UNCORRECTED TRANSCRIPT OF ORAL EVIDENCE To be published as HC 273House of COMMONSMINUTES OF EVIDENCETAKEN BEFOREWELSH AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
PROPOSED NATIONAL ASSEMBLY FOR
|
|
1. |
This is an uncorrected transcript of evidence taken in public and reported to the House. The transcript has been placed on the internet on the authority of the Committee, and copies have been made available by the Vote Office for the use of Members and others.
|
|
2. |
Any public use of, or reference to, the contents should make clear that neither witnesses nor Members have had the opportunity to correct the record. The transcript is not yet an approved formal record of these proceedings.
|
|
3. |
Members who receive this for the purpose of correcting questions addressed by them to witnesses are asked to send corrections to the Committee Assistant.
|
|
4. |
Prospective witnesses may receive this in preparation for any written or oral evidence they may in due course give to the Committee.
|
|
5. |
Transcribed by the Official Shorthand Writers to the Houses of Parliament: W B Gurney & Sons LLP, Hope House, Telephone Number: 020 7233 1935
|
Oral Evidence
Taken before the Welsh Affairs Committee
on
Members present
Mrs Siān C James, in the Chair
Dr Hywel Francis
Mr David Jones
________________
Witnesses: Mr Ieuan Wyn Jones, Assembly Member, Deputy First Minister for Wales and Minister for the Economy and Transport, Ms Lynsey Edwards, Economy and Transport Team, Legal Services Department, Ms Bethan Bateman, Principal Policy Analyst Transport, and Mr Martin Stevenson, Head of Transport Policy and Legislation, Welsh Assembly Government, gave evidence.
Q1 Chairman: Welcome to the Welsh Affairs Committee and in particular to this
session on the proposed National Assembly for
Mr Wyn Jones: Thank you very much for the welcome. On my right is Martin Stevenson who is the Head of Transport Policy. On my immediate left is Lynsey Edwards who is a lawyer in the Department. On her left is Bethan Bateman who is Principal Policy Analyst in the Department and is primarily responsible for the conduct of the LCO.
Q2 Chairman: Thank you very much. I will start the question session off with a series of questions. What are the limitations to the current powers of the National Assembly over the concessionary fares scheme?
Mr Wyn Jones: The current restrictions are that we are not able to have direct negotiations fully with local authorities over the budget that we have and, secondly, because we would wish to do so, there needs to be a new appeals procedure set up, because under the current legislation if there are disputes between bus operators and ourselves over the budget or the reimbursement formula then the appeal would be to ourselves as Welsh ministers, which would clearly be inappropriate because there would be a conflict of interest. What we want is to have the legislation clarified so that there would be no question that we could have direct negotiations with the bus operators over the extent of the budget and, secondly, if there is a dispute that it is sent to an independent appeals panel which could be set up under the Legislative Consent Order we are now seeking.
Q3 Chairman: What changes in the concessionary fares scheme do you hope to bring about by means of the proposed LCO?
Mr Wyn Jones: We do not intend to change the eligibility or the extent of the current benefits because clearly it is a very successful scheme, as I think we have all acknowledged, so it is primarily then to make sure that the budget that we have allocated on an annual basis is kept within that envelope. We have had some discussions with bus operators over the reimbursement formula, and those, hopefully, will come to a successful conclusion, but the only arrangement that we want in place is to make sure that we can keep within the financial envelope but in no way to change the criteria or the eligibility for concessionary fares. We do not intend as a matter of policy to change that at all, although of course under the legislation we are perfectly entitled to do it even as things currently stand.
Chairman: thank you very much. Dr Francis?
Q4 Dr Francis: Good morning. Could I ask about community transport. Would the extension of competence enable the concessionary fares scheme be extended to community transport?
Mr Wyn Jones: I think it could be but the intention that we have is that it should be limited to registered bus services. The reason for that is that we want absolute clarity and certainty about which services are operated. I think there is a danger that if it is extended to community transport that that would open the door to have a range of ad hoc services that could then qualify for concessionary fares, so our current intention is that it should be limited to registered bus services but if community transport groups were wishing to operate registered services then of course they would qualify.
Q5 Dr Francis: Could I refer you to your evidence before the National Assembly Committee on this proposed Order. You stated that if granted competence you intended to maintain the current range of concessionary entitlements. If there are no plans to adjust existing entitlements, how will the proposed changes allow you to continue to fund the concessionary scheme at the current level?
Mr Wyn Jones: We do not intend to change eligibility or the scope of the current entitlement, but obviously in recent years there has been no negotiation with the bus operators over what we call the reimbursement rate to them for concessionary fares. That has been the issue, because if you actually look at the recent history the budget that we have allocated has been exceeded virtually in every year, which means of course that resources have to be found either from within the Department or from reserves to top it up. What we have done is try to negotiate with bus operators on that reimbursement rate which then brings it back within the financial envelope, but that does not affect people's entitlement to use concessionary fares.
Q6 Mr Jones: On that point, I understand that there was evidence given in the Assembly yesterday on this issue and that there was some doubt as to whether what is proposed would actually result in lower costs for concessionary fares. That is right, is it not?
Mr Wyn Jones: I have not got a copy of the evidence that was given yesterday but we are satisfied that if we can maintain the existing entitlement, provided we can control the budget by having an understanding with bus operators about that reimbursement rate, we are confident that this year we will be able to achieve that; that is maintain the concessionary entitlement and control the budget.
