COMMISSION ON THE POWERS AND ELECTORAL
ARRANGEMENTS OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY FOR WALES
|
|
MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS
|
|
of the
|
EVIDENCE OF:
|
CBI CYMRU
|
|
|
|
held at
|
|
ST GEORGE’S HOTEL, LLANDUDNO
|
|
on
|
|
FRIDAY 28TH MARCH 2003
|
|
In Attendance
|
|
Lord Richard, Chair, Richard Commission
|
|
Eira Davies, Richard Commission
|
|
Huw Thomas, Richard Commission
|
|
Ted Rowlands, Richard Commission
|
|
Peter Price, Richard Commission
|
|
Sir Michael Wheeler Booth, Richard Commission
|
|
Paul Valerio, Richard Commission
|
|
Vivienne Sugar, Richard Commission
|
| Sir Michael Wheeler Booth, Richard Commission |
| Dr Laura McAllister, Richard Commission |
| David Rosser, CBI Cymru |
| Robert Salisbury, CBI Cymru |
|
PROCEEDINGS
|
|
Lord Richard
|
| Thank you very much for coming. First of all we’d
to ask you to identify yourselves for the purposes of
the record and then if you would be kind enough to open
up the subject of discussion, perhaps five minutes or
so, then we can pursue whatever things we might think
that would be helpful to us, if that's okay with you. |
|
David Rosser
|
| That's fine. Is anybody going to be asking questions
in Welsh? |
|
Lord Richard
|
| Oh, yes, well, we may do. |
|
Robert Salisbury
|
| My name is Robert Salisbury, Chairman of the Welsh CBI. |
|
David Rosser
|
| David Rosser. Director of CBI in Wales. |
|
Robert Salisbury
|
| In answer to your invitation today to come and speak
before you we have prepared some opening remarks which
I thought I would express to you. I have suggested to
Mr Rosser that perhaps a copy of that can be given to
you afterwards. We've also made a response. |
|
Lord Richard
|
| That we have had. |
|
Robert Salisbury
|
| We've also had suggested responses to the actual questions
which you kindly let us have. So again I would be happy
to put that in afterwards. |
|
Lord Richard
|
| I think that's the one we have got actually. |
|
David Rosser
|
| We've made the formal submission or consultation document.
We had some suggested lines of questioning to which we
have further answers, which you don't have at the moment
but you can have them later. |
|
Robert Salisbury
|
| So we thought we would pass that on to you after the
meeting. By way of opening remarks I would like to say
as follows, thanks for the opportunity to give evidence
on this subject which is of special importance to business
in Wales. The written submission, which has been approved
by the CBI Wales Council – the elected body of CBI
Members in Wales – who as you know determines the
organisation of the Welsh policy position. |
| The nature of our comments to you today has also been
debated at Council and, as a point, the CBI overall position
on devolution in Wales was the subject of a survey of
the entire membership and that of course accounts for
40-50% of the private sector workforce here in Wales.
Our Members did state, and therefore I would like to clearly
state, that CBI in Wales supports the process of devolution
which, in the current settlement, has resulted in the
establishment of the Assembly. We have also as an organisation
allocated more resource to Wales – that's the CBI
generally – by appointing a bigger staff than is
normal to react to the new governance arrangements here.
We continue to devote significant time and effort to working
with the Assembly and its agencies to ensure that policy
making in Wales receives input from the business community
and to ensure that the Assembly has every opportunity
to understand how its decisions are likely to impact on
business and with what consequences. |
| More substantive now, to date we feel that the Assembly
has not used the powers it already has to full effect
and has shown a lack of clarity and urgency in decision
making which needs to be addressed. We would stress this
is not surprising for a young institution and would be
more surprising if the Assembly was functioning at the
very highest level. We feel this is a powerful argument
to say the timing of this Commission’s work might
be regarded as premature. It’s far too early on to
review or countenance transferring more powers to the
Assembly after one term. In addition, from the viewpoint
of business we have reservations on the Assembly’s
performance to date with regard to our business sector
and to the economy in general. Whilst it is possible to
debate the appropriate level of its powers as a separate
issue from the Assembly’s performance, in reality
the decision as to whether or when to allocate more powers
cannot be divorced from an assessment of how those powers
it has already have been used to date. |
| Lastly, we cannot stress strongly enough the changing
reality of business mobility, the globalisation of markets
and the lack of meaning of geo-political boundaries is
to business. Business can and does move – it has
many choices where to invest. Wales is too small an economy
to provide a sufficient home market for our companies.
Therefore there are significant implications of putting
in place a business environment whether fiscal, regulatory
or based on an infrastructure which differs from other
competitive occasions. If we are to entertain the possibility
of establishing a noticeably different business environment
in Wales, we must be certain beyond all possible doubt
that it will be at lower cost, easier, a more flexible
business location, and that we do nothing which marginalises
our business from the key UK, European and overseas markets.
Against this background the CBI strongly argues that devolution
of further powers to the Assembly is at best very premature.
