|
[63]
Edwina Hart: For work across all sectors, and for all
businesses. (1)
|
|
[64]
Mr Price: I can provide a breakdown, if you want to see
one.
|
|
[65]
Alun Ffred Jones: Yes.
|
|
[66]
Edwina Hart: Do you want to see a breakdown? Obviously, you
can have a breakdown if you want one.
|
|
[67]
Gwyn R. Price: Could you outline how the £87.9 million
allocated for business support in 2013-14 compares with the amount
allocated for business support in the current financial year?
|
|
[68]
Edwina Hart: We are delivering quite a lot in terms of
business support, not only through our loan funds but through our
high-potential start-ups and the funds in that area and, of course,
our business support service. We now have a tailored business
support service. There is a £6,000 bursary, I think, in one of
them. We also have Finance Wales and the one-stop service
currently, because we are redirecting the use into current regional
centres. We are doing work on that. There are also other
commitments, of course, that we must deal with. In very real terms,
in terms of business support, there is specific money within the
budget.
|
|
[69]
Mr Hunter: That is correct. It has gone down. It is down by
£17 million. It has dropped since last year. Some of that is
offset by investments that we have made in Finance Wales, which
will still invest in SMEs across Wales during those years. We are
in early discussions at the moment over the possibility of
something to follow on for the Wales economic growth fund. We will
be discussing that with the Minister for Finance.
|
|
[70]
Gwyn R. Price: How much of the £87.9 million allocated
for business in 2013-14 is already committed?
|
|
[71]
Mr Hunter: In the way that I have constructed it, it is
actually quite high. I have given you the BEL tables. I can say
that between 70% and 80% of that is committed at the moment. That
drops down to probably around 50% to 60% in the following year. So,
we do have a very healthy pipeline of projects, and quite high
commitment.
|
|
[72]
Gwyn R. Price: The Welsh Government’s strategic
equality plan includes an action to explore the potential of
entrepreneurship and business start-up initiatives that cover more
take-up for women, ethnic minorities and disabled people. How is
this objective reflected in your allocations?
|
|
[73]
Edwina Hart: We look, quite clearly, at work and gender
issues. In particular, the employment of people with disabilities
becomes an issue for us. We look at what we tend to do in terms of
how we allocate funds. We try to work very hard to get to those
outcomes. I cannot say absolutely that we have been totally
successful in this regard, because, in this current climate, we try
to help and assist everyone who comes to us, wherever we can. We
are trying to do a lot more on the entrepreneurship side,
particularly when people want to work from home as entrepreneurs.
That is why it is so important that we have our broadband project.
Also, developing people’s skills and their abilities makes
life easier. Generally, from that point of view, it sounds like a
loose answer, but it is an honest one.
|
|
[74]
Mr Price: We try to embed it from the very start. I know
that that is the sort of answer that you would expect me to give,
but rather than having quite small budgets set aside for targeting
specific groups with very small projects running in silos, we have
looked at that. Typically, those things have not worked. We have
tried to build it in right at the very beginning. If I were to be
brutally honest, we have been best in the entrepreneurship area,
where everything from the website to the contact centre to the
sessions that we run for people have all had equality properly
built in, and we test it all the way through, including with things
like mystery shoppers.
|
|
[75]
In the reactive business report stuff, we consider it and we take
it on board, but that is more difficult to deal with in the current
economic climate. However, it is something that the Minister is
always pushing business to do, and, particularly on the anchor
company side, that is part of our compact with the anchor
companies: they take on board the need to continue to be socially
responsible, because some of them are incredibly socially
responsible.
|
|
[76]
David Rees: Entrepreneurship is critical to start-up
businesses in Wales, and we are, sometimes, seen to have a problem
in terms of the number of failures as well. Are you working with
the Minister for Education and Skills to look at how
entrepreneurship can be pushed into schools and colleges? Is that
part of your budget or his budget? What outcomes are you expecting
as a consequence of that particular investment?
|
|
[77]
Edwina Hart: I launched an entrepreneurship scheme in the
south-west region on Monday, which involves schools and further and
higher education and is based on the principles within our own
entrepreneurship plans. So, it is starting to be embedded in the
education system. The lovely winner last year, for its initiatives
in relation to entrepreneurship, was the Pontlliw Primary School in
my constituency. There are links between colleges that are running
entrepreneurship courses with some primary schools in order to
encourage entrepreneurship. So, my department has been assisting on
this, and a key partner is the education department. I know that
the Minister for education is very keen on the continuing
development of that.
|
|
[78]
David Rees: My concern is how we are going to measure
success. On the outcome side of things, what kind of things is this
Government doing to measure success?
|
|
[79]
Mr Price: There is a quite simple measure of success really,
which is the number of new starts. That is the outcome that you
want at the end. The measure of success in the interim is how many
schoolchildren have taken part in the various competitions,
courses, training events et cetera. All of that is built around,
first, making people more entrepreneurial in the way that they
think, which is good for society as a whole, and, secondly,
increasing the number of business starts. On your comment about the
number of failures, the more new business starts we have, by
definition, the more failures we have. All the evidence suggests
that we should not be scared of that. In fact, in the States, on
average, the very successful businesspeople had failed three times
before they became successful. We need to encourage a culture that
says that that is okay and not write people off at the first
hurdle.
|
|
[80]
David Rees: Do you have a figure that you deem acceptable as
a rate of failure?
|
|
[81]
Mr Price: I do not think that that is a fair thing to do.
You can look at the averages across different countries and make
assumptions on that.
|
|
[82]
Edwina Hart: It is incumbent on the Government, if we are
sincere about entrepreneurship, to understand that failure does
produce successful results in the end. The way that we work in
Government means that we have to be less risk-averse in terms of
the allocation of resources. Then, dare I say it, Assembly Members
have to be less critical of Government, if we are prepared to take
the risk, and if we all agree that entrepreneurship is a good thing
and should be encouraged. It is difficult sometimes in Government,
particularly in our department, where we want to take an element of
risk, because we trust the businesses and the individuals who come
to us. Anybody who has been a Government Minister—I am sure
that Alun Ffred Jones will understand this—will know that,
sometimes, you have to push, although the status quo dictates that
to do nothing is the safest option. As a department, we are trying
to do more, which is not necessarily the safest option for us, and
there will always be the siren voices as to why we should not do
it.
|
|
[83]
Nick Ramsay: So, does that mean that an increase in business
failures would not necessarily be recognised by you as a problem,
so long as there is an increase in start-ups?
|
|
[84]
Edwina Hart: Yes.
|
|
[85]
Nick Ramsay: Given that you have to produce an annual
budget, what timescale are you giving for a business to have
success after a certain cycle of failure?
|
|
[86]
Mr Price: That has been looked at by the microbusiness task
and finish group and various other groups. Equally, some of the
sectors, particularly sectors like the creative industries, are
also looking at this. There is no defined answer, but it is a kind
of generational change thing. So, my guess is that it is almost a
decade-long thing that needs to be looked at. You should not stop
doing an activity in year 2 simply because you cannot see the
results coming through.
|
|
[87]
Nick Ramsay: That raises a whole host of issues in relation
to evaluating budgets.
|
|
[88]
Mr Price: Evaluation is very important.
|
|
[89]
Edwina Hart: It is important for the committee to understand
some of our thinking on this, because it is quite difficult to move
into this concept and idea, which is the right way to move.
If we are going to increase
the participation of the private sector, entrepreneurship and so
on, we have to be prepared to think in this particular manner. It
is not easy when outcomes are judged in this way. For instance, we
get questions about the Wales economic growth fund, about why is
money not going out of the door and why not this, that or the
other. We have been good with the Wales economic growth fund, we
have made sure that successful applicants have bought their capital
equipment and that they are taking on the jobs that they have told
us they would and then they have the money. That way of working is
sometimes not easy in that it is not the way that the Government
has traditionally worked. We are pushing the barriers,
department-wise, to try to understand that we are in a different
world now in terms of the economy and that we have to be alert, as
a Government, about what our interventions are and how successful
they might be. We also have to acknowledge that some of our
interventions might not necessarily be successful otherwise, and we
must take that risk.
|
|
[90]
Alun Ffred Jones: Rydych wedi
cynnal nifer o adolygiadau polisi ac rydych yn ystyried eich ymateb
iddynt. Mae’r rhain yn cynnwys ardrethi busnes, rhanbarthau
dinesig a pharthau twf lleol Powys. Ble yn y gyllideb mae’r
adnoddau ar gyfer ymateb i’r rheini, os o gwbl, a pha
hyblygrwydd sydd o fewn y gyllideb i ddelio â nhw?
|
Alun Ffred Jones: You have held a
number of policy reviews and you are considering your response to
them. These include business rates, city regions and Powys local
growth zones. Where in the budget are the resources for responding
to those, if at all, and what flexibility do you have within the
budget to deal with them?
|
|
[91]
Edwina Hart: On business rates, the Minister for Finance is
aware that I am having discussions and that I am coming to a
conclusion about what recommendations I am likely to make. So, that
will feature in further discussions with the Minister for Finance
if any additional resources are required.
|
|
[92]
The report on city regions will influence Government policy, and we
are taking it forward in key areas. We also have a lot of partners
involved with city regions, because this will involve local
government and how it feels about it, and further and higher
education; they all have a role in the city regions. I am
particularly confident about city regions, as the concept is
helpful in terms of the development of how we use European
structural funds and about partnership working on the ground. I am
pretty confident that, as we move that forward, there will be a
role for every department, including mine, to bring it together.
