.........
|
Aelodau’r pwyllgor yn bresennol
Committee members in attendance
|
|
Jeff Cuthbert
|
Llafur
(yn dirprwyo ar ran Joyce
Watson)
Labour (substituting for Joyce Watson)
|
|
Russell George
|
Ceidwadwyr Cymreig
Welsh
Conservatives
|
|
Bethan Jenkins
|
Plaid Cymru
The Party of Wales
|
|
William Powell
|
Democratiaid Rhyddfrydol Cymru (Cadeirydd y
Pwyllgor)
Welsh Liberal Democrats (Committee
Chair)
|
|
Eraill yn bresennol
Others in
attendance
|
|
Huw Lewis
|
Aelod Cynulliad (Llafur), y Gweinidog Addysg a
Sgiliau
Assembly Member (Labour), Minister for
Education and Skills
|
|
Joanne Larner
|
Llywodraeth Cymru
Welsh Government
|
|
Swyddogion Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru yn
bresennol
National Assembly for Wales officials
in attendance
|
|
Gill
Eveleigh
|
Dirprwy Glerc
Deputy Clerk
|
|
Steve
George
|
Clerc
Clerk
|
|
Matthew
Richards
|
Uwch-gynghorydd Cyfreithiol
Senior Legal Adviser
|
|
Kath
Thomas
|
Dirprwy Glerc
Deputy Clerk
|
|
Dechreuodd y cyfarfod am
09:17.
The meeting began at 09:17.
|
|
Cyflwyniad, Ymddiheuriadau a
Dirprwyon
Introduction, Apologies and Substitutions
|
|
[1]
William Powell: Bore da, bawb. Good morning, all, and
welcome to this meeting of the Petitions Committee. We have
apologies this morning from Joyce Watson and it’s very good
to welcome Jeff Cuthbert in as her substitute for this
morning’s session. Normal housekeeping arrangements apply.
So, if we do hear the fire alarm, it’s the real thing and
we’re in the hands of the ushers.
|
|
Deisebau Newydd
New Petitions
|
|
[2]
William Powell: So, moving straight away to agenda item 2,
new petitions, we start with agenda item 2.1, P-04-655,
‘Demanding our Rights for the Welsh Language in the Private
Sector’. This petition was submitted by Cymdeithas yr Iaith
Gymraeg and collected 442 signatures. The text reads as
follows:
|
|
[3]
‘We call upon the National Assembly to insist that the Welsh
Government ensures that all private and voluntary sectors that come
within the scope of the Welsh Language Measure 2011 offer enhanced
Welsh-language services by collaborating with the Welsh Language
Commissioner to introduce regulations to the National Assembly
prior to the 2016 Assembly election or at the earliest possible
opportunity.
|
|
[4]
‘Hundreds of thousands of people in Wales are being deprived
of basic Welsh-language services every day by a large number of
organisations, such as telephone, broadband, energy and transport
companies. This totally unnecessary injustice occurs because the
Welsh Government and the Welsh Language Commissioner have not fully
implemented the powers that they have under the Welsh Language
Measure, which was unanimously passed by the Assembly almost five
years ago. The Welsh Government and the Welsh Language Commissioner
are, therefore, hampering the democratic will of the people of
Wales.
|
|
[5]
‘Furthermore, we believe that the Welsh Language Measure
should be amended in order to speed up and simplify the process of
imposing Welsh-language Standards on organisations and companies,
establishing general rights for the Welsh language and extending
the scope of the Measure to cover the remainder of the private
sector, including supermarkets and banks.’
|
|
[6]
A first-consideration letter was sent to the First Minister back on
29 September, as the relevant Minister with overall remit for the
Welsh language. The First Minister has responded and colleagues
will have had the opportunity to read his response in the public
papers. I think it’s fair to say that there is something
short of a meeting of minds here. But, there’s a number of
actions that I think we probably need to take. I’d very much
like to hear colleagues’ views on this one, if there are any indications. Bethan.
