good jobs for people - I think being able to bring the thing that got me into politics in the first place and apply it within that portfolio, even though it might not be obvious at first how to do that, was something that I was really pleased to be able to do.

MM: You came into a second role as deputy minister for housing and local government when Mark Drakeford became first minister in 2018. As you said, your brief changed although some elements of that were a continuation. What reasons were you given by the first minister for why he wanted to move you on to that post and did he set out specific priorities for you?

HB: As a slight aside, and I’m being sarcastic here, it was perfect timing because the new government was formed 48 hours before I was due to get married. I went in to see Mark and one of the senior special advisors, and they actually talked through the whole portfolio because at that point there had been a change. Rather than having the breakdown of lead responsibilities, it was all within the housing and local government portfolio. I think we talked through some of the things at that point which he was suggesting I lead on and then it was for the ministers to work together to see how that would evolve over time.

Some of the things I was carrying over were what I said before around the circular economy and recycling, but also then new responsibilities around things like regeneration and in particular town centre development. Then over time I ended up picking other responsibilities. I was working with Julie James [then minister for housing and local government] and picking up other responsibilities such as for fire and rescue services - that's another one that stayed with me into my next role afterwards as well.

Akash Paun (AP): We’ve heard in other interviews about the change in the nature of the relationship between the cabinet minister and junior minister under Carwyn Jones’ and Mark Drakeford’s governments. How different was that in practice and do you have any reflections on the pros and cons of the two approaches?

HB: I don't think it changes the relationship between the two ministers because even if you've got a very clear set of lead responsibilities, you still need to work together. You're still working to the same budget and so forth. But from my perspective, as the junior minister in the relationship, I think it was clearer for me when I knew exactly which were the areas that I was leading on, though I can understand why you would put it together to create a ministry with a broader portfolio. The pros I would say are that it enables you to have a better understanding of all the different areas within the bigger portfolio. If you ever did have to step in for a colleague at an event or in questions or something like that, then you're perhaps better prepared and better equipped to do that.

The cons, I would say, are that as a more junior minister being clear on what you’re leading on is helpful to give you the space to take forward work. Also, in terms of parliamentary process, when it does come to oral questions, it's not then clear to the opposition who has responsibility for each area. For the questions tabled in advance, clearly you can sit down and go through them and designate who's going to answer which question as relevant to their responsibilities. But when it comes to the spokespeople questions it can be quite challenging because they indicate who they want it to be to, but there's been a number of occasions when they've indicated perhaps for one minister and then the questions have been what the other minister has led on. How it works in the Senedd at the moment they won't let you swap over or hand over, which I understand, so you have to try and find a way to manage that the best you can. So some of it is that over time the opposition members will know exactly who leads on what. 

In terms of the relationship with the minister you’re working with, I think it took a while to get to this point in a practical sense. It sounds slightly silly and frivolous, but when it got to spokespeople questions we would both sit down because if one of us was standing up then automatically the question would go to you, so you’ve almost then got a few seconds to try and work out where that question is meant to go and that person then stands up ready to take it.

AP: I guess in either model the relationship with your senior minister was crucial to being effective in the role. But in the second model you’ve just been describing, it sounds like maybe you had to have a much closer working relationship and more communication. How did that feel?

HB: Yeah, absolutely and I think that model meant that there might be meetings or various forums dealing with the different areas of responsibility where both ministers would attend even if it wasn't for the whole session, because there’d be things that kind of crossed over and also to ensure that broader portfolio understanding. As a junior minister, probably in some ways it was helpful again having that broader understanding and then being able to pick up different areas of the portfolio when needed or when perhaps responsibilities changed over. But sometimes you could find yourself being in a two hour forum when you didn't have that much to contribute, so perhaps your time could have been used more effectively.

MM: You mentioned earlier about the regeneration work you were involved in as part of this role, I was also reading that you led quite a substantial Transforming Towns investment. Could you tell us a bit more about how this scheme was established and what your role was in delivering it?