Q7 Mr Jones: I understand that one witness yesterday pointed out that the costly procedure of processing passes would remain with the local authorities and another witness pointed out that controlling cost is an operational issue and not a legislative issue.
Mr Wyn Jones: Well, that is
absolutely right, but in order to have direct discussions with bus operators it
is important for us to have the competence to do so but also for bus operators
to have an appeals mechanism. For
example, if we cannot agree those reimbursement arrangements with bus operators
- as I think there are a number of appeals outstanding currently in
Q8 Mr Jones: Could you give examples of those issues that might arise?
Mr Wyn Jones: Obviously they would be a matter for the Measures that follow. The two matters that I raised would be of immediate concern for us, as I have indicated, the issue of discussions and the issue of an appeals procedure, but a future Assembly might decide to do other things as well.
Q9 Mr Jones: Yes, but you could apply for a Legislative Competence Order for almost anything on that basis, could you not?
Mr Wyn Jones: Yes, you
could, but the intention is that it makes a lot of sense if the Assembly has
competence over part of concessionary fares for it to have it over the whole
area. It is a lot neater and it means
that we would not have to come back to
Q10 Mr Jones: Could we turn to the second ambit of the proposed LCO and that is learner transport safety. The position at present is that local authorities have discretion in the drawing up of contracts for learner services and there are certain things that they must take into account such as the age of learners, the nature of the route and so on. What are the limitations of the current range of powers available to the Assembly that prevent it achieving what it wants to achieve in relation to safety of learner transport?
Mr Wyn Jones: The powers that came to the Assembly on learner travel came through the Education and Training Act 2006 followed by an Order in Council which gave us Field 5.10 in Part 1 of Schedule 5, which allowed us to look at and to deal with eligibility for transport and behaviour. When I appeared before the Education and Lifelong Learning Committee they expressed concern that the Measure was limited in its scope because it could not deal with safety issues or the type of transport that could be used. What I said to the Committee was that I would seek competence then over the issue of safety, which I am now doing. There is another added benefit as well and that is clearly we are trying to encourage more and more people to use public transport and of course one way of doing that is to encourage more children to use public transport to get to school and if we can make that safer, whether that is in relation to actual or perceived safety, then obviously that is of benefit as well.
Q11 Mr Jones: Would it be possible to adopt a contractual rather than a legislative approach to achieving your aim?
Mr Wyn Jones: I think the
difficulty there is you have 22 local authorities and therefore you could
potentially have 22 contractual arrangements about the type and safety features
on buses. Our feeling is that to have
consistency across
Q12 Mr Jones: Have you considered approaching for example the Welsh Local Government Association with a view to seeking to achieve by consensus a uniform contractual approach?
Mr Wyn Jones: No, not in that sense. What we have sought to do, looking at the evidence that was given at my scrutiny committee in relation to the Measure, together with the scrutiny of the Measure as it went through, it was fairly clear that there was a very big consensus in the Assembly that we should go for legislative competence, primarily to ensure consistency of standards. Our belief is that to get that consistency of standards it is proper that there should be legislative competence to enable us to do so. The problem with the Learner Travel Measure was that although that Field gave us the competence, we were restricted then by an exception which was in Part 2 of the Act which prevented us from doing it in the original Measure. So I am doing this through a Legislative Competence Order to enable me to meet the aspirations of the Committee and the Assembly. I do not think it would be appropriate to try to agree an arrangement with local authorities on the basis of trying to do it with 22 local authorities. Finally, of course, although we can issue guidance to local authorities, that is not statutory.
Mr Jones: Thank you.
Q13 Dr Francis: If we can turn to the practical benefits and look particularly at the question of the safety of children on school buses. Is there evidence that there is some serious concern about this?
Mr Wyn Jones: Yes, there have been a lot of requests for this piece of legislation, both in the Assembly and of course there has been a campaign, as I think members of the Committee will be aware, by the family of Stuart Cunningham-Jones, following the death of their child. Where I think we would benefit from this Legislative Consent Order is that we would then be able to introduce a Measure that would entitle us for example to say that all buses carrying children to school should have seat belts, which would effectively mean the end of three for two, in other words three children on a seat designed for two, and it would also allow us to have measures such as CCTV cameras or even look at the introduction of single-decker buses. That is the kind of thing that we would like to do.
Q14 Dr Francis: Do you have the competence to address issues relating to the safety of pedestrians and cycle users?
Mr Wyn Jones: No.
Q15 Dr Francis: Why is that?
Mr Wyn Jones: Because the only thing we could do, although the Learner Travel Measure is much wider in its remit in the sense that we can look at any mode of transport for learners, we are limited to basically contracted bus services and the Legislative Consent Order because that is the extent of the settlement that we have got. It is not a policy decision by us not to do it; it is just that the current settlement would not allow us to do it.
Q16 Dr Francis: For that reason that is why you would not be able to address the question of learner travel by rail as well?
Mr Wyn Jones: That is right, yes. If I may say so, it is not just by buses we can do it. We can do it by private hire vehicles or by taxis. Those are the three modes.
Q17 Mr Jones: Many school transport operators are small businesses, as you know. To what extent do you estimate that the measures pursuant to the LCO would impact upon them in terms of their costs?