It’s fraught with uncertainty and possibly unnecessary.
|
|
Lord Richard
|
| Thanks very much. Can I perhaps start? I notice that
you said the Assembly is not using the powers that it
has properly. Can you give us some examples of where the
CBI thinks the Assembly is doing things that it should
not be doing or not doing things that it should? |
|
David Rosser
|
| We think the Assembly has sufficient powers to make
a real difference to the environment in which business
in Wales has to operate and to date, we feel that the
decision making in the Assembly has not made full use
of these powers. In particular, we see their thoughts
relating to the economy and economic development tend
to be restricted to the economic development brief, the
Economic Development Minister, the actions of the Welsh
Development Agency. We have pressed long and hard for
the other Ministerial portfolios; for example, transport,
environment, education and local government to understand
how they can take decisions which can improve the environment
for business; therefore the Welsh economy; and therefore
actually deliver what they aim for in the other social
aspirations that they have. We don't feel that –
I am trying not to use the word "joined-up Government"
but it’s difficult. So we don't feel the Assembly
has yet understood that decisions it takes across the
whole piece can have an impact on business and the business
environment. |
|
Lord Richard
|
| I see the general point that you are making. Can you
be more specific? Saying education did this and should
not have done? |
|
David Rosser
|
| For example, the way in which the Assembly has tackled
the Objective One process in Wales. |
|
Lord Richard
|
| What was wrong with that? |
|
David Rosser
|
| It significantly is not delivering for business, it’s
not delivering the results for the economy. The way in
which it is about to set up processes have effectively
cut out the private sector. It's incredibly bureaucratic.
It’s been driven by an ideology which says that bottom
up decision making is the only way to do it, that reducing
decision making to the very local areas is a good thing
to do. It has taken that to the extreme, in our view the
overall aims of the programme will not be delivered. We
will not get the benefit to the Welsh economy or the funding
that is there. That is one example where we think the
Assembly has powers and budget to make a real difference. |
|
Lord Richard
|
| What is it that you actually want them to do on this? |
|
Robert Salisbury
|
| On Objective One? |
|
Lord Richard
|
| You have talked about methods of consultation. |
|
David Rosser
|
| On Objective One specifically, we would strongly argue
that the Assembly should take a rather more of a top down
strategic approach to the way that it implements and delivers
Objective One funding rather than what it has done to
date, which is very much a bottom up piecemeal approach. |
|
Dr McAllister
|
| If we stay with that for a moment – the Objective
One case. Could you explain to us the extent to which
business does feed into the existing Objective One management
programmes and because there are local partnerships, for
example, one would imagine business does feed into that.
Secondly, you mentioned that you felt the Assembly was
adopting a bottom-up approach, but from my understanding
of the management of Objective One there are very strict
constraints in terms of how they can manage the programme
which comes from the Commission and to what extent do
you blame the Assembly for that or the European Commission
itself? |
|
Robert Salisbury
|
| Dave? |
|
David Rosser
|
| Theoretically, business is involved in Objective One
and other processes. In practice I don't believe it is.
I certainly don't believe it is making a real difference.
The principle is the theory. In reality, I think if you
look at a number of the individuals who represent the
private sector, one could question the sector that they
represent. I don't really mind that. I think if you looked
at the actual attendance at many of these partnerships
meetings, as opposed to who is actually on the partnership,
you would probably find that the attendance by the private
sector delegates is relatively poor. The business experience
of bodies participating in Objective One is not good.
They find the process is cumbersome. They find that when
they do turn up, their ability to make a difference and
to have an impact is swamped by the sheer numbers around
the table and by the processes themselves. I think you’ll
find business is very quietly disengaging from the processes.
I’m still being asked for business representatives
on various structural funds partnerships. It’s getting
next to impossible to find business people to do that.
|
| Is this the Assembly 's fault or is it the Commission’s?
Yes, I fully accept that the Commission said that the
programme would be delivered in partnership. The Commission
did not say that we had to have up to 50 partnerships
to deliver this. The decision to do that was one that
we took locally here in Wales. It’s one, which to
our mind, has increased the bureaucracy of the programme
to such an extent that it will not deliver as much as
it could have potentially. |
|
Dr McAllister
|
| Did business feed adequately into the single programming
document in the first instance, which would have set the
tone for much of the management of the programme? |
|
David Rosser
|
| That was before my time in the post. From speaking to
predecessors I believe that business made every very effort
to do so, and was heavily involved in the lead up to the
single programme and document. It happens in a number
of areas that you are very well consulted, you are involved.
But somehow the outcome of your involvement never seems
to quite match up with what you thought had happened during
the meetings. |
|
Robert Salisbury
|
| Could I throw in something there, that you will forgive
me, I am merely the Chairman, I am only a figurehead,
I am here out of respect to your Committee, but I do have
as a local solicitor quite a lot of experience of what
happens on the ground. I could turn round your question
and perhaps you could show us some examples of what the
Assembly has achieved? |
|
Lord Richard
|
| We're not here – I'm not going to defend the Assembly. |
|
Robert Salisbury
|
| I know that, but if you like it’s a negative definition.