HB: The whole package of the Transforming Towns scheme was something that we developed whilst I was in that portfolio. There's been a number of different regeneration budgets and approaches over the course of devolution, but what we were trying to do was focus that a lot better and put those limited resources together. We know that people care passionately about where they live. I represent a constituency that is made up of a number of small towns and I grew up in a small town as well, so it's something I felt personally quite passionate about. 

As well as the Transforming Towns side of things, there’s also a policy called Town Centre First that we developed – which is still there and probably could still be built on in the future. We know that the nature of towns has changed over the past few decades. You don't have the same kind of well-known high street brands you once would have had on every high street, so [this scheme was] basically finding a way to make use of some of that vacant space, whilst also increasing footfall and finding other reasons for people to actually go into town centres. 

One of the ways we did this was through the policy of Town Centre First, which was a cross-government policy. If you were considering, for example, a new health centre then perhaps you should try and look for a town centre location in the first instance. Now that might not always be possible, but the first thing to try and look at should be whether there is actually somewhere you could embed public services in the heart of the community, rather than what had happened in the decades before when things tended to go out of town. 

MM: As you say, this was quite a cross-cutting policy and had applications with other parts of the Welsh government. How did you undertake that exercise of building broader support across government?

HB: Yes, so obviously it was something that had to be approved by the cabinet through a cabinet paper. In anticipation of that, there was a lot of work to talk through with colleagues what that might look like and for them to have an opportunity to raise any questions or challenges they thought it would bring from their perspectives as well. I think for something like that to have even a chance of working there needs to be that genuine cross-government commitment and buy-in to it as well. When we discussed it there was a recognition that it might not always be possible but we should approach it as the preferred option moving forward.

AP: Specifically on that fund and that policy you were leading on, what was the process that the government undertook in terms of evaluating whether the investments were having the desired effects?

HB: One of the things we did – and I think this works with a number of areas across Welsh government because of our size – was that it was very much done in partnership and through local authorities. We looked to them, on the basis that they were closest to the community, to work with that community, to identify support for projects and to consider what those projects might look like as well. In terms of evaluation, it would be looking at “have we increased footfall?” and “are the number of empty properties declining?” but also in terms of the look and feel of a place too. I think sometimes that's very difficult to measure, but it’s important to be looking at actually how you could create new usage and new life within towns as well. 

You have to be realistic and practical too. There is not the financial resource to do it for every town across Wales. One of the reasons why we worked in partnership with local authorities was that you would ask them to go through a process of identifying where they would want to focus that resource in the first instance. Rather than having a tiny bit everywhere, doing it in this way actually made the intervention stronger. Then, what we've also tried to do following that, is to look at how the number of different grants across government can be part of that package as well. It might not always be badged as ‘Transforming Towns’, but it might be something that as a consequence helps towards the regeneration of a community.

MM: When we spoke to Mark Drakeford, he told us that he introduced biweekly ministerial meetings where you would talk about longer-term issues on the horizon. Could you share your reflections on the experience of being in those meetings and how useful they were?

HB: Yes, we used to have a ‘discursive cabinet’ – I think Mark used to call it. It wasn’t for when something was brought for a decision as a cabinet paper, but it was an opportunity perhaps prior to that to have a proper, more open discussion as government colleagues about a particular policy or potential approach. I think that was really helpful in engaging and building support for certain policies. But also, if it wasn't you presenting at it, I found it was really useful to gain an understanding of other people's areas of work right across government, because although you have a taste of what each other are doing, you don't always have that opportunity to gain a greater in-depth understanding. Mark also developed the ‘ministerial calls’. Did he mention that as well?

AP: I'm not sure actually. Maybe you can describe that.