Mr Wyn Jones: Of course in terms of the LCO, none.
Q18 Mr Jones: I know that but in terms of what you propose.
Mr Wyn Jones: I think it is important to stress therefore that in terms of the LCO itself then of course the extent of the burden depends on what is contained in the Measure.
Q19 Mr Jones: Yes, but you clearly know what you want to do in the Measure.
Mr Wyn Jones: I think it would be necessary for us to consult. We are not prescriptive now in saying it should be A, B, C, or D or a combination of them. I think it is important for us to make it clear that there would have to be a regulatory impact assessment, there would have to be consultation and there would be scrutiny, and therefore I am not particularly wanting to be drawn on the full extent of it, but I think it is fair to say that were we to introduce one or more of the measures that I described to Dr Francis there would be a requirement on them to comply with them and there would be extra cost.
Q20 Mr Jones: So what has been the response of those operators or representatives of those operators to this?
Mr Wyn Jones: I think those representatives gave evidence to the Committee yesterday but I have not actually seen it myself.
Q21 Mr Jones: A lot of local authorities rely on in-filling from general bus services to make up necessary buses for school transport. What impact would the proposed measures have upon those bus companies because clearly your proposal, as I understand it, is intended to apply to dedicated transport?
Mr Wyn Jones: Absolutely.
Q22 Mr Jones: But if in fact you have to in-fill with a double-decker bus from a general bus company, what would be proposed in respect of that?
Mr Wyn Jones: I would ask Bethan to answer the precise question.
Ms Bateman: My work in the Measure would be that if you were to impose a duty on a local authority to contract for bus services then those bus services would have to have particular safety features, whether that be the fitting of seat belts or using single-decker buses and so on, and that is the way in which we want to impose the requirement.
Q23 Mr Jones: Yes I understand that, but that is in relation to dedicated transport. What for example if they needed to utilise a bus to in-fill?
Ms Bateman: Then that contracted bus which they were utilising at that time and in-filling with would need to be fitted with seat belts for instance or the other safety features.
Q24 Mr Jones: That might cause practical problems, might it not?
Ms Bateman: For some. I think it is important to say that a number of the safety features that we are discussing are already fitted on modern vehicles now, so we are talking about relatively small numbers of vehicles, for instance, that would not be fitted with seat belts and there would be cost implications for those and it would be necessary to look at the numbers involved.
Q25 Mr Jones: What I am more concerned about rather than the cost is the practical arrangements that might need to be made. For example, if there was a particular need to in-fill with a bus from a general bus company and there was no suitable bus available, then in those circumstances there would be no transport for the children, would there?
Ms Bateman: That would be at the point at which a local authority would contract with an operator who would say that only buses fitted with those features could be used for the school journey. I think there is sufficient evidence to say that actually public transport buses do have these features although a small number would fall outside of that.
Mr Jones: Okay, thank you.
Q26 Chairman: Mr Stevenson, did you want to come in there?
Mr Stevenson: It was really just to make the point that our existing non-statutory guidance does provide certain advice to local authorities about how they contract for services and about the three-for-two concession and double-decker buses, and we do put a proviso in so there is a get-out where it says that it can be used "other than for exceptional operation reasons", so if there is something like inclement weather, vehicle failure or an emergency other vehicles could be used.
Q27 Mr Jones: So it is proposed that that non-statutory guidance would prevail after a Measure was made?
Mr Stevenson: We have not got there yet.
Mr Wyn Jones: In a sense, although I understand the concerns, these are matters which then would have to be dealt with through the Measure rather than through the LCO and therefore what the LCO does is it allows us to do a range of these things. Some of them explain the kind of things we might want to look at but the actual detail then is obviously for the Measure.
Q28 Dr Francis: This is rather a negative question and I am totally unsympathetic to it, but I would still like to pose the question really to evoke your response. Is there a risk that increased safety standards could "fragment" the existing services, suggesting to parents for example that general service buses are unsafe and so undermining the viability of local bus services and increasing the revenue support needed to maintain the services?
Mr Wyn Jones: Personally I would not think so. There is a policy imperative in relation to responding to concerns about the safety of school transport but there is also another imperative which is to try to persuade more and more young people to use public transport, and the safer we can make it then I think that is suitable. The concern that has been expressed to us has primarily been around the transport of children and young people to school. Therefore I think there is a general acceptance that that form of transport should be made as safe as possible. That is why of course we have also introduced behavioural codes for example on school transport because of these general concerns. My own view is that would not mean that that would lead people to conclude that general bus services of themselves were necessarily unsafe.
Q29 Dr Francis: So I take it from that answer that you have made an assessment of the potential impact of the proposed introduction of safety standards for contracted bus services on public bus services?
Mr Wyn Jones: The truth of it is that even if we had wanted to extend it beyond contracted services we could not. I made the point earlier on. It may well be of course that if we had had competence to go wider then we might have wanted to look at it, but it is the legislative barrier that prevents us from doing it. I am not sure whether I have answered the question fully so I wonder whether Bethan would like to pick up whether there has been an impact assessment made on general buses should we introduce safety features on contracted services.