I can't think of one thing that the Assembly has done
in pretty much anything. Example, Objective One, you are
right that if you look at Objective One it was sold to
the public as being the panacea for all our economic ills.
The truth of the matter is that you can only have the
money for certain specific reasons which all seem to be
local authority led. I for one cannot think of one instance
where a private company has benefited from the Objective
One. Perhaps it has been given some work but there is
no funding for private companies at all. |
|
Ted Rowlands
|
| May I as someone who sits on one of the local Partnership
Boards partially refute the assessment you are making.
I can see why you are making the statements, but just
draw attention to the Partnership Board that I have sat
on. Through Objective One we have now given the local
Borough Council enhanced funding to support its business
backing to companies. I have heard from local business
that they have gone for the Assembly grants, simple and
rather unbureaucratic and drawn down quite useful funds
in support for business. |
|
David Rosser
|
| I think the delivery of some of the investment grants
is one of the areas where you can say it has been a significant
improvement. |
|
Ted Rowlands
|
| You would accept that that has? |
|
David Rosser
|
| I would accept that. We're not here to say that the
Assembly has done nothing for business. What we're here
to say that is the Assembly has a range of existing powers
which we feel can be used better than they are currently
being used; it would be stupid to say there is nothing
being done. |
|
Ted Rowlands
|
| Regional assistance has been one of the good points. |
|
David Rosser
|
| Yes I would agree with that. |
|
Lord Richard
|
| What are the bad ones? |
|
David Rosser
|
| There are areas - I think the Assembly has failed to
deliver the general business support programmes to small
business. It’s still a mess. Still trying to be dealt
with by the DWA and here we are four years into the Assembly
and I think coming up two years since it did a full review
of the business programme. I think the Assembly has not
taken very many decisions which have made the situation
worse for business. Our point is that there are many decisions/joined-up
policies that it could have taken which it has failed
to do so far. |
|
Tom Jones
|
| What about agri/foods section where the joined up work
seems to be successful where DWA links with up small rural
groups in adding value to Welsh products? |
|
David Rosser
|
| That's not an area I know much about. |
|
Lord Richard
|
| The brief of joined up government – cement is a
good thing for building buildings but we don't know what
sort of building you have got in mind. I am trying to
explore it with you. |
|
David Rosser
|
| I can remember one instance when the CBI has a seat
on the Assembly Transport Forum, which to me was instructive.
We are very pleased to do that. Transport is a major issue
for business in Wales. My colleague who holds that seat
and attends came back from yet another meeting screaming
that they had been talking about cycle paths for 2 hours.
We went along, I did little more than take the Assembly
's aims and aspirations out of winning Wales, put those
up in the screen on the wall and explained to the Assembly's
Transport Forum and the Minister how they could take decisions
which would help to deliver the Assembly 's own aspirations.
If you want to internationalise Welsh business, how about
doing something with the airport? If you want to get value
added business and access to external markets is an issue,
so travel to market times is an issue. What are you going
to do about that? |
| One example of where we could have seen it – and
another example –has been identified by the CBI across
the UK, not just in Wales: the planning system in the
UK is a major business investment: We have lobbied as
an organisation long and hard to do something about that.
We now see Bills going through in Westminster and the
Assembly as well as in the forward plans to address the
planning system. In England we believe that one of the
problems with the planning system is that the local authority
have a target to determine a certain percentage within
a certain period. So all conservatory applications get
determined and industrial ones fall into the percentage
that don't get dealt with. In Wales our understanding
at the moment is that is going to be deemed to be too
difficult for local authorities to deal with so we went– |
|
Lord Richard
|
| Is any of this a question of the Assembly not having
the powers to deal with it? |
|
David Rosser
|
| No. |
|
Lord Richard
|
| The planning decisions surely, or the reforming the
planning system. I mean, is it within the Assembly 's
powers in Wales to do that? |
|
David Rosser
|
| Yes yes. At the moment it looks like we are going to
put in place fewer and fewer provisions than is being
put through for the primary regulations for England. |
|
Ted Rowlands
|
| Were you consulted on the Welsh provisions for the Planning
Bill? |
|
David Rosser
|
| Yes. |
|
Ted Rowlands
|
| There is a section in the new Planning Bill which is
entirely Welsh, which is different from the English. Did
you object to those differences? Did you find them offensive
to business? |
|
David Rosser
|
| We have made those points. We have a seat on the Planning
Forum as well. To its credit, the Assembly is very inclusive,
it seeks to involve business and take business views.
That's not a problem. That is a distinct improvement post-devolution.