HB: Originally, when I first went into government, as a junior minister you wouldn't be at cabinet. Well, during the pandemic, Mark Drakeford changed that. It was obviously all virtual and we started to attend cabinet and it stayed that way ever since. So even in my last role, all ministers were attending cabinet. I can’t speak for Mark, but I think one of the rationales was that obviously it was a very difficult time. We were spread across the country and so it was intended to mean we were all to be part of that decision making, to have that understanding and to feed in some of the things that we were experiencing from our different partners, stakeholders and groups that we were working with on any changes or policies or restrictions.

But the other thing that developed during that time, and it's stayed in a less frequent form afterwards, was an informal call. It would just be first thing on a Thursday morning for example. During the pandemic, it was much more frequent because obviously things were happening in real time and quite rapidly, but it was something that stayed afterwards on a weekly basis. It was just a half-hour call online for us all and that was an opportunity if perhaps there was something that you thought all colleagues should know about and have on their radar or also to set up something that might be coming further down the line. Actually, I think that was a really helpful intervention.

MM: It’s really interesting how the things that happened during the pandemic can persist afterwards, isn't it? I was going to ask you about your personal experience of being a minister during the pandemic. Were there specific impacts it had on your role and how did you find that?

HB: Yeah, I think at the outset it was a challenge for anybody. I didn't have a senior decision-making role as part of it, but it was practically quite difficult for me because I was in North East Wales – so a long away. Because of the restrictions, I couldn't just pop into the Welsh government offices in Cathays Park with the small number of people that were working there. At that time too, I had terrible, terrible Internet connection, so it made it all very, very, very challenging. I think there were times when I felt quite removed from it, not because of how business was being done or how Welsh government was working, just from a purely practical, geographical sense.

But then, as time evolved, I had more of a role to play. Midway through, when I was deputy minister for housing and local government, Mark Drakeford changed some of the responsibilities around. Some of the things I’ve talked about around recycling and things went to another minister, but then I had responsibility for social partnership. There’d been draft legislation coming through and, because of my background, he asked me to pick that up. Because of that, in the latter weeks and months of the pandemic, I was doing a lot of the engagement work with social partners, whether that was trade unions or representatives of businesses as well.

MM: Did this crisis reveal anything to you about the strengths and weaknesses of the Welsh government or the civil service’s capacity to do things?

HB: To start off first with a weakness, obviously it was a new experience for everybody and it was about trying to learn rapidly as decisions needed to be taken. One of the things I would say is that, whilst I recognise that when you're making a decision as a government minister on any policy it has to go through due diligence particularly when it involves public money, I think it did show you that the civil service can move much faster if it needs to. One of the things other colleagues told me when I first went into government and one of the things I found quite frustrating sometimes was how long something took. So, how long it took from the initial advice or working up of a policy and how long it took to actually affect some kind of change. Like I say, I recognise that you do need to go through a particular process of due diligence, but I think one of the lessons from the decisions taken during the pandemic is that the machine can work much faster if it needs to as well.

MM: Did you notice then that it slowed back down once we came out the other side of the pandemic or did elements of that accelerated decision making remain later on?

HB: I think it’s difficult. It feels like an age ago now. It’s quite strange really. It feels like another world almost. But I think there are some things that we learnt in terms of ways of working. There is no substitute sometimes for that in-person meeting and contact, because perhaps when we were all virtual you'd have had a 15 minute meeting with somebody, but otherwise that perhaps would have been a conversation you would have had just walking down the corridor into plenary or you would just have popped your head into somebody's office and said “I just wanted to let you know about this.”

But, when I was first in government for example, you would get civil servants to come to our ministerial offices in Tŷ Hywel at the Senedd in Cardiff Bay, from Cathays Parks or perhaps Merthyr [Tydfil] or one of the other offices where they worked, for just a half-hour meeting. Sometimes it’s a broader forum where you’re trying to really hash out policy and have that more in-depth discussion and you might want to do that in-person, but it took a lot out of somebody’s day to come for a half-hour meeting just to run through in advance of a statement or questions or something like that. 