Ms Bateman: We have not done an impact assessment as yet. As the Minister has said, the reason that we are looking at only contracted school transport services is that is the limit of the devolution settlement, but obviously where it has been possible the Learner Travel Measure went wider and looked at the behaviour of children on school transport. I think our overall policy position, notwithstanding what specific powers we had, was that we want to see a safe, secure and comfortable transport system particularly in public transport and contracted learner transport that would attract people from using the car as the means to get to school, so we have a range of measures across both public and private. Would specifically passing additional safety standards on private hire vehicles make people think that public buses were unsafe? I do not think so because a number of the things we are talking about legislating for are happening through best practice in terms of public transport anyway - more modern vehicles, the fitting of seat belts and so on - so I do not see there being an undermining impact from that.
Q30 Dr Francis: Under the proposed Order you would be able to introduce a requirement to carry supervisory adults on learner transport. Given the cost of that do you think that power is likely to be used?
Mr Wyn Jones: I think it is a bit difficult to be prescriptive about that now because I think getting the competence would allow us to look at that in some detail. I think that it is the sort of thing we might want to consider in relation to the Measure but we have come to no final conclusion on it.
Dr Francis: I apologise for asking that question. Normally when I sit in that chair I rule questions like that out of order!
Chairman: I am being very generous to you! Mr Jones?
Q31 Mr Jones: Just briefly, to what extent does the proposal of the measures proposed by the proposed LCO interface with or possibly conflict with the Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations?
Mr Wyn Jones: I think that is a question for Lynsey.
Ms Edwards: They actually will not because general legislation in terms of construction of vehicles and the technical standards and safety of vehicles are within the Department of Transport's remit and they will remain within the Department of Transport's remit, so any legislation that we brought forward would be in line with that legislation. The majority of safety legislation UK-wide is governed by EU legislation in any event, so anything that we proposed to do could not go outside that anyway. Just to answer the question, we will not be legislating in terms of vehicle safety standards so there will be no impact on the Construction and Use Regulations.
Q32 Mr Jones: What do the Construction and Use Regulations say about the fitting of seat belts on school buses?
Ms Edwards: The fitting of seat belts depends upon the type of vehicle and the purpose for which it is used. Let me just check, sorry.
Q33 Mr Jones: You could let us have a note.
Mr Wyn Jones: We will let you have a note. The difficulty I suppose in a sense in looking at the exceptions which are contained in Part 2 of Schedule 5 which say that we could not regulate the use of relevant vehicles on roads, construction and use, so what we have done is an amendment to that which obviously is the LCO, which is that we would be entitled as an amendment to that to regulate the description of the vehicle that is being used. It is a limited part of that, so the wider issue around use and construction, no.
Q34 Mr Jones: If you could let us have a note on that I would be very grateful.
Mr Stevenson: I have found the reference so I could answer it now if that would help. I think it is the Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) (Amendment) (No 2) Regulations 2001. The requirement is that seat belts must be fitted on all mini-buses, and that is defined as motor vehicles constructed or adapted to carry nine to 16 seated passengers excluding the driver and seat belts must be fitted in coaches, defined as a type of large bus constructed or adapted to carry more than 16 seated passengers in addition to the driver which has a gross weight of seven and a half tonnes and a maximum speed exceeding 60 miles per hour, first used after 1 October 1988. Buses that do not meet the weight or speed criteria of a coach are not required to be fitted with seat belts.
Q35 Mr Jones: And taxis of course have to be fitted with seat belts already?
Mr Wyn Jones: Absolutely.
Q36 Mr Jones: If you could let us have a note in any event for the Committee's file that would be extremely helpful.
Mr Wyn Jones: Yes.
Q37 Mr Jones: Could we turn now to cross-border
issues. A lot of transport companies
particularly in
Mr Wyn Jones: In relation to concessionary fares ---
Q38 Mr Jones: Sorry, no, I am talking about the construction and use stuff?
Mr Wyn Jones: My understanding is that the LCO would only provide competence in
relation to contracts from companies that contracted with Welsh local
authorities, so if a company whether it is based, let us say, in Llandrindod or
Hereford, if it wished to contract with Powys local authority it would have to
comply with this legislation. However,
if it was a Welsh company in
Q39 Mr Jones: So it is effectively the local authority contract that is the important aspect of the matter rather than the location of the bus company or whatever?
Mr Wyn Jones: Absolutely, yes.
Q40 Mr Jones: Now getting on the concessionary fare regime, you will be aware that we reported some time ago about the desirability of aligning the funding mechanisms on either side of the border. Does the proposed extension of legislative competence here bring that alignment any closer?
Mr Wyn Jones: No, that is not a legislative problem, that is a policy issue. We would have the legislative competence to do it; we currently would have it.
Q41 Mr Jones: Are we getting any closer to that goal?
Mr Wyn Jones: Of itself no, I have to admit because the two considerations are
obviously, as I made clear to this Committee and in the Assembly, that there
are budgetary considerations. The second
is that of course there are different eligibility criteria both sides of the
border, so you would have some local authorities in
Q42 Dr Francis: If we can now turn to consultation.
The expectations of children may well be different from the expectations
of parents or adults with regard to safety.
Have you made any special effort to consult with children? I am particularly interested also in the
extent to which you have thought about consulting with the Funky Dragon Welsh
Children's Assembly and the Children's Commissioner as well in
Mr Wyn Jones: We would certainly want to consult on the precise terms of the Measure. I cannot give you a list today because I could not remember but I think there were a number of organisations that gave evidence to the Enterprise and Learning Committee that called for these powers, and certainly should we be granted these powers then obviously we will then consult with organisations such as the ones you have described to make sure that they comply as far as possible with their requirements.