That reflects CBI’s basic position, which is that
we are happy with devolution. The point we're trying to
make is that the outcomes to the consultation, the nature
of the decisions we have taken which have an effect on
business are not yet at the level we would wish to see
and we would wish to see them used. |
|
Lord Richard
|
| The planning thing. In a sense it is quite sort of important
and what this Commission is trying to look at. You need
primary legislation in Westminster, don't you? |
|
David Rosser
|
| There is primarily legislation going through in Westminster. |
|
Lord Richard
|
| I know there is, but in order to get it for Wales you
have to have primary legislation going through in Westminster. |
|
Ted Rowlands
|
| Do you object to the difference? You want the English
model? |
|
David Rosser
|
| Yes. We actually feel that a more user-friendly planning
system, much of it I understand is guidance implementation
rather than primary legislation. We actually think the
planning system can be a competitive advantage for Wales,
that by more joined up working between the Assembly and
the local authority, we can deliver that. At the very
least we would like a planning system that matches that
in England. We have a fear that we will end up with something
which is slightly less. |
|
Peter Price
|
| If one looks at the picture you are painting, the great
plus is greater access; the great minus is what is coming
out of the process. That's the picture you are painting.
In which case, given that you have this much greater access,
that is an opportunity for influence that did not exist
before, what's your strategy as the CBI for having the
maximum input on the outcomes? |
|
David Rosser
|
| We had access before, clearly the access was through
a different route, we had good relations with the Secretary
of State, the CBI has a great deal of access and reasonable
amount of influence with the legislation process in Westminster.
There is– |
|
Peter Price
|
| But you are saying it is now greater. You are consulted
over more issues, more of the time? |
|
David Rosser
|
| We are consulted in Wales on more issues more of the
time. CBI has always been consulted on decisions in Westminster.
We're not complaining about the level of access, about
the level of openness or about the level of consultation,
the method of consultation. Our strategy for trying to
influence the Assembly decisions pro business, we are
doing the one thing which is the obvious thing to do;
we will respond to the consultation as they come out,
certainly on those matters which are priorities for business.
|
| It has improved over the last 12-18 months, involved
them as a pre-consultation phase, either formally through
sitting on working groups such as the Transport Forum,
the Planning Forum, we have brought groups of CBI Members
together informally to enable Civil Servants to come out
and test their thinking with us. We formally meet with
Ministers individually. The First Minister, the Permanent
Secretary and the Secretary of State have all been to
the CBI Council to meet Members to take questions. The
individual subject Ministers will come to the relevant
CBI Policy Committees probably at least once a year, so
the Education Minister and the Environment Minister have
been to the CBI Wales parts of the committees. We have
given evidence to the relevant Subject Committee, to the
Assembly. Equally we have programmes of activities with
the opposition parties. |
|
Peter Price
|
| The complaints that you are making are in a way that
you have got too much going on across a very wide waterfront
and that it’s not having enough impact on the really
big decisions. As you described, it is a picture of a
CBI strategy of indeed conducting itself across that waterfront
as far as it can, but not getting a picture that you have
identified a few key priorities and ways of communicating
those priorities so that they are seen to be the really
important things that business wants in Wales and would
promote economic development in Wales and really pushing
those messages through a few key channels repeatedly. |
|
David Rosser
|
| We have done precisely that when the Assembly strategy
was produced – what about 12/13 months ago now –
despite having been heavily involved in the process, as
we were not happy with the outcome. We did identify four
key issues which the Assembly could tackle to help the
economy in Wales. They were the planning system, transport
infrastructure, learning and skills and research and development.
I think we made every effort to communicate those to the
First Minister, to individual Assembly Members and the
other Ministers in the Cabinet as being the four key issues
which the Assembly should tackle that were most likely
to make a difference to the Welsh economy. |
|
Peter Price
|
| Do you see Wales as an opportunity rather than the other
way round, that there are dangers of difference, which
is perhaps the dominant message in your written statement,
dangers of difference set out here? Turning it round the
other way, do you see opportunities through difference
that you could have a more business-friendly environment
in Wales, and is this something that you would set out
as an objective? |
|
David Rosser
|
| I think that the opportunities exist through alternative
solutions for an economy of the size of Wales to make
a real difference, which is why our starting point is
that we support the process of devolution to date. I think
that if we can deliver a dedicated and skilled work force,
which is in tune with the needs of business and commerce,
then that will make a real difference. I think if we can
come up with a planning system which makes it easier to
invest in development in Wales and in other parts of the
UK that can make a real difference and positively differentiate
Wales on the R&D front. If we can get our universities
working more closely with business in Wales and a number
of businesses outside Wales then, yes that can make a
real difference. Our contention is that the Assembly has
the powers already to make a real difference in those
areas. |
|
Ted Rowlands
|
| You have got the full-blooded Parliament in Scotland.
Has CBI Scotland found that your concerns and your fears
about the Welsh Assembly becoming a Parliament, have those
fears been realised in Scotland from your Scottish contacts? |
|
Robert Salisbury
|
| We have had a paper from the CBI Scotland. I fear that
their views are very similar to our own. There are unhappy
about the way things are going. I am sorry to appear so
detrimental to everything. Fair play to David, it is so
very difficult for us to – it’s not personal
views, it’s business. In Scotland it’s exactly
the same. Scotland has got the tax-raising powers. All
I see is that the Commission is not delivering or the
Scottish Parliament is not delivering, that sounds so
very negative here because you asked for examples but
I can't think of any examples where it has gone well.