I grew up in the constituency I now serve and one the opportunities of devolution is that it offers more opportunities for people across Wales in terms of the civil service as well. For me, it's really important that we maintain that balance of in-person and hybrid working to be more inclusive of people who actually might not be based within half-an-hour or an hour of Cardiff Bay, that are then fully able to advise and work closely with ministers as well.

AP: Moving on, in May 2021 you became deputy minister for social partnership. You mentioned that you’d taken on responsibility for social partnership already in the previous post that you held but then you were given this dedicated role. Looking at how it was described, it was quite a broad brief. You were also the first person to be given that particular portfolio. Can you explain to us what you understood the brief to be and how it came about that the first minister decided to create this new post?

HB: The approach was still to have a long list of departmental responsibilities. This was with the minister for social justice, although, as you say, what was different from the previous role was that I wasn't the deputy minister for social justice – it was a specific title. I think the aim was to provide that clarity to myself and to those partners who were involved with developing this legislation that there'd be a specific minister leading on it. It was also for embedding that approach across government too, because it's very much become what we would say now is a “Welsh way of working” over the course of devolution – bringing together different partners from the trade union movement, from public and private sector employers to discuss the challenges they may face, to try to seek solutions and to perhaps formulate policies that would work better in practice.

Going back to your question as to what did it mean from the social partnership perspective – it was very clear to me that my role was to get that legislation [the Social Partnership and Public Procurement Act (Wales)] through, which was quite complex legislation. It also sat very closely to the boundaries of the devolution settlement because of what we were seeking to legislate on. As part of that I was also dealing with broader things around fair work and that's always going to be a challenge too, because that spans what's devolved and what is reserved. 

I sat down with Jane Hutt, who was the minister for social justice, and worked through other areas in the list of responsibilities that I would also lead on. Equality was part of the portfolio too, so at that point I picked up LGBTQ+ equality. Jane said “I don’t want to pigeonhole you or anything,” and I was like “well, no, I think it would be quite odd if I was part of this portfolio and I didn’t lead on that work as a member of the community and also as someone who had campaigned for LGBT equality in the past, prior to being elected and also advocated for it as a member as well.” Another specific responsibility that comes to mind too is that I also carried over responsibility for fire and rescue services that I'd held in the previous role as well.

AP: With regards to the Social Partnership and Public Procurement Act, can you tell us more about your experience of the legislative process and your experience of being responsible for, as you say, a big, important, and even maybe legally complex piece of legislation?

HB: I was really pleased to have that opportunity. I'd probably say that out of my colleagues, I was best placed to try and do that because of my background. Organisations like the CBI [Confederation of British Industry] and the FSB [Federation of Small Businesses] in Wales were supportive, as were public sector employers. The call to legislate on social partnership had come from trade union partners. I often say to them now to be careful what you call for and campaign for, because I was one of them that did that and then I found myself in the position of having to take through the legislation afterwards.

Obviously I can't speak for Mark Drakeford and colleagues, but my understanding of the rationale was that, given my background, I would be best placed to have some of those conversations, particularly if the boundaries of the devolution settlement meant that we couldn't do all the things perhaps some of our partners wanted us to do. I was able to have those conversations and there was a level of trust already.

One of the examples was that in the draft bill, there was no definition of ‘fair work’ and that was because we struggled to do that in a way that was within our competence but didn't make it too narrow. This meant it became less effective than we would want it to be. We found a different way to do that eventually by basically amending the “a prosperous Wales” goal of the Wellbeing of Future Generations (Wales) Act [2015] from “decent work” to “fair work”. That was something that some of our partners we'd worked with for a number of years who had campaigned about this were really passionate about, but I was able to sit down and be honest with them about why we couldn't do it. Whilst they were disappointed, because there was that trust, they knew that if we had been able to do it we would have. It wasn't government trying to do something in an easier way or just not wanting to do something. That very much helped in terms of my experience of taking legislation through.

It was quite daunting, particularly when it was something that the then first minister had in his manifesto for leadership as one of his headline commitments. But Mark was incredibly supportive and afterwards I thanked him for putting his trust in me to take that through.