That will not necessarily have any large-scale financial
implications, because this is a way of thinking, a way of doing
things and a way of bringing resources together, probably.
|
|
[93]
On business rates, I have a further meeting with Professor Brian
Morgan to finalise our position. There are also developments going
on within the rest of the UK on discussions about non-domestic
rates and other issues, and I will have to take into account what
might be happening in Scotland and Northern Ireland before I
respond, but I have a discussion scheduled with the Minister for
Finance in case I require any additional resources.
|
|
[94]
Yr Arglwydd Elis-Thomas: Gan
fynd yn ôl at fy hoff bwnc, Weinidog, sef parthau menter,
roeddwn yn ddiolchgar i chi am gyfeirio atynt, a pharth menter
Eryri yn arbennig, ar ddechrau trafodaeth y pwyllgor hwn. Carwn
gael deall yn well sut y byddwch yn sicrhau hyblygrwydd cyllidol i
wneud yr hyn roeddech yn ei ddisgrifio yn eich trafodaethau
gyda’r Gweinidog Cyllid ac, yn arbennig, sut mae
hynny’n cysylltu gyda’r cynlluniau a fydd yn dod i mewn
o’r gwahanol barthau menter a’r byrddau a’r
cysylltiad rhwng hynny a gwariant adrannau eraill y Llywodraeth.
Rydych wedi sôn am hyn yn barod, ond, yn amlwg, mae oblygiadau
ynglŷn â thrafnidiaeth a gwariant amgylcheddol yn codi
o’r arweiniad ar y parthau hyn ac fe garwn gael deall yn well
sut y byddwch yn gofalu am y dyraniadau hynny i sicrhau bod y
cyllid ar gael.
|
Lord Elis-Thomas: To return to my
favourite topic, Minister, namely enterprise zones, I was grateful
to you for referring to them, particularly the Snowdonia enterprise
zone, at the outset of this committee’s discussion. I would
like to gain a better understanding of how you will ensure
budgetary flexibility to do what you described in your negotiations
with the Minister for Finance and, in particular, how that links to
the plans that will be submitted by the various enterprise zones
and the boards and the link between that and the spend of other
Government departments. You have already talked about this, but,
obviously, there are implications for transport and environmental
spend arising from the lead that you are taking on these zones, and
I would like to gain a better understanding of how you will take
care of those allocations to ensure that the funding is
available.
|
|
[95]
Edwina Hart: We have now received the final plans from the
enterprise zone boards in respect of how they want to take various
projects forward, including some of their transport and other
infrastructure-related issues. I have signalled to the Minister for
Finance, and she has agreed, that there will be a discussion
between the draft budget and the final budget about the allocation
to enterprise zones, depending on what comes out of the plans. I
have also scheduled discussions with the Minister for transport on
what is emerging from those plans that fall into his portfolio in
terms of how he would be able to prioritise any of the requirements
there. In terms of education and training, we are confident that we
know what the offer is across the piece and that there is the
flexibility in our dealings with education and training for them to
be able to deliver on this particularly key agenda.
|
|
11.15 a.m.
|
|
[96]
However, you are right to ask, if the plans come out with a lot of
proposals to look at infrastructure, transport and everything, how
the prioritisation will occur. I think that that is something that
I must give some further consideration to. What I will say is that
some of them will be nice to have, and some will be essential. So,
I think that we will have to have that type of scoring mechanism
for what would be nice to have—a little bit of icing on the
cake—and what will be a core element, and I will be
concentrating on what is central to delivery. I think that we will
have a clearer picture in the next few weeks, when I make my
statement on enterprise zones.
|
|
[97]
Yr Arglwydd
Elis-Thomas: Ynglŷn
â hynny, mae rhai parthau menter lle mae penderfyniadau
cyllidol Llywodraeth y Deyrnas Unedig, a’r Adran Ynni a Newid
yn yr Hinsawdd yn arbennig, yn gallu effeithio’n ddifrifol ar
yr hyn sy’n digwydd yno. Yn amlwg, rwy’n sôn yn
arbennig am barth menter Eryri, ond rwy’n siŵr bod
penderfyniadau gwariant y DU yn effeithio ar barthau menter eraill.
Pa drafodaethau y gallwch eu cael yn effeithiol â Gweinidogion
y DU—a’ch swyddogion chithau â’u swyddogion
hwy, wrth gwrs—i sicrhau bod yr ysbryd o gydweithredu a
gyhoeddir gan yr Ysgrifennydd Gwladol newydd yn cael ei adlewyrchu
yn y modd y mae adrannau Llywodraeth y DU yn gweithredu mewn
perthynas â Gweinidogion Cymru?
|
Lord Elis-Thomas: With regard to that,
there are some enterprise zones where budgetary decisions taken by
the United Kingdom Government, and the Department of Energy and
Climate Change in particular, can seriously affect what happens
there. Clearly, I am talking specifically about the Snowdonia
enterprise zone, but I am sure that UK expenditure decisions affect
other enterprise zones. What discussions can you have effectively
with UK Ministers—and your officials with their officials, of
course—to ensure that the spirit of collaboration announced
by the new Secretary of State is reflected in the way that UK
Government departments operate with regard to Welsh Ministers?
|
|
[98]
Edwina Hart: Obviously, my officials have been involved,
because we have had correspondence with the appropriate officials,
and Jane Hutt has very kindly raised issues when she has attended
her bilateral meetings with the Chief Secretary to the Treasury. My
officials have also been in contact with the Treasury about seeing
where we are going on some of these issues that you have alluded
to. We understand that the Scots have not yet had a reply to their
letter of May concerning some of these issues, because there are
issues for them in terms of the enterprise zones—
|
|
[99]
Lord Elis-Thomas: I am not so worried about the Scots,
Minister; they are well able to look after themselves.
|
|
[100]
Edwina Hart: Yes, but we understand that they have issues,
because we keep in close contact with the other devolved
administrations, so that we understand what responses they have
and, if they have something, what we should be looking for.
|
|
[101]
We understand from the Treasury that these outstanding matters will
be resolved in the next couple of weeks, and it is good that the
party conference season has finished so that everybody can now
concentrate on the main business of the day, which I think is to
sort out some of these areas.
|
|
[102]
We are very pleased about the announcement in Deeside, because that
has enabled us to be very competitive in that arena. We do
understand the issue about an even playing field, which does not
allow us necessarily to make the offers that we would like to. Now,
in terms of some of the enhanced capital allowance issues, we might
be in the position of being better off making our own arrangements
in terms of what we can offer as a Government, rather than looking
for enhanced capital allowances.
|
|
[103]
This is difficult territory across the piece, to be frank, in terms
of discussions, and it would be easy for me to make a really nasty
jibe about things. I do not intend to do that, however, because I
want to resolve the matter.
|
|
[104]
Nick Ramsay: Thank you, Minister; no nasty jibes at the
moment. I would point out to Members that we have 10 minutes left,
and we have some questions on tourism that it is important that we
get to. So, if Members, like Ken Skates, can be succinct it would
help.
|
|
[105]
Kenneth Skates: Thank you, Chair. With regard to next
generation broadband, are you able to clarify whether any of the UK
Government’s £57 million is reflected in your
budget?
|
|
[106]
Mr Hunter: I can state clearly that it is not reflected in
this budget. We are in negotiations at the moment; the money has
been agreed, but, on the phasing of the money, we are talking to
Broadband Delivery UK at the moment and will finalise that within
the next few weeks.
|
|
[107]
Kenneth Skates: Just as a follow-up to that, what
consideration is being given to tackling inequalities with regard
to next generation broadband, because it is an area that clearly
shows socioeconomic group inequalities?
|
|
[108]
Edwina Hart: That has been a core part of the discussion
with BT on the implementation programme. We have looked at what
areas the market will naturally deal with, which we do not intend
to be involved in, and we have looked particularly at the issues in
rural areas to ensure that not everything is done in the easiest
areas, but that there is a balance between the difficult and the
easy being undertaken.
|
|
[109]
Kenneth Skates: I have one really quick point—this may
be a query that I should take up with BT, but, in north-east Wales,
a lot of households have the Chester number. Will the roll-out of
next generation broadband therefore be the responsibility of the
local authority across the border, or will it be met by the Welsh
Government?
|
|
[110]
Edwina Hart: It is our responsibility.
|
|
[111]
Kenneth Skates: Okay, that is fine.
|
|
[112]
Nick Ramsay: Joyce Watson has some questions on tourism
investment.
|
|
[113]
Joyce Watson: Good morning, Minister. In 2011-12, there was
a tourism investment support scheme that had an allocation of
£3.9 million for tourism businesses in Wales since April 2011.
Will that TISS continue into 2013-14? If it is to continue, which
budget line will the money come from?
|
|
[114]
Edwina Hart: TISS is funded from the strategic and industry
support budget and is set to continue. I think that its allocation
is just over £2 million for 2013-14 and 2014-15.
|
|
[115]
Alun Ffred Jones: Is that a hefty cut in support, from
£3.9 million to £2.3 million?
|
|
[116]
Edwina Hart: Yes. From 1 April 2011, TISS was £4
million, and just under 100 projects were funded with the
investment, and £14 million-worth of investment arose from it.
Businesses will also be able to allocate through other funds, so,
we have looked at the TISS budget and it is down to £2.3
million for 2013-14.
|
|
[117]
Mr Price: The really important thing on is that while TISS
was running previously, businesses were unable to apply for some of
the mainstream business investment funds, but they can do so now.
So, we had quite a big internal debate originally about whether the
Welsh economic growth fund should be able to fund tourism projects,
and the conclusion is that yes, it can. The conclusion of all of
that is that, if good projects come from tourism, in comparison
with other projects, they will be funded.
|
|
[118]
Eluned Parrott: To follow on from that, in your answer to
questions on monitoring and selecting which projects to cut and
support, you said that, at the moment, you are running at about
£15,000 per job created, whereas, if we look at this scheme,
for which you are quoted as saying that 350 jobs would be created
with £3.9 million, it is a little over £10,000 per job.