David has mentioned the planning. As a lawyer I know that
it’s all about fairness and everybody having their
right to speak. But that often destroys business. We have
a case here in North Wales where a ton of cement –
a company who have tried to build a large cracking tower
in their cement works in Mold, have gone through a 5-year
public inquiry. The cement works have been there since
the war. |
|
Ted Rowlands
|
| That's nothing to do with devolution. |
|
Robert Salisbury
|
| It has the planning permission, now there are other
environmental issues and the investment because it’s
a German company they could well be taken away because
of the delay in the planning system. The Assembly has
the power to control the planning system. It has planning
powers. So we call upon them to expedite matters because
business decisions cannot wait. It might not be happy
but business decisions can't wait 5 years. The world has
passed you by. |
|
Tom Jones
|
| That reflects I think a growing interest/concern in
environmental issues across Europe and the world. |
|
Robert Salisbury
|
| But if we say we won't bother with the cement works,
that’s 100 jobs. |
|
Tom Jones
|
| Are you saying that same application would have been
dealt with a lot quicker 50 miles east? |
|
David Rosser
|
| On the Scottish point first of all, my colleagues in
Scotland believe the same as in Wales; the Parliament
in Scotland has done nothing to really damage the business
but has not delivered anything to make it that much better.
|
|
Robert Salisbury
|
| We've had a quote from the CBI Member which might go
well on the record because we have been told by the Scottish
CBI, matters post devolution are very much in their infancy.
The various institutions of Government appear to be at
different stages in accepting their responsibilities for
creating the necessary infrastructure and environment
for Scottish business to flourish. Anthony Cork observes
the Scottish Executive as having a willingness to engage
in consultation with business organisations and providing
appropriate and constructive access to Ministers and officials.
While the challenge for the Scottish Parliament is to
convince the business community that it similarly realises
the advantage of close partnership. That's mirroring– |
|
Lord Richard
|
| How much of that is mood music, atmospheric, and how
much is hard decisions taken on–? |
|
Robert Salisbury
|
| You are here for examples. It’s so hard to give
examples. I know all lawyers, especially QCs, look for
examples. You are condemned by your own profession, Sir!
ELWa. Four years. I think we've had three or four presentations
to various Committees, what do you want to ask us? The
business message is we always want well-educated children
or young people to come out and work in our industries.
We want them to be able to read and write and to be able
to communicate, also, have a bit of commons sense. I don't
think those have changed since I was a boy. As a solicitor
I don't see that’s what's coming out of schools.
Everybody tells me, I read from the Government, so that's
a Westminster thing, it’s really going well. They
have never been better. Well in the workplace that is
not the reality that I find. I mean you all know from
your own experiences, where are the young men who used
to be sporty? I can't find a rugby player to join my firm. |
|
Dr McAllister
|
| Are you looking for a rugby player? |
|
Lord Richard
|
| You can’t blame the Assembly for the Welsh rugby
team. |
|
Robert Salisbury
|
| What I blame is the education system, that we're not
producing the young people, be it boys or girls, in whatever
level of sport. We could play rugby. You learn to take
a knock. This is common sense. But we don't have sport
in our schools like we used to, this is competition. |
|
Lord Richard
|
| You can't blame the Assembly for that. |
|
Robert Salisbury
|
| I blame the Assembly for not realising that it’s
not going well and they should do something about it.
They shouldn't come to business and say what do you want
to us to do. We have told them and they are not doing
it. |
|
Lord Richard
|
| What you have done is given them objectives. You have
said what you want to. |
|
Robert Salisbury
|
| We're asking them to deliver. |
|
Tom Jones
|
| You have got business people in ELWa. |
|
Robert Salisbury
|
| Indeed we have but we can't make them do it. |
|
David Rosser
|
| Business representation in various areas of ELWa is
patchy. If I give you one example: community consortium
for education and training. This was not just business
of the business community, CBI made points very clearly
at the outset that setting up of the these broader driven
groups is not the best way to match the provision of training
to the needs of business and the needs of employers generally.
Certainly, the setting up of CSETS by locals of the area
was precisely not the way to go. I think all the business
organisations made that point very very clearly. |
| We now have 22 CSETS, one per local authority area,
they have no occasion to travel to work areas which strikes
us to be the only logical basis on which to try to match
skills provisions with skills needs. As a result of that
it's been exceptionally difficult, if not impossible,
to get business people to sit on CSETS and to contribute.