|
|
[7]
Bethan Jenkins:
Rwyf jest eisiau dweud bod yna nifer
o ofynion gan y deisebwyr yn hynny o beth, a byddai’n dda i
ni allu ysgrifennu at Gomisiynydd y Gymraeg i ofyn am yr amserlen
ar gyfer adolygu safonau ar gyfer y cyrff preifat hynny nad oedd yn
rhan o’r cylch gorchwyl gwreiddiol, gan nad oedd y rheoliadau
yn eu lle, ac i ofyn i’r Llywodraeth i gadarnhau eu bod
nhw’n bwriadu cydymffurfio â’r amserlen honno, a
gofyn hefyd i’r Llywodraeth ddarparu rhagor o wybodaeth am eu
bwriadau o ran diwygio Mesur y Gymraeg (Cymru) 2011. Maen nhw wedi
dweud ar y record eu bod nhw’n fodlon gwneud hynny, ond, hyd
yn hyn, nid ydym wedi cael amser penodedig, neu amserlen, i wneud y
gwaith hwnnw. Felly, mae pum mlynedd wedi mynd, efallai ei bod yn
amser iddyn nhw i asesu’r sefyllfa nawr.
|
Bethan Jenkins: I’d just like to
say that there are a number of requirements from the petitioners in
that regard, and it would be good for us to be able to write to the
Welsh Language Commissioner, to ask for the timetable for reviewing
the standards for those private bodies that weren’t part of
the original remit, as the regulations were not in place, and to
ask Government to confirm that they intend to comply with that
timetable, and also ask the Government to provide more information
about its intentions in terms of amending the Welsh Language
(Wales) Measure 2011. They have said on record that they are
willing to do so, but, so far, we haven’t been given any
specified time, or timetable, to do that work. So, five years have
gone past and now it’s time, perhaps, for them to assess that
situation.
|
|
[8]
William Powell: Diolch yn fawr. I think that makes a lot of
sense. Clearly, we need to—partly because she’s been
name checked, and there are various assertions made about her
activities—be in touch with the commissioner in any event,
and building in the request for the timetable that you mentioned. I
think the other two points we need to raise in a follow-up letter
to the First Minister.
|
|
[9]
Bethan Jenkins: Byddai’n
dda i fi wybod hefyd pam bod y Llywodraeth wedi gofyn i rai
o’r busnesau o fewn y trydydd cylch o ymchwiliadau safonau
gael eu tynnu allan, oherwydd, yn ôl ein tystiolaeth yma
heddiw, rôl y comisiynydd yw penderfynu hynny, ond roedd y
penderfyniad wedi cael ei ddwyn allan o’u rheolaeth nhw.
Efallai y gallwn ni ofyn hynny i’r Llywodraeth
hefyd.
|
Bethan Jenkins: It would be good for me
to know as well why the Government has asked for some of these
businesses within the third round of standards investigations to be
withdrawn, because, according to our evidence here today,
it’s the role of the commissioner to decide that, but the
decision was taken out of their control. So, perhaps we could ask
Government about that too.
|
|
[10]
William Powell: Do we know whether that was the result of
some sort of impact assessment, or do we not have that
information?
|
|
[11]
Bethan Jenkins: I don’t know.
|
|
[12]
William Powell: Okay, well that we need to establish, I
think.
|
|
[13]
Bethan Jenkins:
Efallai y bydd Cymdeithas yr Iaith yn
gwybod. Efallai y gallem ni fynd nôl at y deisebwr a gofyn
hynny cyn mynd at y Llywodraeth.
|
Bethan Jenkins: Perhaps the Welsh
Language Society will know. Perhaps we could go back to the
petitioner to ask that before we go to Government.
|
|
[14]
William Powell:
Iawn, cytuno.
|
William Powell: Okay, agreed.
|
|
[15]
Good. I think we can go ahead on that basis, then, if other
colleagues are content.
|
|
[16]
The second agenda item under ‘New Petitions’ is 2.2,
P-04-657, ‘Charging for Parking and the Relationship to High
Streets and Their Success’. This petition was submitted by
Ann Dierikx, and collected 89 signatures on the Assembly’s
website; a further 60 signatures have been collected on a paper
petition. The text of this reads as follows:
|
|
[17]
‘We, the undersigned, call upon the National Assembly for
Wales to urge the Welsh Government to commission research, in
partnership with local authorities in Wales, to assess fully the
relationship between car parking charges and successful local high
streets.