So, on the raw statistics of your analysis, it is clearly more
cost-effective than other programmes. So, why has it been cut?
|
|
[119]
Edwina Hart: As we have indicated on TISS, businesses are
now eligible to apply for money through other schemes.
|
|
[120]
Mr Price: The other thing that you have to bear in mind is
the quality of the job created. The £15,000 will, on average,
be supporting a higher-value-added job than the tourism ones.
|
|
[121]
Eluned Parrott: Okay. Turning to major events, which is
linked to the tourism budget as well, I see that, in cash terms,
there is a reduction of nearly 2% for the overall budget. Will you
tell us what your main funding commitments are in the next
financial year and why that budget can accommodate a cut?
|
|
[122]
Edwina Hart: Some 50% of the budget is already allocated. We
have the Rugby World Cup; extreme sailing, which is very popular;
in golf, we have the Seniors Open Championship; and there is also
Rally GB, which takes up a substantial percentage of the budget at
13%. It is a long-standing flagship event that the industry and the
sectors are very keen on in terms of who they get to meet and who
we might do business with, as well as the impact for the general
public and the publicity for Wales.
|
|
[123]
Eluned Parrott: What kind of percentage of that budget is
currently being used to look at the feasibility of bidding to host
the Commonwealth Games?
|
|
[124]
Edwina Hart: We are obviously looking at the feasibility
issues in relation to 2026. It is mainly administration at the
moment.
|
|
[125]
Mr Hunter: The review, at the moment, has been internal, so
we have not allocated a specific budget to that yet. The
feasibility study has started, but it has started with internal
resources.
|
|
[126]
Yr Arglwydd
Elis-Thomas: Hoffwn ofyn
am gynaladwyedd ar draws y Llywodraeth, a’r graddau y
mae’r gyllideb wedi cael ei harfarnu o safbwynt datblygiad
cynaliadwy fel rhan o broses cynllunio’r gyllideb. Nid yw hwn
wedi ei anelu yn arbennig atoch chi, Weinidog, mae’n gwestiwn
y byddaf yn ceisio gofyn i bawb oherwydd fy niddordeb mewn
datblygiad cynaliadwy ar draws y bwrdd.
|
Lord Elis-Thomas: I would like to ask
about sustainability across the Government, and the extent to which
the budget has been evaluated in terms of sustainable development
as part of the budget planning process. This is not aimed
specifically at you, Minister, it is a question that I will try to
ask of everyone because of my interest in sustainable development
across the board.
|
|
[127]
Edwina Hart: We have adopted a business planning strategy in
relation to delivering our results against the Government’s
commitment on sustainability in its programme for government. We
consult Sustainable Futures on such matters and we look at all the
legislation in this area. We work particularly closely with
Peter Davies, Wales’s Commissioner for Sustainable Futures.
He has undertaken a lot of work for us on our responses to
consultation documents, and he has taken a lead with industry on
our behalf to do it.
|
|
[128]
We have also encouraged corporate social responsibility in terms of
sustainability from the companies that we deal with. As you can
see, it is key to some of the anchor companies, not only because it
is the right thing to do, but because it is also good for the way
that they run their businesses.
|
|
[129]
Sustainability is also built into the way in which we deal with the
budget for the Welsh European Funding Office in terms of European
funds, because environmental sustainability is a cross-cutting
theme within WEFO. Therefore, it has been embedded in budget
proposals from the outset, and that is one of the things that we
must go through when looking at all the schemes that we run.
|
|
[130]
Lord Elis-Thomas: You have discovered no negative attitudes
when you have raised these issues in discussion. I am alluding to
some of the rather superficial discussions that there is some kind
of trade-off in adversity between sustainability and further
economic growth, when, surely, sustainable growth is what we want
in any economic context.
|
|
[131]
Edwina Hart: We understand sustainable growth, as does the
sustainability commissioner in his dealings with us as a business
department and with companies; they understand it. The problem is
that some people think that sustainability is about the world not
changing—they do not understand the meaning of sustainable
development and sustainable industry. That is the problem that we
confront: people’s misuse of language and a lack of
understanding. That is why we have chosen to use the commissioner
to engage in dialogue with businesses on our behalf, particularly
when we look at issues around planning and various other things,
and he has been a useful facilitator for us. Everything can be
incorporated, but everyone must understand that sustainability does
not stop the world from moving on.
|
|
[132]
Nick Ramsay: Do Members have any final questions for the
Minister?
|
|
[133]
David Rees: You mentioned WEFO and I notice that there is no
change in the budget for WEFO—this is the figure for
administrative costs, effectively. I know that you are undertaking
a review of WEFO at the moment. Does that figure anticipate that
there will be no change in the operation of WEFO as a consequence
of that review?
|
|
[134]
Edwina Hart: I do not think that you can think that at
all.
|
|
[135]
David Rees: I just wanted to make sure that there was a
little flexibility. We have also not discussed any funding for
social enterprises and co-operatives. Has the Government looked at
increasing that area to encourage greater aspects of that?
|
|
[136]
Edwina Hart: We have the commission now, under Andrew
Davies, which is going to do some interim reports. We will then
work on the basis of what Andrew reports. You have all had my
letter about some of the issues around this; I thought that I would
give you early notice of some of the issues. We are working our way
through the problems that arise as a result of that communication
to you.
|
|
[137]
Alun Ffred Jones:
I fynd yn ôl at y parthau
menter, mae’n aneglur iawn lle mae’r arian ar eu cyfer.
Hynny yw, mae’n rhaid i’r parthau menter fod yn
rhywbeth heblaw stadau diwydiannol gyda ffordd i mewn. O ble y
daw’r arian i helpu’r cwmnïau hynny a fydd angen
symud i mewn i’r ardal? Os cofiaf yn iawn, roedd £10
miliwn wedi cael ei glustnodi yn y gyllideb ddiwethaf. Ble
mae’r £10 miliwn hwnnw wedi mynd eleni?
|
Alun Ffred Jones: Returning to the
enterprise zones, it is very unclear where the money is for them.
That is, the enterprise zones must be something apart from
industrial estates with a road in. Where will the money come
from to help those companies that will need to move into the area?
If I remember correctly, £10 million had been allocated in the
last budget. Where has that £10 million gone this year?
|
|
[138]
Mr Hunter: There are a number of things. We have allocated
funds to a couple of schemes: a scheme for flood defences in
Deeside received £2.5 million or £3.5 million and a
scheme for some work at St Athan also received about £2.5
million to £3 million. So, some schemes have been funded. That
consequential is still there. It is not reflected in this budget,
but it is just under £10 million over three years. So, we have
the source of funding there. Some of the work that is going on in
sectors will benefit enterprise zones anyway. As the Minister said,
we are having discussions with the Minister for Finance on the
results of the plans once they have been thoroughly reviewed.
|
|
[139]
Mr Price: Each enterprise zone has a sectoral priority
attached to it, although we are not going to be hard and fast about
that because things might change, and we are not going to turn an
investor away. Therefore, the delivery of those sectoral priorities
is built into the sector plans and those budgets.
|
|
11.30
a.m.
|
|
[140]
So, in terms of delivering for individual businesses in an
enterprise zone, that will be built into the sector plans already.
We may need more money; we may need to lever in more private sector
money and we are working on that.
|
|
[141]
Alun Ffred Jones: When we are looking at the budget, I am
trying to find where that £3 million, or whatever it may be,
lies in the budget for your use, or has it been spread across?
|
|
[142]
Mr Price: It is spread across.
|
|
[143]
Edwina Hart: It is spread across several budget lines. It is
also in potential pipeline projects. We are aware that, in certain
enterprise zones, there are negotiations going on that indicate
that we may be successful in having something, and that will
certainly benefit that particular zone, so we have to have the
flexibility to put that money in.
|
|
[144]
Nick Ramsay: That is a very positive point, on which I am
going to draw this session to a close because our next witnesses
have now arrived.
|
|
[145]
Edwina Hart: Thank you. I hope you feel better soon.
|
|
[146]
Nick Ramsay: Thank you, Minister, for attending today. I
hope you feel better soon as well.
|
|
11.32
a.m.
|
|
Cynigion Cyllideb Ddrafft Llywodraeth Cymru ar
gyfer 2013-14: Sesiwn i Graffu ar Waith y Gweinidog
Welsh Government Draft Budget Proposals for 2013-14: Ministerial
Scrutiny Session
|
|
[147]
Nick Ramsay: I welcome the Minister for Local Government and
Communities to this session of the Enterprise and Business
Committee. Sorry for the short delay in bringing you in. The aim of
this meeting is for the committee to scrutinise the Minister on his
draft budget proposals for 2013-14. As I said previously, this
along with our stakeholder event last week will inform the
committee’s recommendations to the Welsh Government. Will the
Minister and his officials please give your names and positions for
the record?
|
|
[148]
The Minister for Local Government and Communities (Carl
Sargeant): Good morning, Chair and committee. As you are aware,
I am Carl Sargeant, the Minister for Local Government and
Communities.
|
|
[149]
Ms Bennett: Good morning. I am Claire Bennett, the deputy
director of policy, planning and partnerships in transport.
|
|
[150]
Ms Duffy: I am Frances Duffy, director of transport.
|
|
[151]
Nick Ramsay: Thank you. We have a number of questions for
you, so we will go straight into them. Gwyn Price has the opening
question.
|
|
[152]
Gwyn R. Price: Good morning, Minister. How are the transport
commitments in the programme for government provided for in the
budget allocations?
|
|
[153]
Carl Sargeant: Good morning, Gwyn. This is the third year of
the budget proposals, so nothing really changes. The programme for
government and the announcements in it are pretty much aligned.
