COMMISSION ON THE POWERS AND ELECTORAL ARRANGEMENTS OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY FOR WALES

Submission by the Director, Wales Transport Research Centre, University Of Glamorgan

Professor Stuart Cole

This Appendix analyses the primary rail issues by means of background for members of the Commission.

The consensus between EPT, WAG and the House of Commons would be remarkable in any political arena let alone in one, which is spread over four political parties. The views of these bodies do not differ significantly from those in the Minister’s statement to Plenary nor in its proposed Transport (Wales) Bill nor in WAG’s response to the House report on Transport in Wales.

However the degree to which Whitehall and the Department for Transport in particular has to date misunderstood the transport demands and needs of Wales becomes apparent through an analysis of :-

-    the Policy Review of Public Transport ( Environment, Planning and Transport Committee, (EPT)National Assembly for Wales, 2000)

-    Transport in Wales (House of Commons Select Committee on Welsh Affairs, 2003)

-    Welsh Assembly Government’s (WAG) response to the House of Commons Report (2003)

-    Minister of the Environment /Cabinet statements on transport to Plenary, National Assembly for Wales

-    Transport in Wales : Response of the Government(UK) (2003)

If two aspects of the House of Commons report (HOC 2003) recommendations – those relating to increased powers for the National Assembly, and the organisational structure for railways and bus operations (PTA / PTE) - are considered, the degree to which the Department for Transport is out of step with the needs of Wales becomes piteously transparent.

There is a clear agreement within the three Wales bodies that an integrated transport policy for Wales is the only way in which the country’s transport needs will be satisfied.

Three major enquiries into Transport in Wales have occurred in the last year. Two were completed in December 2001 - the Transport Framework for Wales published by the Welsh Assembly Government and the Policy Review of Public Transport published by the Environment, Planning and Transport Committee (EPT). The third is " Transport in Wales @ published by the House of Commons Select Committee on Welsh Affairs in January 2003.

Between them the reports point to an integrated transport approach - using public transport investment to influence modal split whilst continuing to make Wales economically competitive through improvements to the core rail and trunk road network. To meet demand in economic and social terms, a set of detailed criteria (covering accessibility, safety, environment, economy and integration) has been developed jointly with a Welsh Transport Forum team (of which the author was a member). This new appraisal process is used by local authorities to prioritise schemes in terms of the "vision" and objectives of the Transport Framework.  

The Transport Framework set out to develop a better co-ordinated and sustainable transport system by improving public and community transport, improving accessibility to non-car owners, attracting people away from car travel, developing the full potential of major ports and airports and road-based transport improvements. This is reflected in an ambitious Vision to be achieved where possible in ten years (by 2012) but some investments will extend beyond that. It will change travel patterns and transport usage, reduce the need to travel (although transport and land use relationships are not the only solution) and charge the traveller fair financial and environmental costs. A more challenging target date (2007) is set to deliver improved public transport system on all modes - more frequent and better quality; improved interchanges; better travel information and improved journey time reliability. The enhancement of the strategic infrastructure network will give economic benefits in terms of trade and congestion. The Framework provides a high expectation policy and identifies the funding sources within Wales, (NAfW, local authorities), the UK Government funding of railways, European Structural Funds (Objective 1), the Trans European Network Fund and the private sector in bus, rail (and presumably taxi) companies.

The "Vision" set out by the Environment, Planning and Transport Committee as its ten-year objective is not significantly different from that in the Framework. The reason is that both considered the responses to consultation and have identified solutions, appropriate to Wales. That the visionary approach should be backed up with investment is inherent in the Committee’s A strong conviction that A significant long term public and private sector investment is needed if we are to deliver our vision of an integrated accessible and affordable public transport system.

So where do we find these solutions? CBI Cymru Wales views mobility as the key to economic growth and we in Wales do not need southeast England solutions. Agreed. Indeed the author has suggested that the decision by the EPT Committee to travel to other more appropriate European locations such as Frankfurt and Sheffield (criticised at the time by some media) should have been extended to the Netherlands, Sweden, Portugal and Ireland.