|
|
[18]
‘Prof Calvin Jones of Cardiff Business School has emphasised
the negative economic impact of car parking charges, especially in
market towns. In the light of this—and a current Ministerial
study on the issue—we call upon the Welsh Government to urge
Welsh local authorities to impose a moratorium on the introduction
of car parking charges at new sites in their ownership and any
increase in parking fees until the 2017 election.
|
|
[19]
‘In addition, we urge the Welsh Government to ensure that
local authorities engage proactively with relevant town and
community councils, before implementing any changes in the local
car parking regime. Town and community councils should be given the
opportunity to adopt car parks in their area—as no one is
better placed to understand the dynamics of the local high
street—before any other options, notably outsourcing of
management, is contemplated.
|
|
[20]
‘Finally, we call upon the Welsh Government to make clear and
transparent regulations governing the procedures relating to car
parking charges to be followed by local authorities.’
|
|
[21]
Before we go further, I should declare that I gave some procedural
advice to this particular petitioner, ahead of its submission.
Also, she has had some involvement with petitions, because she
appeared as the photographer at our memorable 11 November visit to
the Mid Wales Hospital in Talgarth, where she was an informal
photographer for a local website, and so she is known to us in that
connection.
|
|
[22]
But, apart from that, a first-consideration letter was sent to the
Minister for Economy, Science and Transport, back on 12 October.
We’ve got a response here, together with an executive summary
of a report that she refers to. And I think, probably, that the
petition does refer to a current study, so, possibly, that’s
what she had in mind. The Minister’s comments have been
forwarded to the petitioner, but we haven’t had any responses
yet. I do know that the petitioner has actually been in hospital
and has been significantly unwell and had an operation from which
she is convalescing. So, it’s perhaps not surprising that we
have not heard back just yet. Anyway, I value colleagues’
opinions. Russell George.
|
|
[23]
Russell George: Thank you, Chair. I think that we do need to
get the petitioner’s comments before we do anything else on
this because the petitioner is aware that research has been done,
but she’s commenting that perhaps more research needs to be
done. So, although the Minister has provided us with that research,
I think we need to get the petitioner’s view on this. And
given, as you said, that she’s perhaps unwell at the moment,
I think we should give her a bit of time to allow that. So, perhaps
we should wait for that response and bring this forward to a future
meeting.
|
|
[24]
William Powell: Yes. I think that would make a lot of sense.
We’ve got three indications. Bethan.
|
|
[25]
Bethan Jenkins:
Ie, roeddwn i jest eisiau dweud yn
fras fy mod i’n meddwl bod angen inni, os ydym yn gallu, ofyn
i’r Llywodraeth beth y maen nhw wedi’i wneud
gyda’r darn hwn o waith gan fod yr argymhellion yn dweud y
dylai awdurdodau lleol ystyried ffactorau ehangach pan fyddant yn
rhoi taliadau ar barcio. Dylai’r awdurdod lleol fesur yr
impact ar y bobl leol. Nid wyf yn gwybod beth sydd wedi digwydd
gyda hynny: a yw awdurdodau lleol wedi cael gweld hwn, ac a ydyn
nhw wedi ymateb. A ydym yn gallu gofyn i’r WLGA a ydynt wedi
ei weld, achos nid yw’n mynd i gael unrhyw effaith heblaw bod
yr awdurdodau lleol yn gwybod? Rydym wedi dysgu gwersi, efallai, o
gymryd gwyliau yn ystod cyfnod ysgol, ac o’r sefyllfa gydag
asbestos, bod angen inni ddilyn drwyddo i weld sut y mae
polisi’r Llywodraeth wedyn yn effeithio ar lawr
gwlad.