This is a continuation of the budget proposals for this year.
|
|
[154]
Gwyn R. Price: Are there any areas where you are concerned
that limited resources may have an impact on the ability to deliver
programme for government transport commitments?
|
|
[155]
Carl Sargeant: Yes, of course. There is a reduction of
around £2.1 billion over the period that we are trying to deal
with as Government. Making decisions and programme commitments, and
then being affected by financial change, causes pressures in the
system. However, we are working very hard to do things differently.
With my other hat on, that of local government, you will be aware
of the issues around collaboration that also form part of the
transportation opportunities. Doing things differently gives us
some flexibility to mitigate some of the reductions in the budgets.
It is a pressure, but our team is working very hard to make sure
that the commitments that we have made in the programme for
government are completed.
|
|
[156]
Byron Davies: Good morning, Minister. The paper that you
have provided states that you have identified a number of specific
actions to develop further collaboration between local authorities
and the Welsh Government, and you say that there are already
examples where initiatives have been delivered. Can you tell us
what these are and what specific actions have been identified? I
would be interested to know what these are.
|
|
[157]
Carl Sargeant: We are exploring many opportunities with
Welsh local government and the regional transport
consortia—all the different agencies that we have brought
together. A lot of it is being led by the public service leadership
group and the Simpson agenda on the transformation of public
services. However, you are interested in the pounds, shillings and
pence element of this, as I am, and that is always the challenge
when talking about change and what it delivers in the end.
|
|
[158]
I can share with you some of the projects that have already
delivered. An example in south-west Wales is the e-procurement
passenger transport system. That is already an IT-based programme
between Neath Port Talbot, Pembrokeshire, Carmarthenshire and
Swansea. Savings of around £3.7 million are already being
reported in terms of that collaboration agenda and that is about
doing things differently.
|
|
[159]
Another example in north Wales, which I know colleagues will be
interested in, is in Denbighshire council, which is the main office
for collaboration between several authorities, namely Bridgend, the
Vale of Glamorgan and Denbighshire. They are collaborating to
deliver civic parking enforcement.
|
|
[160]
Alun Ffred Jones: It is very effective.
|
|
[161]
Carl Sargeant: I will not go into that in detail, but they
are looking, on average, at a saving of around £100,000 a
year, just through Denbighshire doing that for a couple of
authorities. If we could ramp that up to include the 22 local
authorities, who knows what the cost-effectiveness of that would
be? Those are just two examples. I hope they were helpful.
|
|
[162]
Nick Ramsay: Ken Skates has a question on fiscal
sustainability.
|
|
[163]
Kenneth Skates: Good morning, Minister. If the next spending
review brings further cuts to the Welsh Government’s budget,
how prepared is your department for that?
|
|
[164]
Carl Sargeant: I hope that that is a hypothetical question
because I am really hopeful that our budgets will increase.
However, in reality, that is probably not going to happen and we
are all aware of that. It is extremely challenging now. There have
been reductions in our budgets, as you are aware. I hope that my
team can prepare and start to give me examples as to where we need
to make changes to the services that we deliver. I will just go
back to that number of £2.1 billion now; if that cut is
increased by any proportion, then it will be the difference between
delivering and not delivering a service. I am concerned about that,
but I do not know what those numbers are, so I cannot speculate on
what I would or would not cut.
|
|
[165]
Nick Ramsay: Dafydd Elis-Thomas is next on infrastructure
investment priorities.
|
|
[166]
Yr Arglwydd
Elis-Thomas: Bore da. Mae’r
Gweinidog a minnau yn teithio rhwng de a gogledd Cymru o leiaf
ddwywaith yr wythnos, felly mae gennym ddiddordeb yn y cwestiwn
o’r berthynas rhwng cynllun buddsoddi seilwaith Cymru
a’r cynllun trafnidiaeth cenedlaethol. Yn arbennig, Weinidog,
sut wyt ti’n llwyddo i gydbwyso cysylltedd y gogledd
a’r de â chysylltedd y dwyrain a’r gorllewin, a
hynny ar draws pob modd o drafnidiaeth? Sut mae hynny’n cael
ei adlewyrchu yn y dyraniadau yn y gyllideb?
|
Lord Elis-Thomas: Good morning. The
Minister and I travel from north to south Wales at least twice a
week, so we are interested in the question of the relationship
between the Wales infrastructure investment plan and the national
transport plan. Particularly, Minister, how do you balance the need
to develop north-south connectivity and east-west links across all
transport modes? How is that reflected in the budgetary
allocations?
|
|
[167]
Carl Sargeant: I am grateful for the Member’s
question; it really is an interesting one. As Members will know,
people suggest that investment opportunities are given to favoured
areas—wherever you do not represent, generally. People say,
‘It all goes to the south’, or, ‘It all goes to
the north’. However, I know that Dafydd Elis-Thomas’s
constituency is well-served and well-serviced by Welsh Government
contributions in terms of the networks that we provide.
|
|
[168]
On a serious note, connectivity is important and the focus for the
Welsh Government, working across the boundaries of this department
and other ministerial portfolios, is the economy. We understand
that to drive Wales as being a successful nation, we have to ensure
that the economy has every opportunity. That is not just about
building new infrastructure because sometimes it is about
connectivity and those go hand in hand.
|
|
[169]
We have made priorities in the national transport plan, as the
Member is aware, in terms of east-west connectivity, whether that
be through the road network or the rail network. The active travel
Bill is also quite an exciting proposal in the department. It is
looking beyond the traditional modes of transport and how we can
develop those. Notwithstanding the Member’s important
question, connectivity is still required between the north and
south. He will be aware of the current interventions on the A470 in
Maes yr Helmau, Gelli Gemlyn and Glandyfi on the A487. They are all
of strategic importance to us, but this is a balancing act: how do
we encourage growth in the economy along the east to west route,
which we know is industry’s favoured route, and maintain
connectivity between north and south? That is the balance that we
have tried to bring through the national transport plan and the
Wales infrastructure plan, which runs alongside that.
|
|
[170]
Nick Ramsay: Given that you have just mentioned the active
travel Bill, Minister and Dafydd Elis-Thomas, I think Byron Davies
would like to ask a question on that.
|
|
[171]
Byron Davies: You mention in the paper that you provided
that the costs of aligning walking and cycling with the delivery of
the Bill will be met through the existing active travel, walking
and cycling budgets. What impact will this have on the delivery of
existing programmes, for example?
|
|
[172]
Carl Sargeant: The active travel Bill is a really exciting
piece of work that is getting worldwide recognition, because of the
change or cultural shift from traditional modes of transport of
road or rail, in which we would make significant investments, as
other Governments in other areas have done.
|
|
[173]
What we are trying to encourage—this is a long answer to your
question, but it is significant—is looking at a holistic
approach to what we have for Wales and at how we integrate all
those forms of transport, cycling, walking, sustainable travel
centres and so on. That is why the Bill comes forward with the
principle of what we want to do, and then we need to feed in what
we are currently doing with cycling, walking and sustainable travel
centres to sustain that.
|
|
[174]
I have, therefore, asked my team to look at rationalising the
funding that is currently available to support active travel. It is
not taking money away from walking and cycling; it is building it
into the main structure of support around active travel. How does
this run alongside sustainable travel centres? How do the
interventions in rail transport fit into the active travel Bill? It
is all about building a bigger structure in terms of understanding
modal shift in transport in Wales. It is a very exciting Bill,
which probably sits better in the health department, because there
is a health consequence to the active travel Bill, and its
preventative spend certainly lies within the health budget. We have
had a lot of encouraging interest across Wales and beyond that we
have had interest from Canada, Australia and New Zealand: they are
all looking at what we are doing, because they are interested in
the opportunities that this might present.
|
|
[175]
Byron Davies: The evidence for that will be a long way down
the road, I guess. So, you would say that there will be absolutely
no impact on the delivery of existing programmes.
|
|
[176]
Carl Sargeant: I am not saying that those programmes will
look the same: they certainly will not. I am saying that the
walking and cycling spending programme area that you are currently
familiar with will be introduced into the active travel Bill to
support that. I say that very broadly as I have not yet made that
decision, but that is my vision. That will be the ethos of the
Bill. What are we trying to achieve and where are the pots of
money? If we can rationalise those, we can make bigger savings
across the areas we currently invest in—22 authorities and
four sustainable towns, etcetera. If we can understand that what we
are trying to achieve is to make more people active, it makes sense
to bring them together. So, will the money disappear? No. Will it
be in a different place? Yes.
|
|
[177]
Byron Davies: What is the timescale for all this?
|
|
[178]
Carl Sargeant: We are currently consulting on the Bill. When
is that being presented as legislation, Claire?
|
|
[179]
Ms Bennett: It is due to be introduced in February next
year. So, depending on how long the passage through the National
Assembly for Wales is, we are hoping it might receive Royal Assent
towards the late summer, early autumn of next year, but that
depends on the National Assembly for Wales. Given the way that the
provisions in the Bill are set out, there is a process of mapping
the current active travel network and then thinking about the
future vision network. Local authorities need to set about doing
that mapping work. From then on, it is a process of investing on a
continuous improvement basis to deliver the visionary network on
top of the existing one. So, we have a bit of time to start
reshaping the programmes as the Minister has outlined, to deliver
against those priorities. That is one of the important points.
Rather than what we have at the moment, which is a series of
programmes that support really great projects around Wales, we will
have that prioritised on the basis of a map of the most important
routes to build on or connect up in order to deliver active travel
outcomes. It should give us much better strategic alignment between
what we are spending and the things most important to each
community to enable people to travel actively.
|
|
11.45 a.m.
|
|
[180]
Byron Davies: I have a very brief final question on this. We
did a review of town-centre regeneration. Have you looked at that?