In Scotland the relationships with the SRA and the Scottish Executive in the interpretation of the SRA are:-

-    powers of direction and guidance over the Scotrail franchise

-    powers of advice and guidance on cross – border services (e.g. Virgin to London; Virgin X Country; GNER to London).

The equivalent of this in Wales would be :-

-    powers of direction and guidance over the Wales and Borders service with the Committee’s proviso set out in Para 38(b) for services in England. The cross border issues can easily be overcome in the view of WAG

-    powers of advice and guidance would refer to cross border services operated by Virgin and FNW in the north and FGW in the south.

The National Assembly for Wales should be given:

-    powers of guidance and direction over the Strategic Rail Authority in respect of the Wales and Borders franchise and other rail services within Wales provided that they are consistent with the guidance and direction of the Secretary of State; and

-    power to appoint two members of the SRA using the open system for public body appointments;

-    accompanied by a statutory duty to ensure that the interests of those in England who are served by the Wales and Borders franchise are properly represented (paragraph 38).

UK Government Response

"The SRA already works closely with the Assembly on all matters that affect Wales, including the Wales & Borders and other franchises. Although Scottish Ministers have the power to give the SRA directions and guidance, this is because of the self-contained nature of the Scottish railway network and the ScotRail franchise, and because the Scottish Executive is responsible for funding the franchise. We are not persuaded that the Welsh Assembly (the National Assembly for Wales that is) should have a similar power, as the Welsh railway network has a much greater degree of inter-dependence with the English network. Whilst the Wales and Borders franchise has created a more geographically focussed business, it remains the case that there is a significant cross-border element.

It is the statutory role of the Secretary of State for Transport to appoint all members of the SRA Board. He is required to consult the Welsh Assembly about one member of the Board, and must have regard to the desirability of appointing a person who is familiar with the special requirements and circumstances of Wales. The obligation to consult the Assembly is intended to ensure that the Assembly has a role in the selection of a member who will be well placed to advise the Board about Welsh matters. However, Board members are chosen because of their expertise in a number of different areas; they are not representatives of a particular interest. We do not see that the needs of Wales would necessarily be better served by giving the Assembly the direct power to appoint a member, or more than one member. It is the statutory duty of the SRA and its Board to ensure that the needs of every part of the GB network are properly addressed. There are further safeguards to ensure that this happens, including the SRA’s statutory duty to consult the Assembly about its strategies and its obligation under the Directions and Guidance to take into account the Assembly’s policies ".(HOC 2003b)

The Minister for Environment welcomed the Welsh Affairs Committee (WAC) endorsement of devolving further powers to the Assembly, especially powers of direction over the SRA, and the power to appoint a member to the SRA. It was disappointing that the UK Government, in its response to the WAC report, continues to reject the arguments for this. One might understand the Government’s arguments about the nature of the network in Wales, but these concerns are not insurmountable. WAG has outlined its intention to seek such powers in its proposed Wales only Transport Bill, which was recently approved by the Assembly. The rail network in Wales is a key element underpinning the Welsh Assembly Government’s vision for a coherent transport network. Powers of direction over the SRA are therefore essential so that the delivery of train services in Wales supports our integrated transport policy. WAG would work very closely with the English border authorities to ensure their needs and aspirations are also fully integrated into the services. They have recognised the potential for this by their support for the Wales & Borders franchise.

The WAG vision for rail and bus services also encompasses its social inclusion agenda, which is a part of its public transport policy.

The Department for Transport clearly misunderstands the pre-requisites for an integrated transport policy in Wales when set up by the Welsh Assembly Government(WAG). The Department’s view appears to begin and end from a Great Britain (GB) standpoint. The Wag policy cannot be achieved without guidance and direction of the SRA and of bus policy.

"We are not persuaded that the Welsh Assembly should have similar powers" is a repeat of the view in the DfT response to the Committee report on the Transport Bill and its impact on Wales (1999 – 2000 HC 287).