Q43 Dr Francis: If we could move on to draft issues. This Order proposes an extension of competence over "regulation" of the description of the vehicle which may be used pursuant to learner transport arrangements. Will this definition allow you to resolve the full range of safety issues that have been identified?
Mr Wyn Jones: Yes it would. Lynsey, would you like to confirm that.
Ms Edwards: Yes, the term "description" has been used deliberately to enable the widest possible interpretation without actually going into vehicle safety standards and technical specifications, so under the term "description" we would be able to regulate the age, the size, the colour of the vehicle and the installation of seat belts and CCTV, so it covers the whole range of areas that we would potentially like to make Measures in.
Q44 Dr Francis: At the risk of wandering into a Measure I hope you will allow me to ask this question, Chairman. I do wonder and worry, reflecting on my own experience as a parent, about the issue of supervisory adults and their role between a school bus and safe delivery to the school itself having left the bus. Do these issues impinge on your thinking at all?
Ms Bateman: It is not covered in this competence Order but the powers already exist for criminal records checks on supervising adults on buses and so on. If you are talking about the part of the journey when the child leaves the bus ---
Q45 Dr Francis: That is right, the physical moment of leaving the bus and entering the school. Sometimes it is very busy traffic in towns or whatever, that kind of issue, but I suppose that does not relate specifically at all to this LCO?
Ms Bateman: That does not relate to this LCO but I think that is part of having an overall approach to school transport policy which has already been taken forward in the Learner Travel Measure and in other ways, so the LCO is part of that process, but the overall process would look at issues about children crossing busy roads and safe reach to school and that is part of the overall consideration although not explicitly within the Order today.
Mr Stevenson: Our guidance does say it is good practice for children to be supervised from the point at which they leave the bus to the entry into the school. I think it probably would be difficult to legislate for that. I think it is essentially a matter of custom and practice.
Q46 Chairman: Before I draw this session to a close I have two questions that I would like to ask. It picks up on the regulations of supervisory adults. You have chosen to provide for the possibility of regulations for supervisory adults by proposing a new exception to an existing exception to the Assembly competence. Could the same results that are sought by Article (3)(1) and (2) of the proposed Order have been secured by the addition of further Matters in Field 5 or by the amendment of Matter 5.10? It seems very complex. I am really asking about the complexity of it.
Ms Edwards: I think first and foremost the drafting of the LCO has to be taken against the legislative background that we currently have. The exceptions to our competence include transport security which is reserved to the Department of Transport and the use and construction and equipment of vehicles. That is something I think the Deputy First Minister has explained. It is a legislative limit that has been placed on us. So this LCO is legislating in a subset area of the Department for Transport's competence. Unfortunately, the way that Schedule 5 is drafted and the way the exceptions to Matters are drafted, the only possible way of drafting this is to have an exception to the exception, if you understand what I am saying.
Mr Wyn Jones: It is an amendment to the exception.
Ms Edwards: Yes, so it is bringing competence back into us that was previously not there.
Q47 Chairman: That is also an addition but it also includes transport security. That is the bit I was particularly asking about?
Mr Wyn Jones: Yes, in other words, what we have done is the exception will remain except for the area which we are seeking the competence for.
Q48 Chairman: The Order states that the concessionary schemes covered by the Matter relate to "bus services". Can you clarify that "bus services" is intended to bear the same meaning as in other transport legislation? Should an appropriate definition be added to the Matter?
Mr Wyn Jones: Yes is the answer.
Ms Edwards: Yes it does.
Mr Wyn Jones: I am glad we are at one on that one.
Q49 Chairman: That is short and sweet, thank you. Before I draw this part of the session to a close is there anything else you would like to add at this point or any other information to submit?
Mr Wyn Jones: No, I do not think so. I think we have explored the issues.
Q50 Chairman: Thank you very much for your testament today. We have been very fluent and very fluid and we have remained in time, so thank you very much and thank you for your attendance and your evidence.
Mr Wyn Jones: Thank you.
Witnesses: Mr Wayne David MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Mr Chris Stevens, Legislative Section, and Ms Susan Olley, Legal Adviser, Wales Office, gave evidence.
Q51 Chairman: Good morning and welcome once again to the Committee. Could you please for the record introduce yourselves.
Mr David: Thank you, Chairman. I am
Wayne David, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for
Q52 Chairman: What are the problems with the concessionary fares scheme that the existing limitations on competence prevent being addressed? Are some of those problems that need addressing specific to the Welsh context?
Mr David: The first point I would make is that the concessionary scheme is
extremely popular and very successful.
600,000 people in
Q53 Chairman: Are you content that the proposed Order would allow the National Assembly to remove concessionary travel from local authority control?
Mr David: This is very much a matter of policy for the Welsh Assembly Government, but they make clear to us that the policy intention is not to minimise or undermine the effective role which local authorities have in the administration of this scheme but to ensure they have a more direct relationship themselves. As the Welsh Assembly Government are the providers of the finance for the administration of the scheme, the Welsh Assembly Government would like to have a direct relationship in addition to the continuing role of local authorities.