|
Bethan
Jenkins: Yes, I just wanted to briefly say that I think that,
if we can, we need to ask the Government what it has done with this
piece of work because the recommendations do state that local
authorities should take wider factors into account when they impose
car parking charges. The local authority should measure the impact
on local people. I don’t know what has happened with that:
whether local authorities have had sight of it, and whether
they’ve responded to it. Can we ask the WLGA whether they
have seen it, because it is not going to have any kind of effect
unless the local authorities do know? We have learned lessons,
perhaps, from taking holidays during school term times, and the
situation with asbestos, that we need to follow this through to see
how the Government’s policy then impact at the grass-roots
level.
|
|
[26]
William Powell: Yes. I think you make a good point and I
think we should probably consider writing to the WLGA on that
connection because they’re crucial to any implementation,
aren’t they? Jeff Cuthbert.
|
|
[27]
Jeff Cuthbert: I think the fairest decision at this point is
to give the petitioner a little bit more time if she has indeed
been hospitalised and is recovering. That would be only fair. Six
weeks, as suggested here, would seem a reasonable point in time. I
don’t know how unwell she is or the nature of the operation.
I don’t know.
|
|
[28]
William Powell: I think she’s making progress, from
what I understand.
|
|
[29]
Jeff Cuthbert: If she is I think six weeks is reasonable.
The only thing is that I understand fairly well—and I’m
sure we all do around here—the very difficult financial
position that local authorities are in. They do need to look to
raise money from other sources. We’ve got the comprehensive
spending review tomorrow.
|
|
[30]
William Powell: Indeed.
|
|
[31]
Jeff Cuthbert: That may have further bad news for local
public services. So, I would be rather reluctant to make any
recommendation at this stage about whether car parking charges
should cease or be altered in some way. I think, at this stage, all
we should do is give the petitioner a bit more time to respond so
that we can look at it in the round.
|
|
[32]
William Powell: Yes. Absolutely. Okay. I certainly think
that the idea of contacting the WLGA makes a lot of sense, whether
now or post any feedback.
|
|
[33]
Bethan Jenkins: But also what I said about writing back to
the Welsh Government to see if they’ve flag that up. You
know, where has the report gone in terms of—?
|
|
[34]
William Powell: Yes, it’s on a shelf somewhere.
|
|
[35]
Bethan Jenkins: These recommendations are for local
authorities. So, you know, we need to know that it’s got to
them and that they’ve seen it. I wouldn’t want to say
that people shouldn’t charge for parking. It does vary and
local people sometimes have been priced out of being able to shop
in their local towns.
|
|
[36]
William Powell: Yes, absolutely. I think that one other
feature of this petition was the flagging up of the crucial role of
town and community councils and the possibility that they might
operate it on a devolved basis. That seems to be a different strand
that isn’t really picked up particularly in the executive
summary of the research. But, anyway, that’s maybe for
another time. Okay. Thank you very much for your contributions.
|
|
09:29
|
|
Y Wybodaeth Ddiweddaraf am Ddeisebau Blaenorol
Updates to Previous Petitions
|
|
[37]
William Powell: Agenda item 3—updates to previous
petitions. We start with agenda item 3.1: P-04-633, ‘To Raise
Awareness of the Poor Broadband in Our Area’. This petition
was submitted by Geraint and Jane Evans. It was first considered by
us back on 12 May 2015. It has the support of 60 signatures. We
recall the particular local frustrations about the level of service
that are referred to in the petition. We considered it at our last
meeting and agreed to allow the petitioners some additional time to
provide comments on correspondence that we’d had with the
Deputy Minister. We’ve now got responses from residents,
indicating that broadband speeds remain slow. It is also clear that
this matter is timetabled in to be addressed, and it seems that
they’ve got the energetic support of their own constituency
Assembly Member, Lord Dafydd Elis-Thomas, who’s clearly
involved in the correspondence as well. We recall the reassurances
that we had from the Deputy Minister with regard to the Superfast
Cymru broadband programme in this particular area. I’d very
much appreciate colleagues’ thoughts as to whether or not we
proceed further or whether we may have come towards the end of the
road. Jeff Cuthbert.
|
|
09:30
|
|
[38]
Jeff Cuthbert: I assume, when they refer to
‘cab’, they mean ‘cabinet’ in the
petition.
|
|
[39]
William Powell: I think so.
|
|
[40]
Jeff Cuthbert: Too far from the cabinet, I assume.