We actually developed it in social partnership too, which sometimes made things take longer, but I think ultimately made the product we came out with a better one than if it had just been done by one group of people or just within the civil service alone. It also strengthened some of those relationships and actually meant that a wider group of people felt like they have ownership over and pride in that legislation and want to make it work in practice. 

One of the things I would say is that doing the committee scrutiny on legislation felt very much like cramming for an exam and yet if you got the answers wrong it was very public. Stage three is the big legislative stage where you have to go through all the amendments in the plenary of the Senedd, but there was nearly a spanner in the works as I managed to test positive for COVID that week. I think there was a bit of concern amongst my colleagues that somebody else might have to step in at the last minute, but because we still had hybrid working, I was well enough to do it remotely. It was not what I would have wanted to do, but I'm glad that I was still able to do it because I put a lot of effort into that and I wanted to see it through to the end. I was armed with cough medicine, water, cough sweets and only a Labrador for company who wasn’t much help in terms of assisting me with which amendment I was up to.

AP: What was your experience of the impact that the legislation had on the way the Welsh government engages with social partners? Did it make the changes in practice that you'd hoped to see? Or is it too early to say?

HB: I think some of it's too early to say. But it did demonstrate a different model of working and the value of involving people at an early stage, when it is perhaps more accessible to make changes or if you're not able to make those changes, to be able to clearly explain why and develop that kind of understanding. One thing that we said from that social partnership relationship is that it doesn't mean you're always going to agree, but it means you're going to understand where each partner is coming from. I think for me personally it does very much offer an example of how you can get better policy. It might mean you have to build in more time in the development of that policy. If as a minister you are presented with something from an official or you’ve worked on something and it looks great on paper, for me – perhaps because of my background – I don’t think you can underestimate the value of working that through with the people who might have to implement it on the ground. They may foresee challenges that you haven't and it gives you an opportunity to make the changes you need to address them, prior to something being passed and implemented. It helps bring people with you.

AP: Earlier you mentioned the LGBTQ+ Action Plan. Can you tell us a bit more about your role in that and also how your approach to that was affected by your own membership of the LGBTQ+ community?

HB: When responsibility transferred to me, there'd already been work on a draft plan. We were then able to work with an expert group that was set up to help develop what the plan looked like, with representatives from different parts of the community. I think one of the important things to stress is that whilst I was the lead minister for the action plan, it was very much a cross-government plan. This was because, whilst I led on LGBTQ+ equality, many of the levers to achieve what we wanted to achieve fall within different government departments, whether that is education, culture or health. Every single one of the 46 actions in that plan needed to be agreed (and were agreed) with ministers and with the officials who were responsible for taking that work forward. At times that was probably quite a laborious task for some of my officials, but I think it's one that is really important. Again if something is going to be cross-government, if you need everybody to have collective responsibility for it and to implement it, then that kind of groundwork ahead of anything being published or announced is really, really important.

There are certain areas now where the media debate and discussion becomes quite heated. I did find one of the values of being able to talk about my own personal experience is that it took some of the heat out of it from that perspective. And it also provided reassurance to some of the LGBTQ+ community in Wales that they had an advocate that spoke from experience and was an ally because of my own experiences. I think that's really valuable because I think authenticity in politics is really, really important. Again, it goes back to people's trust in you as well.

AP: What was your experience of working with Plaid Cymru and of the Cooperation Agreement that was in place at that time?

HB: Eventually, the LGBTQ+ Action Plan in its entirety became part of that agreement. Initially in the agreement itself it just listed specific areas, so around things like ending conversion practices, for example, or calling for the devolution of powers around gender recognition. But I think because it was one of those areas where there was really firm common ground between us as the Labour Party in government and Plaid Cymru, and the importance of progressive politicians working together in those issues, it evolved over time to cover the entire action plan. I think the positives of that were that you had that stronger progressive voice speaking in the Senedd chamber and outside in the community as well. I think it has challenges, perhaps from a practical perspective. I've referred to before when things take a long time or things are delayed, so perhaps when you're issuing a statement and lots of people need to agree something, it's not the end of the world, but it can be quite frustrating when it takes longer. I think one of the things I always used to say to as part of that is “this specific policy is going to be included in it but I will likely personalise it as well,” because I think it's really important that you reflect on experience as part of that. 