Q54 Dr Francis: Good morning. The second
purpose of this proposed Order is learner transport safety. Would primary legislation be required to
change the safety requirements for learner travel in
Mr David: As far as
Q55 Dr Francis: Are you persuaded that a legislative approach is the better approach to ensuring the safety of the learner travellers? Could not the use of contractual terms achieve the same objective?
Mr David: Having a contractual approach would be an option but, as the Deputy First Minister previously made clear, there would have to be contractual arrangements with 22 local authorities in Wales and in the interests of uniformity as well as simplicity I think it would be more coherent for the Assembly to introduce its own statutory measures which would apply right across Wales.
Q56 Mr Jones: Is there evidence that the safety of children on school buses is a special cause for concern?
Mr David: I think there is a concern and I think that if we cast our minds back to 2002 when there was a fatal accident and a child lost his life as a result of an accident on a school bus in the Vale of Glamorgan, we saw a very public campaign, called Stuart's campaign, which did strike a resonance understandably with many people in Wales. This matter has been raised not only in Parliament but also in the Welsh Assembly as well. I think in many ways the genesis for this particular proposal that we have before us emanates from that campaign and also the discussion which took place at one of the committees of the Welsh Assembly.
Q57 Mr Jones: I recall the accident and I recall the emotions that were stirred at that particular time, but the Committee has evidence that school transport in fact does have generally a very good safety record in this country and an improving record. We are told that across the country as a whole casualties have almost halved from 1997 to 2007, presumably as a result of the improving standards of vehicles generally.
Mr David: I think it is correct what you say.
We have seen a consistent improvement in
Q58 Mr Jones: That being the case is that not something that maybe should be introduced at a national level rather than just at a Welsh level? To what extent have you had discussions with the Department of Transport about this?
Mr David: Discussions have taken place with the Department of Transport and of course they are very concerned, as everybody is, to ensure that the momentum to improve school transport safety is maintained. It is the Welsh Assembly Government's view that there is a need to take the existing legislation and to make a relatively small change to the legislation as it applies to Wales to ensure that they have this competence so they can take the agenda that much further forward in Wales.
Q59 Mr Jones: Which is rather worrying because surely this should be something that is uniform across the country as a whole?
Mr David: I certainly think there is a case for
Q60 Mr Jones: You have had no discussions with the DfT about this?
Mr David: Discussions have taken place between officials and ministers. I think it is true to say the Department of
Transport is watching very carefully and will study very closely what happens
in
Q61 Mr Jones: Does the Assembly have competence to address issues such as the safety of the learners going to school on foot or by bike?
Mr David: I think that is something beyond this LCO proposal and I am not aware of any legislation that currently exists with regard to that area.
Q62 Mr Jones: Do you know why the proposal is limited to motor vehicles and does not extend for example to journeys by rail?
Mr David: I think the focus is on transport by road and buses in particular because the fact is the overwhelming majority of young people who travel to school use the bus as their mode of transport.
Q63 Mr Jones: What percentage is that?
Mr David: I would have to come back to you on the precise figure but an overwhelming percentage I would imagine.
Mr Jones: Thank you.
Q64 Dr Francis: I am not aware of the proportion of learner travellers who local authorities arrange to travel by general bus services but I assume it is quite significant. Does this particular Order allow the National Assembly to legislate to consider the safety of the learners travelling on non-contracted services?
Mr David: I would refer to my colleague but my understanding is that it is specific to contractual services.
Ms Olley: It is arrangements made by local authorities with contractors providing learner travel.
Q65 Dr Francis: For the reasons which we have heard from the Minister earlier I guess. But it is anomalous, is it not, and there is a potential for division there because all learner travellers should be treated equally, should they not? It is a rhetorical question I know.
Mr David: In a sense I think that is true, but I think that we are talking about contracted services with local authorities and, as I explained earlier, I think part of the impetus for this is what happened in the Vale of Glamorgan regarding that tragedy. I think that although the situation has improved, nevertheless there are grounds to believe that there are certain circumstances in which sufficient care and attention is not given to safety by certain operators, and I think that although there has been an improvement nevertheless this piece of legislation will provide a significant improvement on the situation which we have.
Q66 Dr Francis: Following on that point is there a risk that increased safety standards will "fragment" the existing services, suggesting to parents that general bus services are unsafe and so undermining the viability of the local bus services and increasing the revenue support needed to maintain those services?
Mr David: That is a very much broader issue I suppose. I think that this Measure is very much focused on a very precise improvement of the law as it currently exists dealing with the exception which is in the legislation, but I think it will be generally welcomed by parents and they will have peace of mind that their children will be that much safer travelling on buses to school.
Q67 Dr Francis: Have you made an assessment of the potential impact of the introduction of the proposed safety standards for contracted bus services on public bus services on either side of the border?
Mr David: It would not be the role of the Wales Office to undertake such an
assessment. My understanding is that
consultation has taken place in
Chairman: I
think, Mr Jones, you wanted to ask some questions on cross-border services with
Q68 Mr Jones: Are you concerned that in the cross-border areas these proposals might have an impact upon competition specifically in terms of the increase in cost for Welsh companies as opposed to English companies?
Mr David: I think any cost burden will depend very much on the precise safety improvements which are actually expressed in the Measures which will be coming forward, so it is very difficult.