They are seen as dominated by local authorities and by
providers. So it’s not a question of business not
being wanted, not having the opportunity to participate
in these. But the structures and processes are being set
up and were guaranteed to ensure that business won't participate
and individual business won't participate. This is a concrete
example. |
|
Tom Jones
|
| Part of the issue is capacity building and helping members
to contribute fully to these meetings. And would you explain
to us, in paragraph nine is the Wales Social Partners
Unit limiting an attempt by the Assembly to support CBI.
Is that what it refers to? |
|
David Rosser
|
| Yes. |
|
Tom Jones
|
| Capacity building fund. |
|
David Rosser
|
| I Chair the Social Partners Unit currently. This came
out of many discussions between various business organisations,
again not just the CBI and the Assembly and on the issue
of consultation and capacity in the business community.
We were hoping that it would streamline the consultation
process – it didn't quite achieve that. But what
we did achieve was the Assembly saying we will put something
in place to help the business orientations to cope. It’s
been appreciated. It’s made a difference. |
|
Tom Jones
|
| So you welcome that? |
|
David Rosser
|
| We welcome that. |
|
Tom Jones
|
| How much funds does it have? |
|
David Rosser
|
| It is adequate for the task that we want at the moment. |
|
Tom Jones
|
| That's a step in the right direction. What about the
Partnership Council? Can you explain how that is working?
How effective it is? |
|
David Rosser
|
| It’s probably general agreement that's it not terribly
effective at the moment; if you were to ask the Assembly
they would say the same thing. Its not our most effective
means of trying to lobby influence. We would much prefer
a direct meeting with individual Assembly Ministers and
First Ministers rather than large public meetings with
many different political parties represented on the business
partnership councils. Sometimes party politics would come
into it. |
|
Tom Jones
|
| I sit on the voluntary sector one. We have moved by
insisting on things like regular meetings with the individual
Ministers. You mentioned the need to be able to influence
the Environment Minister, the other portfolio Ministers
and we are able to achieve annual meetings with the groups
that have specialist interest in those works and then
hold them to account, to have inputs in the budgets the
Assembly set. Have you been doing work to try and deepen
your influence? |
|
David Rosser
|
| We regularly get other Ministers attending voluntary
Council. Attendance is not a problem but we don't feel
yet that the Business Council, Partnership Council is
making a real difference or achieving anything. I think
it has taken a while for the business community to get
its act together. Devolution is new for us as well. We
are having to learn. |
|
Tom Jones
|
| Perhaps in four years time – do you think time
itself will actually improve the quality of its work? |
|
David Rosser
|
| I'm not convinced, but it’s an aspiration –
we're all working towards it. |
|
Tom Jones
|
| Further on again you refer to this about what is a confusion,
about what is a UK budget which is perceived as an England-only
budget which means that funds that are available for organisations
in Wales are not taken up by organisations in Wales. Apparently
the confusion comes from devolution in the sense that
people look to Westminster then to Cardiff, then it is
sometimes not delivered. Just examples of where you think
Wales has missed out. |
|
David Rosser
|
| There are 2 issues there. Areas where funding is transferred
to the Assembly over and above the block grant to match
announcements made in England. So for example the Chancellor
has announced funding for encouraging small business to
take up investors in people which is an issue that CBI
strongly supports. An equivalent sum to the Barnett Formula
was transferred to the Assembly which went into a pot
and a year later I have the Chief Executive of Investors
in People knocking on my door saying, ‘What can we
do? Wales is falling behind in investors in people.’
That’s clearly a decision for the Assembly but one
which we regret, the fact that they have not released
that money for investment in people take up in Wales.
Another issue is one where a scheme is launched at a UK
level, which applies equally to Wales. It’s not transferred
to the Assembly. |
|
Tom Jones
|
| For example? |
|
David Rosser
|
| For example the DTI Partnership for Work Fund which
is to assist businesses to put in place partnership working
arrangements to improve productivity, etc. There is a
DTI fund – business organisations in Wales are welcome
to apply for it. The issue there seems to be often uncertainty,
people think that something the DTI automatically does
not apply to Wales because the country is devolved, isn't
it? On the other side I sense a reluctance on behalf of
English headquarters of UK organisations to start dabbling
in Wales because they think they muddy the water or treading
on toes. There is an over sensitivity to the alternative
devolution issues. Again we are now working with the TUC
and ACAS to try and get Partnership for Work Funds better
taken up in Wales. That clearly is not the fault of the
Assembly. It’s a side effect of devolution, one which
I think is real. |
|
Sir Michael Wheeler-Booth
|
| You are regretting that you were being negative. When
we were in Scotland we were told one of the troubles with
devolution here has been that everybody thought there
was going to be a brave new world. Suddenly light would
dawn, beautiful governance, all the rest of it. The truth
is things are not like that. Don't you think there is
an element of that here with you? |
|
David Rosser
|
| I doubt the CBI ever thought it would be a brave new
world! |
|
Sir Michael Wheeler-Booth
|
| I put it in rather highly coloured words, but his was
a serious point that was put to us repeatedly in Scotland
and it struck me listening to you. The second point I
would like to put to you: you say you are negative but
in fact there are two points in this paper which are quite
positive. The first is in paragraph 13: "Additional power
we consider should be provided to the Assembly, the power
to restructure local government as many examples of lack
of strategic plan", etc. "stems from the number of all
purpose local authorities". That is quite a big proposal,
isn't it? Quite, well, I mean you describe yourself as
being entirely negative and you are saying that. |
|
David Rosser
|
| Well, I think it probably stems from something which
may be taken as negative. We have no stated aspirations
for local authority government reform in Wales. But I
have to say we have evidence from our Members to the extent
that many of them, commented on previously, that we have
two many all purpose local authorities in Wales many of
which just are too small to fulfil their purpose and functions.