Is that interacting with it?
|
|
[181]
Carl Sargeant: Yes. I mentioned earlier the shift I saw last
year in how the Government operates between departments. It would
be fair to say that we used to operate in silos. We had an amount
of money and we worked on local government and communities or
economic elements of delivery. We are much more joined up now. I
have regular meetings with Edwina Hart, with Huw Lewis on
regeneration, and with John Griffiths on the environment, about our
interventions. We have to do that, because finances are getting
much tighter. We need to stop duplication and look at the
opportunities in these communities. Does active travel fit in with
regeneration? Absolutely. People will have views on this, but we
should recognise that we have 22 authorities delivering on economic
development and regeneration proposals, and active travel does not
recognise boundaries and borders. We have to look at how to get
from A to B better, whether that is in Wales or beyond its
boundaries. We can do that as a partnership, rather than as
individual departments looking at what they do compared to what
anybody else does.
|
|
[182]
Nick Ramsay: Before I bring Eluned Parrott in, Jenny
Rathbone, did you have a supplementary question?
|
|
[183]
Jenny Rathbone: I do not have a supplementary question, but
I wanted to follow up on the rail aspects. I am happy to come back
in later.
|
|
[184]
David Rees: I have a quick supplementary question on this
one. Clearly, the Bill transfers responsibility to local
authorities. At the moment, we have a budget line within the
transport portfolio. You said earlier that it is not going
anywhere, it just may be placed somewhere different. Is there an
intention to transfer any of that budget into local authority
funding, or will it stay within the transport portfolio?
|
|
[185]
Carl Sargeant: There is a process for developing legislation
and we do strategic assessments of the cost of legislation. I have
always said that if there are known cost implications, whether they
are a burden on local authorities or another body, we should
consider funding them—or not, but be upfront about it. We
should tell people, if there is a cost to something, that the cost
is theirs and we are not going to pay for it, or that we are going
to pay for it. We are not in that position yet, because we have not
constructed the legislation—it is still being framed. We also
have to remember what I said earlier, that local authorities
already invest through the regional transport
consortia—Taith, SEWTA, SWWITCH, etcetera—which is
money that comes from the Welsh Government to local authorities in
some form for delivery. We are saying that, if we all think about
what we are trying to achieve here—active travel—the
regional transport consortia can make better use of their money.
There also needs to be an investment by us and Sustrans and so
on—a partnership approach to developing an integrated plan
for Wales. Instead of having, for example, a Cardiff plan and a
Neath Port Talbot plan, we need to think about how we join all of
this up across Wales. The mapping element is an opportunity to do
that. We do not think that doing the ground work in the Bill will
be a big financial burden on local authorities. The investment will
be part of the programme for government in combination with third
parties. How to do that better is still up for discussion, but they
are really engaged in it, because it is quite exciting.
|
|
[186]
Eluned Parrott: My family is looking forward to the active
travel Bill. My husband commutes to work, with two trains and two
bike rides in each direction. He gets booted off his train about
once a fortnight on average because overcrowding means it cannot
take the bike. There are infrastructure requirements in terms of
rolling stock and bicycle storage in railway stations, which are
very real costs. If the money is coming out of the existing walking
and cycling budget, there is a 10% cut in that budget for 2013-14
and nothing at all in it for 2014-15. So, how are you going to
deliver those requirements if you have no money at all in
2014-15?
|
|
[187]
Carl Sargeant: I will ask the team to look at the 2014-15
element not in the budget line. As I said earlier, we have to
consolidate the budget. The budget is reducing, and I cannot do
anything other than react in the same way as you or anybody else in
this room would do. When there is no more money, you cannot spend
anymore. So, you have to build your work programme within the
boundaries of the financial envelope. We believe that, by creating
this piece of legislation and changing the way that people operate,
there will certainly be savings to be made in terms of economies of
scale and the way that we operate. The budgets I will be aligning
up to support the active travel Bill will be less than what is
currently allocated in budget lines for the other elements.
|
|
[188]
When we are developing the road network, which has a separate
budget, I have to think about what I do alongside it to ensure
that, when we create a new road space, it is active-travel
compliant. We are looking at opportunities in the design of the
network so that, when we build a road, we think about whether it is
right to build a cycle path at the side of it or have linkages.
There are other elements of the budget that can support this. We
cannot have legislation or policy development in isolation of
everything else. There has to be a holistic approach to travel and
transport in Wales. The department is looking at that in relation
to integrating rail and road travel. In Wales, we build really good
roads, but we have to go beyond that and look at how those good
road builders can work alongside the good rail infrastructure
development officers. Building those synergies is sometimes
challenging, because this is what people do, but we are getting
used to it, and we are understanding that work together. My team is
leading on this, and I believe that we are moving into a very
different place with regard to travel. I do not know whether Claire
wants to talk about the finances.
|
|
[189]
Ms Bennett: Looking at the table that was annexed to the
committee paper about the capital lines, which is the final page of
the paper, the walking and cycling investment line shows a
continued investment of £1.8 million throughout the budget
period. There is also quite significant investment in walking and
cycling in the sustainable travel towns programme, which is just
underneath. Also, as the Minister said, a reasonably significant
proportion of the regional transport plan investment goes on
walking and cycling. That kind of capital investment, which is used
to support walking and cycling or active travel infrastructure, is
broadly maintained through the year, with a reduction in the
regional transport plan funding available.
|
|
[190]
Eluned Parrott: But the regional transport plan revenue
budget has also been cut by a significant margin over that
period.
|
|
[191]
Ms Bennett: Indeed, but the actual infrastructure investment
comes from capital funding, not from revenue.
|
|
[192]
Eluned Parrott: Are you content, therefore, that there are
no policy interventions that require revenue funding in walking and
cycling in 2014-15?
|
|
[193]
Carl Sargeant: The active travel Bill and the walking and
cycling policy interventions that we are creating will be funded.
Are there challenges to the budget? Absolutely. I am not going to
sit here with a reducing budget saying that everything will be
fantastically well served, because we have huge challenges, which
are beyond my control.
|
|
[194]
Nick Ramsay: As we have just touched on regional transport
planning, Alun Ffred, would you like to ask your question?
|
|
[195]
Alun Ffred Jones:
Fel y dywedodd Eluned Parrott,
mae’r gyllideb ar gyfer y cynlluniau trafnidiaeth rhanbarthol
yn gostwng o £11.5 miliwn i £0.5 miliwn yn y ddwy flynedd
nesaf. Pam?
|
Alun Ffred Jones: As Eluned Parrott
said, the budget for the regional transport plans will reduce from
£11.5 million to £0.5 million in the next two years.
Why?
|
|
[196]
Carl Sargeant: That is an accounting issue, which I am happy
to explain. Last year, there was a budget transfer from the
business, enterprise, technology and science department to our
department. That was about £7 million that was repatriated
back to our department. It is in that line. With regard to the
additional £3.5 million—
|
|
[197]
Ms Bennett: It is revenue associated with the local
government borrowing initiative, which has been placed into that
budget line, but it is not being spent on regional transport
consortia work per se, it is supporting the local government
borrowing initiative. So, the baseline position for that budget is
the £0.5 million that is shown in future years.
|
|
[198]
Carl Sargeant: It is about accounting. I am more than happy,
Chair, to drop you a note on that if it is helpful. It is not a
difficult element of this, but—[Interruption.]
|
|
[199]
Nick Ramsay: Given the number of perplexed faces around the
room, it would be useful to have that clarified.
|
|
[200]
Carl Sargeant: I am more than happy to write that note, but
it is basically a £7 million transfer that went out last year
and has come back to us this year from the business, enterprise,
technology and science department—it was an accounting
transfer. We put it into that budget line, and the additional
£3.5 million is the borrowing initiative that was issued by me
and Jane Hutt for highway infrastructure, which will go into the
revenue support grant next year. It is just an accounting element,
but I am happy to explain that further.
|
|
[201]
Alun Ffred Jones:
Ar gorn hynny, rydych chi’n
dweud nad oes gweithgarwch sy’n digwydd ar hyn o bryd na fydd
yn digwydd oherwydd y newidiadau hyn. Mae gostyngiad yma—beth
bynnag yw’r rheswm am hynny—a’r cwestiwn yw: a
oes gweithgarwch a fydd yn dod i ben oherwydd y newidiadau
hyn?
|
Alun Ffred Jones: On the back of that,
you are saying that no current activity will cease to take place
because of these changes. There is a reduction here—for
whatever reason—and the question is: is there any activity
that will come to an end because of these changes?
|
|
[202]
Carl Sargeant: No; there is not, in effect, a
reduction—I know that it is hard to see that because of the
numbers. It is £0.5 million and it will continue to be
£0.5 million; there is a reason that that additionality is
there, and it is just an accounting issue for us. As I said, I am
happy to explain that further in a note.
|
|
[203]
Alun Ffred Jones:
Ar linell arall, sef gwella a chynnal
a chadw seilwaith ffyrdd lleol, mae’r gyllideb yn
diflannu-mae’n werth £13 miliwn ac wedyn nid oes dim. A
allwch chi esbonio hynny?
|
Alun Ffred Jones: On another line,
namely improving and maintaining local road infrastructure, the
budget is disappearing—it is currently worth £13 million
and then there is nothing. Can you explain that?
|
|
[204]
Ms Bennett: That was the budget line that paid for the
former transport grant, which offered support to local road
projects and is no longer available for new projects. The last of
the projects to complete is the docks peripheral distributor road
in Neath Port Talbot. That was one of the choices made in managing
the reductions.
|
|
[205]
Alun Ffred Jones:
A oedd yr arian hwnnw ar gael i
awdurdodau lleol wella a chynnal ffyrdd lleol? Rwy’n deall
nad yw’r arian hwnnw bellach ar gael.
|
Alun Ffred Jones: Was that money
available to local authorities to improve and maintain local roads?
I understand that that money is no longer available.
|
|
[206]
Carl Sargeant: That is the case in that respect, and that is
part of the Wales infrastructure plan, which is part of the
£3.5 million borrowing proposals. You will be aware that this
was an agreement between local government and the Welsh Government,
where there is huge investment and a long-term borrowing element
for local authorities, which is funded by the Welsh Government.