Q69 Mr Jones: We have an idea as to what is proposed, we heard from Mr Wyn Jones, as you know, a few moments ago.
Mr David: Yes, but the only point I would make is that it is very difficult to indicate at this stage what the costs would be because it would depend. Albeit the area we know is very limited we have an idea of what may happen. Nevertheless cost implications will depend on the specificity which is included in the Measure. Obviously cost will be a factor but I would very much hope that bus contractors would be very concerned about the safety of the children they are transporting and that factor would be foremost in their minds rather than simply pounds, shillings and pence.
Q70 Mr Jones: I suppose to a large extent local authorities would be bearing the additional costs because presumably increased fares would be levied by the transport companies, so there will a cost implication not only to the bus operator but also the local authority who is commissioning services of the bus operator?
Mr David: I suppose in certain circumstances that may happen, but I understand there has been consultation with the Welsh Local Government Association, and certainly in principle - we are talking about principles here - local authorities would be happy to bear any slight increase in cost there may be because of the safety of the pupils whose care they have responsibility for in large part is foremost in their minds.
Q71 Mr Jones: I am sure that is correct and in fact you make a point that you will recall I touched on when I questioned the previous witness. I am sure that Welsh local authorities would want to ensure the safety of children who are travelling to schools in their areas, and I am wondering whether a contractual approach would have been the right one and whether given that there have already been consultations with local authorities it might not have been simply an easier option to put forward a code of practice for adoption by local authorities?
Mr David: A code of practice and a contractual approach, as you say, would
have been one option. There is no doubt
about that. However, I think that there
is a lot to be said for having a uniform approach, a simpler and more straightforward
and easily understood approach where there was uniformity right across
Q72 Mr Jones: I am personally unconvinced, I have to say, that the voluntary approach has been adequately explored by the Assembly Government. I do not believe it has and I am not sure that you believe that either.
Mr David: Obviously it has been examined and, objectively, in terms of
studying both approaches I think that the approach outlined by the Deputy First
Minister is a better approach than relying on voluntarism, I have to say. It is a question of balance but in my mind I
think having a legislative approach uniform across
Q73 Mr Jones: Again on cross-border issues,
has any consideration been given to the potential impact on English-based
contractors who might seek to offer learner transport in
Mr David: Again it comes very much at the Measure stage. The Deputy First Minister again made it very clear that the emphasis would be on the contracts rather than the location of the companies as such, and I think that when there is full consultation, as there will be with the Measure, the views of English-based contractors will be taken into account.
Mr Jones: Thank you.
Q74 Dr Francis: On this question of cross-border issues, in our recent report on cross-border transport we recommended as a medium-term goal that there should be an effort made to align the concessionary fare schemes on either side of the border. Do you think this proposed Order brings this objective nearer or further away?
Mr David: Firstly, could I say I agree very much with the sentiments expressed
in the Committee's report and I know from being a constituency Member of
Parliament often I had representations from constituents who travel back and
forth across the English/Wales border who would like to see that
uniformity. There is a great deal to be
said for having that compatibility between the Welsh scheme and the scheme
which operates in
Q75 Dr Francis: If we could move on to consultation. Many operators bidding for the school transport work are small businesses, as you know, and it is quite likely that the increased costs as a result of introducing these safety measures will be passed on to local government. Are you satisfied that there has been adequate consultation by the Welsh Assembly Government and yourself I suppose of the key stakeholders in this?
Mr David: It would not be for the Wales Office to hold that kind of consultation at all really. It is up to the Welsh Assembly Government to have consultation. I think that at its formulation stage the Welsh Assembly Government has consulted generally with some of the main stakeholders like the Welsh Local Government Association, and they are certainly on board with the direction of travel, if I can put it that way. I think the detailed negotiations will take place once the Measures have been formulated. I come back to the point I made to Mr Jones really that it is only when we know precisely which improvements the Welsh Assembly Government want to include in the Measure will we have a very clear and precise idea of any additional cost there may be. I think that a regulatory impact assessment is an obligation to take place once we have the Measures drawn up and I think the cost element will be a key part of the consultations.
Q76 Dr Francis: Following up on this question of consultation, it appears to be a
compressed timetable for consultation on this proposal. Is this as a consequence of the time taken by
Mr David: The timescale for consultation is something which is very much in the Welsh Assembly Government's hands. Our concern is that there is always full and comprehensive consultation rather than the time it may or may not take. In terms of the time it has taken for us to be where we are at, I am very satisfied that there has been very effective co-ordination and co-operation and dialogue which has enabled speedy progress to be made. I think we are talking about a period of three months in total.
Q77 Dr Francis: It took three months to clear?
Mr David: It took three months for the Department of Transport to be fully engaged, ourselves to be fully engaged and the Welsh Assembly Government to be fully engaged and to come to a consensus. In the order of things that is a relatively short period of time and I think there has been very good co-operation between officials and there has been good political co-operation between ministers, it has to be said, because we have been involved as well. Certainly if you compare the progress on this LCO with the progress on previous LCOs, the speed of travel here has been very good.
Q78 Dr Francis: I take it then that irrespective of the fact that this perhaps is a simpler, more straightforward LCO that we are all getting a little more efficient in the way we are doing it?