I worked quite closely with Adam Price [then leader of Plaid Cymru] and also with Siân Gwenllian [lead designated member for Plaid Cymru in the Cooperation Agreement from 2021 to 2024] as part of that. We made amendments to some parts of the action plan and found a way to emphasise things around, for example, supporting Welsh speaking members of the LGBTQ+ community and an event called Mas ar y Maes, which means “out on the field” literally translated, as part of the Eisteddfod [an annual national celebration of Welsh arts, language and culture]. 

AP: You mentioned making the case for further devolution of power around gender recognition. Was there any engagement you were involved in with UK ministers or with the UK government to make the case for those reforms? More generally, in your time as a minister, how much interaction did you have with UK ministers?

HB: Initially the most interaction was when I had the environment brief, because I remember regularly attending intergovernmental forums where not just the UK government but Scottish government ministers were there as well. In the latter years in government, one of the things I also had responsibility for that I've not mentioned was support for veterans. Even though the armed forces and defence are very much reserved matters, a lot of the support that is needed or provided to veterans falls into devolved areas like housing, education, and health. So we had to work quite closely with the Cabinet Office, because the veterans minister sat within that, but also with the Ministry of Defence. I know that officials I worked with then would say they had a really good relationship on an official level with those officials too. I think the relationship I had eventually was good and we actually worked with our colleagues in Scotland as part of that too, having trilateral meetings.

But there was a challenge in getting the understanding that some decisions have an impact on devolved areas and we need to be part of that process – not finding out about it when it's announced or in a press release. Over time we did make movement on that because you were able to build that relationship with individual ministers. At the official level, I think that does make a difference. One of the things I would say for me in terms of lessons learned is that there's no formal mechanism, really, or no requirement for governments to work together on those areas. I think for me personally that’s where something could be strengthened in the future. I don't want to say to force governments to work together, but to actually bring them together in a meaningful way, so it's not just “we're telling you we're doing this,” it's actually “how do we make it work on a cross-government, cross-nation basis?”
On the LGBTQ+ Action Plan, some of the most contact we had was around conversion practices, because I think the last UK government had an intention to legislate to end conversion therapy in a Queen’s Speech and then a King’s Speech. There was a point when I picked up responsibility for LGBTQ+ issues in Wales, when maybe within 40 hours they U-turned on the commitment then U-turned on a U-turn. What that meant is that we sped up our work in Wales to see what we could do in that space. Some of it is reserved because of how you would legislate to end it, but we looked at the work we could do in terms of support. Some of those areas get quite complex, because there are things you can do within Wales, but they might be better on a two-, three- or four-nation basis as the borders aren't a barrier to some of those abhorrent practices happening. I think it's best if you could have that level playing field and the same legislation by working together in a properly meaningful way rather than one government just saying “this is what we're going to do” and taking the lead on something. Again, it’s having that mechanism to be able to meaningfully work together in a way that you can find common ground.

AP: You’ve talked already about your time working under Carwyn Jones and Mark Drakeford. Then, for a brief period, you were a minister under Vaughan Gething [first minister from March to August 2024]. What was your experience of working with him? And then, could you briefly talk us through the events that led to your departure from government?