They borrow an amount and we pay the revenue cost of that loan.
There was an agreement that this was a better way to lever more
money into the system. ‘Yes’ is the answer to your
question on whether that funding has now gone, but we have replaced
it with this proposal to fund a borrowing regime for local
authorities to deliver on infrastructure projects for local
roads.
|
|
[207]
Alun Ffred Jones:
Beth yw gwerth yr arian hwnnw
sy’n cael ei fenthyg gan awdurdodau lleol yn
flynyddol?
|
Alun Ffred Jones: What is the value of
the money that is borrowed by local authorities every year?
|
|
[208]
Carl Sargeant: I can give you a note on the overall amount
borrowed, but I think it is in excess of £170 million in
total.
|
|
[209]
Alun Ffred Jones: What is the annual value?
|
|
[210]
Carl Sargeant: Let me give you the right figures, as I would
not want to mislead you in any way—the Welsh
Government’s revenue-funded investment of around £12
million in annual revenue supports the local government borrowing
initiative. In 2012-13, we will pay £4 million, and £8
million in 2013-14; that will allow the total amount over the
period to be around £170 million. That is not an annual total
of £170 million being borrowed.
|
|
[211]
Joyce Watson: I want to take us back to last year, when we
asked questions about monitoring the national transport plan that
was updated in 2011. What specific changes have you made in policy
delivery following the publication of the update on the monitoring
of the national transport plan? How are those reflected in budget
allocations?
|
|
12.00 p.m.
|
|
[212]
Carl Sargeant: We launched the reprioritised national
transport plan. How best can I describe the transport plan? It is a
sort of deliverable shopping list that looks at what we want to do
in terms of the longer term vision for transport in Wales. We
monitor the effects of what is happening in the system. However,
because we had a change in data in one year, we did not think it
was right to change the whole national transport plan. We have a
vision of what we would like to achieve and how we intend to get
there.
|
|
[213]
So, we monitor the indicators of the transport plan as trends.
Going back to the issue of active travel, this is what we are
trying to achieve. We are trying to create a modal shift, getting
people from vehicles on to cycles, cycles on to trains or whatever.
However, we look at the long-term trends to see whether we are
having an effect in order to influence the transport plan and the
next stages of the plan. So, yes, we do monitor them. Do we make
significant changes on the back of an indicator in transport
planning? No, because there could be many reasons for the results.
We monitor the trends rather than the indicators per se with regard
to policy shifts. One example—and this is not
factual—would be that, if bus usage increased this year it
could be because of increased tourism due to the Olympics. We would
not change our transport planning operation for next year because
of the Olympics this year. It is about the trends. We need to look
at the trends and how we influence things. In the longer term,
those will influence the national transport plan.
|
|
[214]
Nick Ramsay: David Rees is next on joint transport
authorities.
|
|
[215]
David Rees: Before we start, Alun Ffred mentioned the budget
for the regional transport plans going down. What does the regional
transport plans’ budget line actually cover?
|
|
[216]
Carl Sargeant: Claire, do we have the detail on exactly what
we pay them for?
|
|
[217]
Ms Bennett: It varies across the different regional
transport consortia, because each consortium has a regional
transport plan, on the basis of which they prioritise the
investment needs for that area. The budget tends to include
walking, cycling or active travel schemes, integrated transport
measures—such as park-and-ride facilities or facilities at
railway stations—occasionally railway investment, and
occasionally local roads investment. So, the particular balance of
investment will depend on the priorities in the region, but on the
basis of what is set out in the regional transport plan, they have
the scope to come to us with proposals every year on what they
would like to take forward in the next year. We discuss the plan
with them, agree it and then the funding is made available.
|
|
[218]
David Rees: In your paper, you identify that regional
transport consortia are key partners in delivering transport
services. However, although I accept the point about the accounting
figures, we can clearly see the revenue budget for the regional
transport plan is flat. There is also a decrease in the capital. If
they are key partners, how are you going to manage to get value for
money out of the decreasing figure?
|
|
[219]
Carl Sargeant: Again, I go back to the point that our
budget, and particularly the capital budget, has been reduced
significantly over the years. That is a consequence of what comes
in and what goes out. That is the allocation for this department
and we have to deal with that. There is a knock-on effect on
regional transport consortia in that respect. If we do not have it,
they cannot have it either. However, it does not take away from the
fact that they still have their regional planning role with regard
to what they want to do locally in respect of the broad objectives
Claire just shared with you. What is it they are trying to achieve?
Is it better bus routes or better infrastructure projects, for
example? A couple of Members here continually write to me about
Carno station, which is just one of the pressures that was not in
the national transport plan or in the regional transport plan for
that consortium. So, these are the local things that these
consortia need to consider.
|
|
[220]
David Rees: I can think of other stations that are close to
my heart. [Laughter.]
|
|
[221]
Carl Sargeant: That is just an example. I am sure that I
will get letters on the back of this. [Laughter.]
|
|
[222]
The issue for me, David, is the function of the regional consortia,
which I am considering. You will be aware of the manifesto
commitment to look at regional transport boards, and so we are
looking at whether we need regional transport boards as well as
regional transport consortia. We are considering whether there are
some more things that they can do, given that they have been
helpful in the way that they are collectively looking at bus
services across Wales. So, that is just one example of what they
can do, despite the funding issues. Funding is of course
challenging, and every question that you are going to ask me is on
what is going to be reduced. We must look at how we deliver
services differently and the consortia are part of that partnership
approach to achieving that.
|
|
[223]
David Rees: You have pre-empted my next question on the
joint transport authorities. What time frame are you considering
within your review as to whether you wish to go ahead with
that?
|
|
[224]
Carl Sargeant: We have done some scoping around that, but
there are still many more questions to be asked. There is a similar
scenario in relation to some of the legislation that I am
considering on youth justice, which is totally separate from
transport but has the same principle. The question is whether we
need to go to that position. I have the powers to create joint
transport authorities, but we already have things in place that,
should their ability to deliver be strengthened, could possibly be
the right route forward, as opposed to creating more legislation.
So, I am getting some further advice on that. The manifesto
commitment said that we would scope this, which I am doing.
|
|
[225]
I am having a really constructive relationship with the regional
transport consortia, and they are stepping up to the mark in terms
of delivery. There is still a long way to go in terms of what they
can and cannot do, but I am encouraged with that relationship and
with the way things are going. The consortia are not now just third
parties that deliver on their own priorities with Welsh Government
money; it is about what they can offer and bring to the table as
well. So, the relationship has changed significantly.
|
|
[226]
David Rees: So, do you think that, by this time next year,
we will have a clearer picture as to whether you will want to go
ahead with those authorities or stick with what we already
have?
|
|
[227]
Carl Sargeant: We will certainly be in a clearer position,
because the consortia are currently involved in some significant
changes to operation. I mentioned earlier what they have done with
bus services in Wales and their involvement in that. That will give
me an indication of their capacity and whether they are capable of
taking what we require them to do to the next level.
|
|
[228]
Nick Ramsay: We have a couple more questions on capital
investment from Gwyn Price.
|
|
[229]
Gwyn R. Price: The Wales infrastructure investment plan
identifies M4 improvements between Magor and Castleton, and at
junction 28, for delivery in 2013-14. How will these improvements
be funded? Are you satisfied that all Welsh Government’s
transport capital investment commitments for 2014-15 are fully
funded?
|
|
[230]
Carl Sargeant: The improvements that you mentioned in that
particular area on the M4 and at junction 28 will be funded fully
by the transport capital budget. However, we are talking with
technical advisers about that to see how we can move forward to the
next level in relation to statutory services and the development of
new road networks or the upgrading of road networks. So, yes that
will be fine.
|
|
[231]
Will everything be fully funded? We believe that we are on schedule
for delivery, but that is on the basis that there are no unforeseen
objects placed in our way. We rely heavily on European funding for
network infrastructure improvements. If that suddenly stops or
something changes, then we will have to have a serious think about
how we start delivering some of these projects. I mentioned earlier
to Joyce that the national transport plan is a shopping list of
aspiration and delivery. We have to have what we want and we need
to set the goals that we need to achieve. However, there are many
incoming things that have an effect on that. At the moment, we are
confident that we can deliver these things, but who knows what is
around the corner?
|
|
[232]
Byron Davies: My favourite subject is the M4, on which I
suffer virtually every day. On the M4 corridor enhancement
measures, I understand that discussions are ongoing on financing
strategic enhancements. How will delivery of the M4 corridor
enhancement measures be funded, given the limitations on capital
budgets?
|
|
[233]
Carl Sargeant: I will be cautious in what I say about the
enhancement measures, because some issues are still ongoing
regarding the consultation on the outcome of that, so I will be
careful about the detail. However, the broader principle of funding
is an important one. I have had regular meetings with the Minister
for Finance to look at new opportunities for funding. I think that
they are now called single-purpose vehicles—a modern way of
looking at how we support new projects by different models of
borrowing opportunities, subject to the ability to borrow. So,
there is an important element here: future projects will be based
on the premise that we are allowed to borrow in the future. Some of
the M4 improvement projects are long-term aspirations and, again, I
do not know what they will be yet, because I have not made a
decision on that. So, what we will have in the future will be based
on different funding models that I am exploring with the Minister
for Finance. A lot will depend on the ability to borrow.
|
|
[234]
Byron Davies: I understand that.
|
|
[235]
Nick Ramsay: Alun Ffred, did you have some questions on the
M4 and the national strategic plan?
|
|
[236]
Alun Ffred Jones: No.
|
|
[237]
Nick Ramsay: Are you sure?
|
|
[238]
Alun Ffred Jones: I am certain.
|
|
[239]
Nick Ramsay: Jenny Rathbone, we have spoken a lot about
roads, so would you like to ask about rail?
|
|
[240]
Jenny Rathbone: To follow up your comments about the
importance of active travel plans, which are hugely important to
Cardiff—not least because of its air quality, because of the
numbers coming into the city by car—a lot hangs on Network
Rail’s completion of the Cardiff area signalling renewal by
2015 for the Cardiff region, and the travel plans for that, and for
the Cardiff to Swansea links. What are the penalties to make sure
that Network Rail delivers by 2015?
|
|
[241]
Carl Sargeant: You will be aware that some of the
interventions on the rail infrastructure element are not devolved.