|
|
[41]
William Powell: Yes, absolutely. I think that’s the
cabinet, yes.
|
|
[42]
Jeff Cuthbert: My view is—and I know Dafydd El very
well, of course—if he’s pursuing it, as he’s
perfectly entitled to as a constituency case, there’s no
point in duplicating effort, and if he’s well in hand with
that, I suggest that we leave it with him. I know from my own work
as the Deputy Minister that, by the end of next year, the pledge is
that 96 per cent of Wales will be covered by Superfast Cymru, and I
suggest that will be the same sort of information that Dafydd
Elis-Thomas would get back.
|
|
[43]
William Powell: Yes—in these deep rural locations.
Russell George.
|
|
[44]
Russell George: I think part of the frustration perhaps on
many of these issues is that people are not aware whether their
area will be covered or not by the date of next spring. So, I think
there’s frustration—
|
|
[45]
William Powell: Communication is the key to it, isn’t
it?
|
|
[46]
Russell George: Yes. There is bad communication from the
Superfast Cymru website, which doesn’t give enough
information about specific areas, but I think that we’ve
probably taken this as far as we can as a committee. So, I perhaps
would propose we do close the petition, because I can see Dafydd
Elis-Thomas is pursuing the case—
|
|
[47]
William Powell: Absolutely, yes.
|
|
[48]
Russell George: The Deputy Minister did issue a letter to
Assembly Members on this about a month ago or three weeks ago, so I
think we should send the petitioner a copy of that letter if we
haven’t already done so. Also, as a bit of a plug, there is a
cross-party group tonight, which I chair, on this, which the Deputy
Minister and the director of the project are attending. So, I will
make a note of pointing that out to Dafydd Elis-Thomas
today—
|
|
[49]
William Powell: And you’re chairing that meeting.
|
|
[50]
Russell George: —and ask him to attend. I am chairing
that meeting, yes.
|
|
[51]
William Powell: Okay—just for the record. Good.
Excellent. I think we’ve got a consensus on that one.
|
|
[52]
We move now to agenda item 3.2: P-04-468, ‘Road Safety
Concerns A48 Chepstow’. This petition was submitted by
Chepstow Town
Council and was first considered by us back on 19 March 2013. An
associated petition had collected in excess of 1,000 signatures,
simply calling, as we recall on Welsh Government to deliver the
reduction in the speed limit on the A48 at Chepstow from 50 mph to
30 mph. We last considered this on 3 February, and we had a letter
at that time from the Minister for Economy, Science and Transport,
indicating that Government officials had, and I quote,
|
|
[53]
‘completed the speed limit review of all trunk roads within
Wales. The results will be available shortly.’
|
|
[54]
In light of this, we agreed to note the position and await further
action, and we’ve not heard anything further from the
Minister and, as you’ll see, the letter that we have in our
pack today is actually something to which we’ve been copied
in. It is addressed to the Minister, and it’s quite trenchant
in parts. They’re clearly seeking some information as to what
action they can expect in their own community. So, I would be
inclined that we, as a committee, should write and give some
support to the sentiment in the letter, if colleagues are agreeable
to that.
|
|
[55]
Bethan Jenkins: Yes.
|
|
[56]
William Powell: Okay. Good. Agreed.
|
|
[57]
Jeff Cuthbert: If it’s the bridge that I’m
thinking of, I’m surprised there’s a 50 mph limit on
it, I must say.
|
|
[58]
William Powell: Precisely. I think they are too.
That’s right. Indeed. I think that’s the one in
question.