The Government does not explain why his view differs significantly from that of the Committee and from WAG. The recommendations of the Committee have essentially been included in the WAG Transport (Wales) Bill referred to above they are:-

-    preparation of local implementation plans in line with the Assembly’s transport strategy

-    establish joint authorities along the lines of PTA/PTE’s

-    powers of direction and guidance over the SRA in respect of the Wales and Borders franchise to be transferred to the Assembly Government

-    the Assembly Government to appoint a member of the SRA

In particular the powers of direction and guidance over the SRA would not "affect the economic efficiency of a coherent national rail system" as the Minister fears otherwise why has the decision been made to transfer these powers to the Scottish Executive this year. The "total operation in Scotland argument" is not relevant as its system has to fit into the national network e.g. in respect of services into northern England operated by Virgin, GNER and Scotrail. The SRA continues to be the co-ordinating body and joint contracting body in Scotland and would do so in Wales.

The Bill proposed by WAG indicates the consultation cannot be preferred to guidance and direction in the achievement of the Assembly’s integrated transport policy.

The location of an SRA Scottish liaison officer in Edinburgh rather than in London appears to have positive consequences regarding investment and planning the railway.

The Board member selected to advise the SRA on Welsh matters is unknown to the railway "community" in Wales. The Committee may wish to question the Secretary of Stare for transport on the appointment and was it agreed with the WAG and the detail of the consultation procedure. The line of responsibility to the S of S makes it difficult for the appointee to truly represent the views of Wales. The initial advertisement, if correctly recalled, ask for someone with knowledge of railways in Wales of which there are many suitable candidates. Members may wish the appointed member to appear if the Committee decided to ask the SRA for further evidence.

Powers to establish PTA/PTE’s

The Government should introduce legislation to enable the Assembly to establish, by secondary legislation one or more Passenger Transport Authorities or Passenger Transport Executives covering all or part of Wales. Whether to establish one or more PTAs or PTEs will then remain a decision for the Assembly. (Paragraph 21).

The Government has no plans to introduce legislation to enable the establishment of new Passenger Transport Authorities. As the Committee's Report acknowledges, there is scope for improving public transport under existing legislation, through authorities working closely together in partnership with transport operators.

The proposed Wales (Transport) Bill seeks powers to establish joint authorities on the lines of Passenger Transport Authorities for all or part of Wales. WAG welcomed the House of Commons Committee parallel proposal. The Minister stated in her report to EPT in June and to plenary in July that the case for an alI-Wales PTA is not yet overwhelming, but that a case could be made for establishing a PTA/PTE in South East Wales. WAG are still continuing to strengthen the work of the regional consortia and have secured funding in the last budget for them to employ staff and to constitute themselves as legal bodies. This will lead to better planning, co-ordination and implementation of transport policies across local authority boundaries. However, it is important to have the option of introducing a PTA/PTE in Southeast Wales should these strengthened consortia fail to deliver real change.

The UK Government view flies in the face of the House of Commons Committee and WAG. The Transport (Wales) Bill proposed by the WAG Cabinet in Plenary (12 March 2003) includes such proposals. The DfT, it appears, with little or no knowledge of the debate or situation in Wales makes a general point about PTE/PTA’s.

In its response to the Report on the Transport Bill (HOC, 2000), the Government rejected the idea of a PTE/PTA in Wales because" no group of authorities seemed to have a very strong case" and " because PTA’s have no roads responsibilities". The DfT may not be aware of the type of organisation which WAG have suggested (which involves close links to local authorities and the WAG – the two highways authorities in Wales), and have made no apparent effort to further research their view. Indeed one might suggest they did not even read the response to HC287/HC497, since the House Committee evidence in the Transport in Wales Report (HOC 2003a) specifically covered those issues.

A Wales PTA within the National Assembly Government would be the cornerstone of an integrated transport policy for Wales and would have many of the benefits identified by the House of Commons report. It would be, as its name implies, within a partnership of the National Assembly, the Government, local authorities and users. It would work with the Passenger Transport Boards based on county council groupings responsible for franchising all bus services currently both commercial and tendered. These boards would be based on the existing consortia and would take forward their considerable achievements to date. They would make local decisions on bus services and ensure the integration of bus rail and taxi (through local authority licensing) services in their relationship with the PTA.

This would ensure the continuation of a bottom up decision making process where county councils would play a vital role in ensuring that the diverse characteristics of need are provided for. The distinctive needs of urban and rural Wales show that decisions on the core travel network have to be made by the Assembly, while decisions on local public transport have to be made regionally. This will integrate, within the partnership, the " total journey " through investment in good quality information and in seamless interchanges between rail, bus, taxi, car, cycle and feet. Thus the partnership will create the integration which is the objective of this exercise.