We believe that these are all on target, but I will ask Frances to
give you the detail on the penalties element.
|
|
[242]
Ms Duffy: The Cardiff area resignalling programme is part of
the high-level output specification and the priority investment
that has been set out by the UK Government for Network Rail to
deliver. We engage with it frequently and monitor progress, but it
is the responsibility of the Office of Rail Regulation to ensure
that Network Rail delivers on its specified outputs, and that is
part of that specification. So, there is a process by which the ORR
monitors the outputs from Network Rail as well, and, through the
regulatory regime, it has different options for penalties if
Network Rail does not deliver on what its programme should be.
|
|
[243]
Jenny Rathbone: Okay, but I can see that the projects that
are the Welsh Government’s responsibility hang on other
people delivering on that signalling. Things such as improving
services to Caerphilly, Pontypridd, the Vale of Glamorgan and
Maesteg cannot be delivered unless we can improve that signalling.
So, how might it affect your budget if other people do not deliver
on those targets?
|
|
[244]
Carl Sargeant: You are absolutely right. Most of the
projects that you just mentioned are not possible without the main
infrastructure being completed successfully, but they are also
based upon the principles of the new franchise and the
electrification of the Valleys lines and the West Coast main line.
So, the interventions there are quite complex. Fundamentally,
however, if that is not completed, all the other things go out the
window. We have confidence that that will be completed and that it
will not, therefore, have a direct impact on the budgets or the
future planning for the upgraded proposals made, predominantly, on
the premise of electrification.
|
|
12.15 p.m.
|
|
[245]
Jenny Rathbone: Just following on from that, I wondered if
you could just tell us a bit about what role you have in ensuring
that there is a proper, integrated rail-bus link at Cardiff, so
that people like Byron Davies would consider coming in by public
transport.
|
|
[246]
Carl Sargeant: I am more than happy to have a discussion
with Byron directly about his personal travel arrangements.
|
|
[247]
Jenny Rathbone: He is a good example. Cardiff Central rail
station is not outside our door here, but we have to encourage
people to use the railways and then complete their journey by
bus.
|
|
[248]
Carl Sargeant: Yes, and you will be aware, specifically
around Cardiff, that Cardiff Bus and the local authority have
placed clear importance on joining up the services, and have looked
at how to do that. Of course, my team has spoken with all local
authorities, including Cardiff, about timetabling with Arriva and
network delivery with Network Rail.
|
|
[249]
What I have said in the past about our vision for transport in
Wales is that active travel is key to all of this in terms of
delivery, but by 2018 I think that we have a great opportunity to
look at how the Welsh Government finances buses, and what we are
trying to achieve by that. How do we finance the new franchise, and
how do we integrate it? That is partly why we have had the
difficult discussion about changing the way we finance buses in the
first place—we have to be in a place where we can influence
that. Before, we were funding fuel, but now we will be funding
routes, and therefore we can change the way that operates. However,
it is a package, and you cannot isolate buses from trains. I think
that the franchise date of 2018, with electrification, gives us a
whole new opportunity, alongside the metro concept as well. At the
moment it is about relationships and how they work. In the future,
we will have much more of a lever to make those things happen.
|
|
[250]
Nick Ramsay: Before we move on to the metro, you have talked
about buses and Joyce Watson had a question for you specifically on
that.
|
|
[251]
Joyce Watson: I am sure that you will not be surprised,
Minister, that I am going to ask you some questions on bus funding.
I write to you all the time on that subject. The bus funding
technical group was expected to report to you in September this
year. Do you expect service levels to be improved following the
implementation of the new funding arrangements? How will you
monitor the impact of the review of bus funding on service
levels?
|
|
[252]
Carl Sargeant: The simple answer is ‘yes’. Do I
expect a better service? Of course I do. I am also hoping that that
will happen. In term of monitoring this, I have not made any firm
decision yet. We are still in discussions about shaping this new
service, but I alluded in my last answer to my change of direction,
away from fuel subsidy to service and mileage subsidy, so that we
do not pay in the future for fuel for buses that travel empty. It
has to be services that we pay for, because that is the right thing
to do. We are certainly getting into that space now. One of the
interventions alongside this is about the principle of quality bus
partnerships. It is about funding ticketing machines, so that
services that we fund will have machines that will be able to
identify the journey, and recognise bus passes as well. We know
that there are some operators that have not operated the system as
they perhaps should have done, and now we will be able to fully
understand the route, the service that is being used, and how many
are using it, by providing buses with these machines that can read
the card. That will give us a lot more information. On that basis,
we think that there may be a cost saving as well. So, I am quite
excited about these new proposals. There is a little bit of
resistance to pursuing this from some organisations, but change is
always difficult.
|
|
[253]
Joyce Watson: Do you have scope within your current budget
allocation to take action should new funding arrangements lead to
any service reductions?
|
|
[254]
Carl Sargeant: Have we got any more money? No. That is why
we are making these changes—for the betterment of the
service, to adopt the more targeted approach to bus service
delivery that we need and are happy to pay for.
|
|
[255]
Joyce Watson: Still on buses, and moving on to concessionary
fares, Minister, the three-year deal to fund concessionary fares
was agreed prior to the current review of bus funding. Do you have
any concerns about the future financial viability of the scheme
given the subsequent reductions in, and reorganisation of, wider
bus funding?
|
|
[256]
Carl Sargeant: The concessionary bus fare scheme has nothing
to do with the bus operator grant or the new service that will be
in place in the future; there is no correlation between them. Do I
have enough money for the scheme? Currently, yes. I can give you
complete reassurance that we will not amend the flagship scheme in
Wales on concessionary fares. Will it be challenging in the future?
Yes, but that is a negotiating position that we will adopt with the
operators when we seek another three-year capping agreement on what
the funding and delivery mechanism will be in future.
|
|
[257]
Alun Ffred Jones: Wrth edrych ar y llinell ar gefnogi bysys
a thrafnidiaeth leol, mae gostyngiad o 10%. A yw’r arian
hwnnw ar gyfer y grant gweithredwyr gwasanaethau bysiau a’r
grant trafnidiaeth lleol? Ai dyna yw’r elfennau yn y £29
miliwn sy’n gostwng i £26 miliwn?
|
Alun Ffred Jones: In looking at the
line on supporting buses and local transport, there is a reduction
of 10%. Is this money for the bus service operators grant and the
local transport grant? Are those the elements in the £29
million that is reducing to £26 million?
|
|
[258]
Carl Sargeant: Yes.
|
|
[259]
Alun Ffred Jones: Felly, mae gostyngiad o 10% ac mae’n
anodd iawn gweld sut y gallwch gael gwasanaeth gwell allan o hynny.
Rwyf wedi gweld llythyr gan gyngor sir i gwmni bysiau sy’n
dweud bod llai o arian yn dod iddo. Pan ofynnwyd sut y
byddai’n cynnal y gwasanaeth, ei ateb oedd y byddai’n
codi pris tocyn ar gyfer teithwyr. Oni fydd hynny yn cael effaith
uniongyrchol ar yr arian rydych yn gorfod ei ddyrannu ar gyfer y
rhai sy’n teithio am ddim, achos os yw’r daith yn
ddrutach mae’n costio i chi? Felly, gallai hynny gael effaith
ar y gyllideb honno o £52 miliwn ar gyfer tocynnau teithio
rhatach. A yw hynny’n wir?
|
Alun Ffred Jones: So, there is a 10%
reduction, and it is very difficult to see how you can get a better
service from that. I have seen a letter from a county council to a
bus company stating that it will receive less funding. When it was
asked how it would maintain the service, its response was that it
would increase fares for passengers. Will this not have a direct
impact on the funding that you allocate for those travelling for
free, because if the journey is more expensive, it costs you more?
So, that could have an impact on the £52 million budget for
the concessionary bus scheme. Is that true?
|
|
[260]
Carl Sargeant: Let me take us back a few steps in terms of
why we did this in the first place. The Member will be aware that
the bus service operators grant was at a much higher level than
anywhere else in the UK; we were paying much more than England and
Scotland. I made a conscious decision to realign that finance,
because a disproportionate amount was going on fuel subsidy and
route subsidy. I still stand by this; we should not be subsidising
empty buses going round the country, wherever they are. We should
be providing services for people who need them, on a route and
mileage basis. That is why we made the shift.
|
|
[261]
So, based on the premise that there was much more money in the
system than anywhere else in the UK, we have reduced it. It is
still more than in other areas; we are potentially paying 1p more
than in England, but that is less relevant at the moment. By
changing the system, so that we now pay for service routes, there
is an opportunity for bus operators, regional transport consortia
and the Welsh Government to develop a new way of delivering the
service.
|
|
[262]
I was rather perplexed by the actions of some local authorities and
bus operators that ran interesting campaigns to suggest that there
was a reduction in funding, when there was not—there was no
change in the subsidy that we gave. We were in negotiations with
the bus companies and local authorities. Some of the companies
increased fares, some of them reduced routes, and some local
authorities changed how they operated the relationship with the
services when there was no change whatsoever in the subsidy. It was
unfortunate for the people who jumped the gun in those
circumstances. I am happier to deal with the facts of the situation
than with anecdotal evidence from organisations that wish to make
mischief because, actually, those facts are not true.
|
|
[263]
Alun Ffred Jones:
I gadarnhau, mae gostyngiad y
flwyddyn nesaf o 10% yn y gyllideb hon, felly bydd gostyngiad yn yr
arian a fydd ar gael, sut bynnag y byddwch yn ei dalu, i lywodraeth
leol ac i’r cwmnïau bysiau.
|
Alun Ffred Jones: To confirm, there is
a decrease next year of 10% in this budget, so there will be a
decrease in the money that will be available, however you pay it,
to local government and to the bus operators.
|
|
[264]
Carl Sargeant: Yes.
|
|
[265]
David Rees: I have a very simple supplementary question. The
reduction in the bus service operators grants and the local
transport service grants is clearly there, and you are looking to
hold a review of that and, effectively, a replacement. Is greater
efficiency going to be required, and do you expect better outputs?