We think Wales would be served better by fewer, better
quality local authorities. Planning is an absolute example
of that where some local authorities are too small to
have the professional Planning Department that they need.
The impact of having to too many local authorities is
magnified by the Assembly 's insistence of delivering
many priorities with a bottom-up approach. Local decisions
taken by local people are by definition local, therefore
we have 22. So we have 15 Objective One local partnerships,
etc. It does not strike us as the best way of proceeding
to strategic decisions. The business community is trying
to respond to the open welcome to get involved. We are
pleased that there is an open welcome, but for the business
community to respond to this plethora of activity is next
to impossible. We think the Assembly does not take a robust
enough position on behalf of local authorities. One of
our Members suggested the local authority is often used
as a ‘Get out of jail’ card as a reason for
not doing something, that might explain that comment,
a rather tongue in cheek comment. |
|
Ted Rowlands
|
| Could I ask you about paragraph 17. You say: "In respect
of the existing powers…and legislation we would welcome
clear procedures for…legislation by Parliament and
National Assembly for Wales." Detailing your experience
of the clauses in the Planning Bill as a most recent example
– how were they not clear? |
|
David Rosser
|
| Our response to this was drafted by a constitutional
lawyer. |
|
Robert Salisbury
|
| Not me. |
|
Ted Rowlands
|
| Is it quite central to some of our considerations about
the whole question of the co-legislation model that we
have or might have? If you can't answer it I would be
grateful for fuller elaboration. Take again, dare we ask,
we want illustrations. The Planning Bill is a good example,
it’s a recent one and you have been involved in it.
In what way was it not clear? In what way would you seek
to improve it so that this joint processing could be more
effective? |
|
David Rosser
|
| I would prefer to get a proper response. |
|
Ted Rowlands
|
| Did CBI pitch in at the Westminster end? You pitched
in it that end. Did CBI pitch in to get the views expressed
during the opening of the Planning Bill clauses at Westminster? |
|
David Rosser
|
| Yes. We will obviously respond to the planning Bill
in Westminster because it effects CBI Members across the
UK. We will make comments in Westminster as to what we
believe the devolved position will be. |
|
Lord Richard
|
| The general impression I am getting is that the CBI
have certain things that they want, like reforms to the
planning procedure, reorganisation of local authorities,
less bureaucracy. You are being drowned by people asking
you to go on consultation boards. You don’t really
mind how it’s done. Whether it’s done thorough
the Assembly or whether it’s done through Westminster
or partly through Westminster or partly through the Assembly.
Is the real problem you don't trust the Assembly to do
it? |
|
David Rosser
|
| Correct. |
|
Lord Richard
|
| It’s not a question of structure, if you thought
the Assembly could do the job you would like them to have
the power to do it? |
|
David Rosser
|
| That is our view. |
|
Lord Richard
|
| Can you answer that? |
|
David Rosser
|
| Our view is that the Assembly is not by instinct or
by nature….. |
|
Lord Richard
|
| To what extent would you attribute that to the character
of the Assembly Members themselves in terms of their previous
work experiences on– |
|
David Rosser
|
| Largely, I think, also at Civil Service level there
is not a great enough understanding of business and economic
matters of the way business thinks and works. |
|
Lord Richard
|
| Can I come back to the question, which was if you thought
the Assembly could do the job in a pro-business way presumably
you would be in favour of giving them powers to do it? |
|
Robert Salisbury
|
| The answer to that is, yes of course we would. |
|
David Rosser
|
| We want to see some evidence of that. Robert’s
initial comments were to use the word premature. |
|
Lord Richard
|
| I appreciate that yes. Let me follow the thoughts through.
So what you are saying is you don't really have fundamental
objections to the powers of the Assembly being changed.