Its second role could be to provide the framework for developing and funding (where appropriate with the private sector) Wales’ railway infrastructure. One option is that it could replace the SRA in its following functions:-

-    finance infrastructure development,

-    determine fares and timetables,

-    manage the franchise (possibly through the SRA via powers of direction and guidance, as occurs in Scotland) and,

-    liase with the SRA, Network Rail and other train companies in Wales and in England, thus ensuring integration into the Great Britain network.

Thirdly, it would also be the link to the national core road network.

And what of the final piece of the jigsaw - land use planning? This would remain with local authorities in their current relationship with the National Assembly and, through the PTBs, link into the bus and rail networks.

The consortia /PTBs are not an alternative for a Wales PTA. The need for a cohesive national public transport policy with high investment levels as set out by the EPT Committee can only be achieved by as national body. The PTBs are suitable for their local, regional role and in this the Minister is correct in wishing to see them strengthened.

This wide range of activities has to be co-ordinated at local, regional and local level through a partnership of equals each executing the task set at the appropriate level. This ensures an integrated policy and an optimum allocation of funds which reflects the priorities of the partners.

One example of inter-governmental liaison - creating the Wales and Borders rail franchise - involved regular meetings between officials and an SRA team meeting regularly in Wales with specialist staff whose role is to liase with the devolved governments. This comes to successful conclusion with the placing of the franchise in 2002 for a 2003 start.

Select Committee View

We believe that the establishment of the Wales and Borders franchise to replace the four local service franchises, as this Committee has previously recommended on several occasions over the last 20 years, will help to simplify the organisational structure of the railways in Wales (paragraph 40).

The Wales and Borders franchise has now been operating in interim form since September 2001. Having one franchise covering all local and regional services within Wales has meant that the management of the franchise can focus on the specific needs of rail travellers within Wales.

The National Assembly has produce two reports - the Transport Framework for Wales (TFW, 2001) and the Policy Review of Public Transport (PRPT, 2001) . Both documents deal with issues such as railways and bus policy (which are outside the Assembly’s current responsibilities) and which without the necessary changes in primary legislation cannot be significantly affected by the Assembly/Executive. A question being asked is – "should the Assembly/WAG spend valuable time on such matters which are not currently its responsibility but which affect the particular country involved? (Chaney et al, 2001) The answer is a clear yes, otherwise how can decisions be made on the devolving of areas of activity to achieve an integrated transport policy.

An interesting debate between the two governments (Wales and UK) has followed the Transport Framework for Wales and the Policy Review of Public Transport final reports published early in 2002 and subsequent Ministry of Environment and Cabinet statements. Amongst the topics will be the role of the National Assembly vis a vis the SRA. One of the more interesting dialogues will now be how receptive the UK Government will be to the view in Wales given the starting point of the successful debate on the Wales and Borders franchise.

The devolution of power is a continuing process, but it will take time. However there is currently an apparent reluctance by UK Government ministers in London to transfer any more responsibilities in respect of transport. So what processes will indicate change? In Wales, should one of the outputs from the various policy statements be the transfer of powers of direction and control over the SRA, and of the appointment of member(s) for Wales? And what of the establishment of Welsh style passenger transport boards for example based on the consortia? The Cabinet has put forward a Transport (Wales) Bill which if agreed with DfT would lead to the preparation of primary legislation by DfT and the NAfW legal counsel. It would be likely to be on the Scottish model of powers to direct the SRA (subject to the Secretary of State’s power to override). One question which arises is :- what discussion has taken place between the WAG and DfT concerning the Bill prior to its announcement in NAfW Plenary.

But would funding for such expenditure have to be met from the existing block grant or from additional ring-fenced amounts? Railways in Wales make losses; Wales and Borders revenue support is fully funded by the SRA; the Barnett formula is not expected to generate that additional funding alone so an additional negotiated settlement would be needed. These financial issues will be key to satisfying demands and needs for public transport over the next few years.

10^th June 2003