HB: Like you say, it was very brief in the end. I think it was from March until May of this year. Reflecting on the role I had first of all, I think the working relationship was fine. There were a number of my colleagues who came back into government that I'd worked with previously and a number that remained, as well as new members that I'd worked quite closely with in the Senedd as well. 
I think I was surprised to still have the same title, because, for me, social partnership is something that we should all be doing across the Welsh government now that we've legislated for it. Rather than having a stand-alone minister, it needs to be embedded across everything you do. You could have one minister who perhaps had a responsibility for making sure that is happening and having that oversight. I was under the impression that once legislation had been brought through and implemented, then perhaps that role in terms of the title itself had probably run its course. 

But, as well as the implementation of the legislation, I was given responsibilities around aspects of the economy portfolio. You’ll be well aware that when you create different ministries or portfolios then it does mean that the civil servants are moving into different areas as well and falling under a different area within the Welsh government. I think it was the right thing to bring social partnership officials together with the broader economy officials, because from my perspective that's the next step in making sure the things that we've done in the public sector can then go more broadly across Welsh government policy. 

In terms of my departure from government, I would say it wasn't planned. I said perhaps what I wanted to say in the personal statement that I made in the Senedd chamber when I went back to work. One of the things I would say and it may be something I follow up in the future is that, whilst I recognise that it's in the gift of a first minister or a prime minister for whomever they want to serve in their government and it's perfectly within their gift just to remove them because they just don't want them there anymore, I think if you are removing somebody from government because they are being accused of doing something, or said to have done something, then I think having a process is really, really important.  I said in the statement that it's important not just for the individual involved but more broadly around the office of the first minister and the devolved institution as a whole to have that process. The outcome may end up the same and you may end up with an outcome where you still disagree, but at least you've had that process to reflect on and I think that provides reassurance to all involved. Again, it goes back to the importance of trust as well.

AP: Thank you – I think we’ve covered the entirety of your ministerial career. Looking back across your whole seven years in office, what's the thing that you're most proud of from that whole experience?

HB: Probably the legislation on social partnership. Like I said, if you look at my reasoning for going into politics in the first place and my background, it's a real privilege to actually take that through, and also to work with colleagues I'd worked with previously as part of that. 

I’ve reflected on this recently too – whilst I wasn’t able to do all the things I wanted to do implementing things in the LGBTQ+ Action Plan, because some of those actions can only happen over a significant amount of time – if I look back to when I was at school in my constituency that I now represent, the shy teenager who struggled with her sexuality would never ever have believed that I would be leading on a policy issue of that area for the Welsh government. So that is something that I reflect on with pride now.

AP: The converse question is, looking back, is there anything that you wish you'd done differently?

HB: Going back to what I said earlier, really, in terms of perhaps having more confidence to challenge at the start and knowing that you can ask as many questions as you want. I think perhaps sometimes there's an assumption if somebody goes into government that they have quite significant experience of working with the civil service and not everybody has. It’s not quite the same in Wales as in Westminster and Whitehall, but it's a beast within itself and when you first go into government, it would help to have a bit more of an induction about how the civil service works and the expectations on ministers. Like I say, there's no manual to be a minister, but more can be done to support people when they first come into post. 

I did see some changes over time with that, as I was going into different roles. For example, in the last one under Mark Drakeford, there was a document that was given to all members which covered some of the key issues within the portfolio you're picking up. Ironically, that was probably the time I least needed it because a lot of those areas I was most familiar with, but I think that is a positive change. Sometimes you don’t know if a reshuffle’s going to be taking place, but when Mark stood down we knew there was going to be a change of government. That did enable there to be a piece of work with some civil service officials talking to ministers about what they would want to see done differently and how they would improve things. So that is a positive, but I think finding more ways to navigate how it all works at the start would have been helpful, because I think then you could hit the ground running a lot more effectively.

AP: You said that there’s no manual, but what would be your tips or advice that you’d give someone coming into office now for the first time?

HB: Sometimes you’ll be presented with a piece of advice. You don’t have to agree everything. You can go back and ask as many questions as you want. Ultimately, you can change things. If you want to do things, you say you want to do those things. Obviously you take the advice of those officials because they're there to provide you with protection and support as well. But remember that you can challenge and you can change things.