At the end of the day, we are looking at value for money, so are
you expecting better outputs, perhaps by having more services or at
least in the non-reduction of services, as a consequence of
rearranging your funding?
|
|
[266]
Carl Sargeant: Yes, I am, and we should not get hung up on
the fact that the subsidies that we were paying out did not deliver
services; they delivered fuel subsidies. That is the big
difference, and while I hate to say it, this is public money, and
we are paying a lot of private companies a lot of money as a fuel
subsidy. Now, that might have been right at the time, and I am not
going to argue for or against it, but now we have less money, so
there is less money to go into the system.
|
|
[267]
What we have done is, again, about rationalising the system that is
out there. Local authorities already place money, separate to Welsh
Government funding, into bus companies to deliver additional
services. The principle that I have asked them to look at is that
of how we can rationalise this by bringing the whole pot
together—everybody brings all their money together, we
understand which routes are required, and we pay for the route, and
not for the fuel that it takes to get the bus from the depot and
around the route.
|
|
[268]
Do I expect better services? I am hopeful. Is this a more targeted
response for bus services, as opposed to a fuel subsidy?
Absolutely.
|
|
[269]
Yr Arglwydd
Elis-Thomas: Mae gennyf un
cwestiwn ar hyn. Sut mae’r gyllideb honno yn ein symud tuag
at drafnidiaeth fwy integredig—rhwng bysiau a threnau yn arbennig—a pha
arweiniad mae’r Gweinidog yn ei roi i’r consortia
trafnidiaeth rhanbarthol ac awdurdodau lleol i ddelifro hyn yn fwy
effeithiol? Rwy’n derbyn y feirniadaeth, mewn ateb i gwestiwn
blaenorol, ynglŷn â’r ffordd nad oedd y cymhorthdal
blaenorol, o safbwynt y cwmnïau bysiau a llywodraeth leol, yn
gweithredu yn yr un modd mewn gwahanol ardaloedd, ond onid
yw’r Gweinidog yn gallu delio â hynny drwy’r
consortia rhanbarthol?
|
Lord Elis-Thomas: I have one question
on this. How does that budget move us towards a more integrated
transport system—between buses and trains in
particular—and what guidance can the Minister give to the
regional transport consortia and local authorities to deliver this
more effectively? I accept the criticism, in response to an earlier
question, about how the previous subsidy, from the perspective of
the bus companies and the local authorities, did not function in
the same way in different areas, but can the Minister not deal with
those through the regional consortia?
|
|
[270]
Carl Sargeant: Yes. I think that I mentioned earlier that I
believe that regional consortia have grown up with us. We are
looking at operations between local authorities and how they can
work as regional transport consortia, and I am very keen to
allocate funding that they have not had in the past, because they
can do it on a regional basis. Byron Davies asked earlier about a
collaborative approach to delivery: in north Wales, the regional
transport consortium, Taith, is looking at a bus programme for
fleet management between all six authorities, because they
recognise that they can get cost savings—
|
|
[271]
Lord Elis-Thomas: I cannot wait, Minister.
|
|
[272]
Carl Sargeant: They recognise that they can get cost savings
by using the six services across north Wales. At the moment, they
have six individual ones; why not bring them together? This is not
rocket science, and once we have brought down the barriers of
personal ownership, we can move ahead on this.
|
|
[273]
Nick Ramsay: Minister, are you free to stay for a couple of
minutes?
|
|
[274]
Carl Sargeant: I can probably give you a good five minutes,
if that is okay, Chair.
|
|
[275]
Nick Ramsay: That is fine. We have just a couple more
questions that we would like to get through.
|
|
[276]
Joyce Watson: To save you time, Minister, because everybody
is interested in integrated travel, particularly bus journeys and
the changes, and as we do not have time to explore it here in the
way that we would perhaps like, would you be able to write a paper
for us, explaining the changes between the different funding levels
and what they might mean for the customer? It would be very useful,
I am sure, to everybody around the table, in that we could then
present it to the people who keep writing to us, leading to us in
turn writing to you.
|
|
[277]
Carl Sargeant: I am happy to do that.
|
|
[278]
Eluned Parrott: On community transport, I noted that the
programme for government annual report says that you are
|
|
[279]
‘continuing to fund the Community Transport Concessionary
Fares Initiative scheme for the first part of 2012/13 pending a
review’.
|
|
[280]
I understand that funding for the CTCFI pilot schemes was due to
end at the end of September this year, but when I spoke to them on
27 September, they still did not know whether that funding was to
be continued. Do they have that funding agreed now and, if so,
until when?
|
|
12.30 p.m.
|
|
[281]
Carl Sargeant: They will have the funding agreed until I
make a decision.
|
|
[282]
Eluned Parrott: I notice as well that, in the budget, there
is an increase of £1.5 million in the concessionary fares
line. Does that mean that you are hoping to mainstream the CTCFI
funding into that budget?
|
|
[283]
Carl Sargeant: No.
|
|
[284]
Eluned Parrott: So, what is the likely timescale for the
decision making on the CTCFI pilot projects?
|
|
[285]
Carl Sargeant: It will be any time now, really. As you have
said, the report was coming through to me in September. I have
asked for more clarity on some of the detail on that. That has gone
out for some more discussion. When I have fully appraised that, I
will make a decision and I will make the appropriate budgetary
changes, should I have to do so, with regard to the services that
are provided.
|
|
[286]
Eluned Parrott: How much notice will you be able to give to
the operators to be able to make the changes that you require?
|
|
[287]
Carl Sargeant: Three months.
|
|
[288]
Nick Ramsay: Minister, the national transport plan strategic
environmental assessment undertaken in 2009 did not consider the
specific proposals contained in the M4 corridor enhancement
measures consultation. Why was an SEA on these proposals not
published alongside that consultation?
|
|
[289]
Carl Sargeant: As I said earlier, I am conscious about
decisions made on this and things that I may say that might
prejudice any remarks that I make with regard to the future
decision regarding the proposals. However, if I may, I will discuss
this in the broadest sense as it would apply to any scheme. That
proposal was unique with regard to the way in which we consulted.
We have gone out to the public in the broadest way and have said
that there is an issue and we have asked what people believe can
resolve the problem—whether the answer is to do a little or
to do a lot. On the scale of works, from doing nothing to doing a
lot, there is a lot of legislation behind it regarding the
proposals to stack up that scheme. I have said that we should go
out to consultation, ask people for their views, they can tell us
their views and, when they come back in, I will make a decision on
that—whether it is to do nothing, do something, do a lot, or
anything in between. Once I have identified what we are going to
do, we will go back out to consultation, with the SEA, looking
through the legislative proposals to see exactly what we need to do
to comply with the statutory services that we have to provide.
|
|
[290]
We have not done this before, so this is unique. We have been
transparent and people think that we should not have done
it—that we should have stuck to the rules. However, there are
no rules in this. This is consultation about the broader scheme,
identifying what people want and listening to people. Once we find
out what people are interested in, we will follow those proposals
through with the statutory processes, including the SEA, aligned to
the scheme that I may or may not choose.
|
|
[291]
Nick Ramsay: Do you accept that there was an issue and that
some consultants might have felt that they were not fully aware of
the environmental impact?
|
|
[292]
Carl Sargeant: Of course, there are views out there and
people have said that this should have been done before we even got
to this position. Is there anything wrong with talking about
potential schemes, whatever they may be—whether they involve
doing something or doing nothing? This is a genuine consultation.
We will see what people are interested in or whether this will turn
out to be a non-starter. Why would I waste money on doing something
that may never happen? It makes sense to consider whether this is
the right scheme for the proposal. You will understand this. There
will always be people who will be for or against a scheme. Once we
have established my position and theirs, let us try to bring them
as close together as possible and then launch a consultation with
all of the statutory considerations involved in that. I accept that
people are disappointed because this was not in place when it went
out, but it does not prevent us from doing that in future for any
scheme that we may identify.
|
|
[293]
Nick Ramsay: Thank you, Minister, for agreeing to stay for a
few more minutes, as we had a lot of questions to get through. I
thank you, Minister, and your officials for attending today. You
have helped us greatly with our scrutiny of the budget process.
|
|
[294]
Carl Sargeant: Chair, if there is anything that was not
clear or if you require any further information, I will be happy to
answer that by letter or to appear before you again.
|
|
[295]
Nick Ramsay: Okay; thank you.
|
|
12.35 p.m.
|
|
Cynnig Gweithdrefnol
Procedural Motion
|
|
[296]
Nick Ramsay: I move that
|
|
the committee resolves to exclude the
public from the remainder of the meeting in accordance with
Standing Order No. 17.42(vi).
|
|
[297]
This is so that the committee can discuss the budget report. I see
that the committee is in agreement.
|
|
Derbyniwyd y cynnig.
Motion agreed.
|
|
Daeth rhan gyhoeddus y cyfarfod i ben am 12.35
p.m.
The public part of the meeting ended at 12.35 p.m.
|