Mr David: I think it is the case that with a new system having been introduced as a consequence of the Government of Wales Act, we are getting used to the processes which have been established. As we have become more used to them we have become more efficient, relationships have been established and working practices have developed and, yes, I think we are dealing far more speedily than was the case right at the start of the process.
Q79 Dr Francis: To put it more bluntly, I guess that efficiency may well also be a symptom of the fact that we are all, including yourselves, a lot more impatient and you are prepared perhaps now more frequently to just pick up the phone and tell the appropriate department to hurry up?
Mr David: I suppose it is the case that as I am in post longer I gain in confidence and perhaps become slightly more impatient, but it is true as far as we all are concerned who are involved in different ways in this legislative process that we are all learning as we go along. I would like to make the point really that there has been some criticism in some quarters about the alleged complexity of the process, but if you compare the process that we are engaged in with other processes in this place and in other legislators it compares very favourably indeed. I would emphasise the point that I think it is vitally important to have detailed pre-legislative scrutiny in order to make sure that when we get to the point of actually producing the legislation we have a coherent piece of legislation before us which not only makes sense in itself but actually achieves what it is intended to achieve. I think that, yes, in summation we are learning as we go along but we are in a far stronger position now than we were perhaps 12 months ago, and I think that is eloquent testimony really to how this process is stimulating effectively democracy for the people of Wales.
Q80 Mr Jones: Could I turn please to some of the technical aspects of the proposed LCO draftsmanship in particular. The proposed Order suggests an extension of competence over the "regulation of the description of the vehicle". Are you satisfied that "description" is sufficiently precise to enable the Welsh Assembly to do what it wants with the powers that are proposed? It is really a legal question.
Mr David: I am not a lawyer.
Q81 Mr Jones: I was just looking at the lady sitting next to you.
Ms Olley: We are satisfied that it enables the Welsh Assembly Government to do what it wants, including refer to technical standards as part of that description, but not to in any way change those technical standards which are set at either an EU or a GB level so, yes, we are content that the description fits the bill.
Q82 Mr Jones: It seems rather a vague expression to me. I have to say that when I first read this paragraph I found it quite difficult to understand because it seemed to me that if it did not include the setting of technical standards for construction or equipment what did it include?
Ms Olley: It includes making reference to those technical standards as part of the description, as in two-point attachment seat belts but not specifying how they may be attached, or three-point attachment seat belts, but not going behind that to talk about the materials used in constructing that equipment.
Mr David: As a lay person it would seem to me to make sense to have a description as wide as possible so that it can encompass a whole range of different things, including for example the size and the age of the vehicle as well as various kinds of equipment which may be employed within it.
Q83 Mr Jones: Do you think more accurate and precise terminology could have been adopted rather than the word "description" which as I say again I find rather vague, not in terms of breadth but in terms of vagueness.
Ms Olley: We spent a very long time discussing this.
Q84 Mr Jones: I bet you did!
Ms Olley: And we all felt that this was really the best that we could do that matched the need for broad aims (because of course we cannot pre-empt what the Measure is going to say) but also kept the competence of the UK Government intact and did not allow any impingement on that. This was not something used lightly. Neither do we think it is something that needs a further definition in Schedule 5.
Q85 Mr Jones: And you are entirely satisfied that it would not conflict in any respect with the Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations?
Ms Olley: We are absolutely satisfied. That was our starting point.
Q86 Mr Jones: I bet it was. Again this is a carve-out, if you like, rather than an addition. Could the same result have been secured by the addition of Further Matters in Field 5 or by the amendment of Matter 5.10?
Ms Olley: You will recall that all Matters are subject now to the exceptions in Part 2 because of the changes that have taken place in previous LCOs, so even had we inserted new Matters we would have had to make carve-outs from the existing exceptions. We avoid duplicating text in any legislation because of the interpretation possibilities that it might give rise to, so we thought the most economical way, certainly for the lawyers, was to just have the carve-out from an existing exception in a sense to reclaim that competence back to the Welsh Assembly Government rather than put in a new Matter because they already have the competence over learner transport by virtue of Matter 5.10.
Q87 Mr Jones: I agree with that. Finally, do you consider that the expression "bus services" needs to be defined in the proposed LCO?
Ms Olley: It was not something that DfT were concerned about. What I do not know is whether the Local Travel Act contains a definition or whether it is just something that is a commonsense understanding. Certainly (b) is much more technical and clearly just relates to railways, but there was no issue about the understanding of what a bus service would cover. If you wanted a little further elaboration we certainly could offer that in terms of if there is a statutory definition.
Mr Jones: I think that would be helpful.
Q88 Chairman: A concluding question from myself. Would you characterise the proposed LCO as a tidying-up measure or a significant devolutionary step?
Ms Olley: Somewhere in between. I do not think it is tidying up. Clearly during the passage of the Learner Travel Measure passed by the Assembly issues came to the fore that needed to be dealt with by a refinement of the existing exception, so to that extent it is a development, it is a dynamic process, the devolution settlement.
Mr David: Could I say I think it is both in that it is a relatively small, as
Sue has explained, tidying-up measure.
It adds to a large body of competence which the Assembly already has, so
in a sense it is a tidying-up measure, but I think it is important nevertheless
because we are talking about understandably a very important and emotive issue. I think many parents in
Q89 Chairman: Is there anything else that you would like to add at this point?
Mr David: No.
Chairman: Thank you very much. Thank you very much for being so succinct.