|
|
[59]
Agenda item 3.3 is P-04-539, ‘Save Cardiff Coal
Exchange’. This petition was submitted by Jon Avent and was first considered on 11 March 2014,
having collected 389 signatures. An associated petition hosted on
another website collected 2,680. We’ve got the detailed text
of the petition, and Mr Avent is a very dedicated and tenacious
petitioner. Some of us have had the opportunity to meet him on a
site visit at the Coal Exchange, which was quite helpful. Just as a
summary of recent actions, the committee last considered the
petition on 6 October, and we had sight of a feasibility report on
the Coal Exchange, which had been prepared by Capita, in
association with the economy, science and transport department and
Cadw, and we also had brief comments at that stage from Mann
Williams Consulting Civil and Structural Engineers, which is the
same company for which Mr Avent works. The committee agreed to
await comments from Mr Avent himself, before considering further
steps. We’ve got some additional comments from the
petitioner, as you can see in the public pack, and he retains his
concerns about a number of aspects, particularly surrounding
Cardiff council and some of the ways in which they’ve
approached this matter, and some of the ways in which they’ve
called into action certain of the permissions that they have in
extreme situations in terms of building safety. And, all the way
along, Mr Avent has contested whether or not that’s a valid
use of those powers. What do colleagues think we should do in this
case? Bethan Jenkins.
|
|
[60]
Bethan Jenkins:
Rwy’n credu y dylem ni
roi’r wybodaeth yma i’r Gweinidog, ond byddwn i eisiau
ffeindio mas gan y Gweinidog beth mae e’n ymwybodol ohono o
ran yr hyn y mae CCSE wedi gwneud. Yn ein gwybodaeth, mae’n
dweud bod Stephen Doughty a Ken Skates wedi cael gwybodaeth
ynglŷn â’r demand for payment notice a oedd
ar wal yr adeilad, ond mae’r wybodaeth gan Jon Avent, er ei
fod e’n weddol gynhwysfawr, nid yw’n dweud yn gwmws
beth mae Stephen Doughty, neu Ken Skates, fel Gweinidog, wedi
gwneud am y peth, neu os ydyn nhw’n mynd i wneud unrhyw beth
am y peth.
|
Bethan Jenkins: I think that we should
give this information to the Minister, but I would want to find out
from the Minister what he’s aware of with regard to what CCSE
has done. In our information, it states that Stephen Doughty and
Ken Skates have received information about the demand for payment
notice that was on the wall of the building, but the information
from Jon Avent, even though it’s fairly comprehensive, it
doesn’t say exactly what Stephen Doughty, or Ken Skates, as
Minister, have done about this, or if they are going to do anything
about it.
|
|
[61]
Yn ôl beth rwy’n ei wybod,
bydd beth fydd yn digwydd yn y fanna yn golygu lot ynglŷn
â sut mae’r adeilad yn gallu cael ei ddatblygu yn y
dyfodol. Mae rhai o’r materion sy’n cael eu codi
ynglŷn â chyngor Caerdydd ynglŷn â mynediad
i’r maes parcio yn dod â ni yn ôl at y drafodaeth
ynglŷn â’r cyngor a’n perthynas gyda’r
cyngor. A oes gwerth cysylltu â nhw eto gyda rhai o’r
pwyntiau sydd yn y ddogfen yma? Cwestiwn i’r Aelodau
Cynulliad eraill yw hwnnw efallai. [Chwerthin.]
|
According to what I know, what will be
happening there will mean a lot regarding how the building can be
developed in the future. Some of the issues arising with regard to
Cardiff council in terms of access to the car park bring us back to
the discussion about the council and our relationship with the
council. Is there value in contacting them again with some of the
points in this document? That’s a question to the other
Assembly Members perhaps. [Laughter.]
|
|
[62]
William Powell: Indeed. We recall the difficulty that we
had, over many months, in securing arrangements for the site visit,
which, in the end, happened, and to beneficial effect, from our
point of view. I think we probably need to write to the Minister
for Economy, Science and Transport, but also maybe copy in her
deputy, given that he’s been name-checked in subsequent
correspondence. And obviously, their party colleague Stephen
Doughty has taken a constituency interest in the matter because he
obviously appears to be concerned about the demise of the building.
Are there any other comments from colleagues, because I think
it’s really important that we try to get some progress on
this one, particularly given the fact that we’re in very much
the latter stages of this Assembly, and this particular committee?