It's that they would not be capable of using them properly
if they have additional powers? |
|
David Rosser
|
| I don't think you can separate those two out. |
|
Lord Richard
|
| You can. |
|
David Rosser
|
| We would not agree with that. |
|
Robert Salisbury
|
| We would – the answer is yes. |
|
Lord Richard
|
| I thought you had agreed to it? So what you are talking
about is your view of the quality of the Assembly? |
|
Robert Salisbury
|
| We want performance. What we want them to do make it
a prosperous Wales. We are doing our bit from business,
we do try to contribute and answer all the questions but
we want performance by the Assembly to actually achieve
things. That's why I was saying you are asking me for
examples and I can't give any because– |
|
Lord Richard
|
| But if you had got indications of that performance,
which is the Assembly did things that you thought were
good, then presumably you would be in favour of it having
greater powers? |
|
David Rosser
|
| If we were sitting here in 10 years’ time we might
be coming up with a different answer. |
|
Lord Richard
|
| It’s a question of principle not timing. |
|
Robert Salisbury
|
| That's right. That must be right. |
|
David Rosser
|
| But nonetheless we would be strongly opposed to any
transfer of powers now. Timing is important. Evidence
of performance. |
|
Ted Rowlands
|
| You are saying, as most other witnesses have to us,
that the process of consultation since devolution and
the involvement of people in Wales in policy formation
has improved; it is more open and inclusive. |
|
Robert Salisbury
|
| We do have more opportunity in and access to consultation.
Whether we are listened to is another thing. |
|
Ted Rowlands
|
| At least getting the opportunity. |
|
Robert Salisbury
|
| That was embodied in the Act. |
|
Ted Rowlands
|
| That’s improvement. |
|
David Rosser
|
| The CBI did not suffer for a lack of– |
|
Lord Richard
|
| The Secretary of State is sitting in Cardiff. |
|
David Rosser
|
| To influence– |
|
Lord Richard
|
| What's being devolved are the powers that the Secretary
of State had. It’s not a question of– |
|
David Rosser
|
| My understanding pre dates me. We had relationships
with– |
|
Ted Rowlands
|
| They were Conservative Secretaries of State before 1997
for 18 years. The Conservative party was seen as sympathetic
to business. |
|
Robert Salisbury
|
| That would be right. There is an issue to the side,
I was at the Wrexham Science Festival yesterday, the point
was made by Digby Jones that there is suspicion in many
parts of business and they think that we are all thieves
and vagabonds trying to impress the working classes, the
example was given that in Coronation Street the murderer
was a business man. |
|
Peter Price
|
| That prompts me to ask about paragraph 2 and the figures
that you have got there. You have got figures of 40 per
cent of respondents thought the Assembly was business
friendly whilst 43 per cent thought it was not. The impression
that I have got from statements by Digby Jones and others
is that the perception of the UK Government would be more
adverse than the 40/34 split that you have here. Have
you figures of CBI/UK-wide surveys, what they show on
a similar basis? If you don't have actual figures would
you think that my impression is right – that the
figures would be more adverse than 40/34? |
|
Robert Salisbury
|
| Perhaps I could answer because I sit on the Committee
of Chairman from time to time. That would be a right statement
on your part because certainly the north-east is fighting
tooth and nail not to have a Regional Assembly. The view
of all the English CBI is not to have a Regional Assembly. |
|
Peter Price
|
| If one looks overall at what your Members want for Wales
in terms of Government structure, 70% in your survey wanted
existing or more powers for the National Assembly and
only 29% wanted a reduction. |
|
David Rosser
|
| You could say 70% wanted existing or less. Interestingly
that was a survey of the entire CBI membership. I think
that we were surprised and pleasantly surprised by the
positive answer to that, to the business friendly or not
question. We were all also very pleasantly surprised by
the level of engagement there would be between individual
Assembly Members and business in their area. The view
of the CBI Wales Council, which is our elected group of
40-odd members which governs the CBI in Wales, would probably
be a little less positive than that. By and large, those
members are the ones which will have been involved with
us in the detailed policy process and working with the
Assembly on policy issues. That's actually quite interesting.
I also have had many comments prompted from members in
Wales who say that they get depressed by some of the tones
used by some our politicians, the tone of words used by
some of our politicians towards business. Particularly
when you enter the realm of business involvement and the
delivery of public services, and Members who have said
that they find it far easier to do business with the public
sector in England than they do in Wales. BPI is a major
part of that. That is a concern to us, which on the face
of it again seems primarily somewhat at conflict with
the results of our survey, but nonetheless it’s a
comment that I do get frequently. |
|
Tom Jones
|
| You mentioned the Regional Assemblies. If there were
Regional Assemblies for England with powers similar to
the Assembly’s powers, would you be concerned about
that in terms of competitive advantage? |
|
Robert Salisbury
|
| That's a very clever question because, of course, Wales
has done very well by having an Assembly. Although we
had the board before in the WDA, which has been such a
success. It’s that success which is often regarded
with envy by English districts and of course where does
it all fall out, because we would all be competitive with
one another for inward investment, etcetera. I can tell
you that the main fear, it’s been touched upon here,
the main fear of the Chairman from other areas in England
is that it would be become another talking shop. That's
what the are saying, just another layer of Government
which does not achieve very much. |
|
Lord Richard
|
| Well, thank you very much indeed. That was very interesting
and revealing. |
|
Robert Salisbury
|
| Thank you very much. |
|
Lord Richard
|
| You will let us have that additional statement? |
|
David Rosser
|
| Yes. |
|
|