The issue isn’t going to go away. Okay. Agreed.
|
|
[63]
Item 3.4: P-04-565, ‘Revive Disused Railway Lines for
Leisure’. This petition was submitted by Albert Fox, and was
first considered on 17 June 2014. It had the support of 14
signatures. We recall Mr Fox’s aspirations to harness these
particular disused railway lines for leisure activities, and in the
petition he cites a whole range of possible uses that they could
have. We last considered this on 2 June and agreed to await
comments from Mr Fox as lead petitioner on comments both from the
Minister and from Sustrans. We’ve now got replies indicating
that their priority, as the Government, and Sustrans, was for
active travel routes to be used for everyday journeys, rather than
those for tourism. We’ve received petitioner comments on that
also in our public papers. I’m not clear that we can do a
whole lot more on this matter, usefully, but there is the
possibility of linking up Mr Fox with Sustrans.
|
|
[64]
Bethan Jenkins: Also, I’m part of the campaign to
reopen the Rhondda tunnel between Blaen-cwm and Blaengwynfi, and,
at the moment, there’s work by Sustrans to look
at—it’s not particularly on the Rhondda tunnel but on
feasibility in this regard across Wales. So, I wouldn’t want
to close the petition until we get that piece of work done by
Sustrans, because this might inform the petition further. Also,
just to tell the petitioner that it’s not actually the Welsh
Government that owns these tunnels, it’s the highways
department in England.
|
|
[65]
William Powell:
That’s the legacy body going
way back from—
|
|
[66]
Bethan Jenkins:
Yeah, it’s a heritage body as
part of the heritage railways, as part of the transport department
for England. I’ve written to the UK Government asking for
them to transfer the ownership of the Rhondda tunnel to the Welsh
Government.
|
|
[67]
William Powell:
With what response?
|
|
[68]
Bethan Jenkins:
The UK Government want to do it, but
Edwina Hart, as Minister, is minded to wait for the Sustrans
review. She says she needs compelling evidence from the Sustrans
review first. So, if it’s possible—obviously, I’m
declaring an interest in this regard—to keep it open just so
that we at least have an idea as to whether this one is viable, so
that it could potentially set the way for future tunnels being
transferred over.
|
|
[69]
William Powell:
Yes, it could be a pilot project, in
a sense, couldn’t it?
|
|
[70]
Bethan Jenkins:
Yeah. I mean, there are hundreds of
tunnels that are not being utilised, but they’re being
maintained only for safety reasons at the moment.
|
|
[71]
William Powell:
Okay. That’s interesting. Are
colleagues happy with that? Jeff Cuthbert.
|
|
[72]
Jeff Cuthbert:
I’ve got no objection in
principle to the issues that they’re calling for. I take the
point about ownership, however, in south-east Wales, of course,
many of these former lines could well be used for the new metro.
So, it may not be quite as clear cut. There are other
priorities.
|
|
[73]
William Powell: Understood. Yes, that’s a very good
point. So, if colleagues are happy with that approach. Do we have a
timeline for this piece of work? I suppose Sustrans are going to be
the gatekeepers—
|
|
[74]
Bethan Jenkins: Yes, but it’s being done—the
Minister has asked them to do it, so it’ll go back to her.
Perhaps we could write to the Minister saying, ‘We are aware
of your work in relation to the call by the Rhondda Tunnel Society.
Could you keep us, as a committee, in the loop with when that study
will be completed?’
|
|
[75]
William Powell: That would be good, because that would guide
us as to whether or not it’s feasible to keep this open for
the duration or otherwise. But I think we should make sure that Mr
Fox is aware of this, because it seems to be exactly the kind of
initiative that he’s seeking support.
|
|
[76]
Bethan Jenkins: He might want to contact the UK Government
separately.
|
|
[77]
William Powell: Yes, absolutely. He might be interested in a
site visit or goodness knows what. Yeas, absolutely. Good.
|
|
[78]
Agenda item 3.5 is P-04-540, ‘Stop Sexism In Domestic
Abuse’. This petition was submitted by Healing Men and was
first considered on 11 March 2014, having collected 238 signatures.
You’ll recall the sentiments underlying the petition and the
call for a reappraisal of the way in which domestic abuse is
viewed. We’ve been wrestling with this for some time. The
committee last considered the petition on 20 October and we agreed
to await the views of the petitioner, Mr Stott, before considering
whether to close the petition. We’ve now got that response
and that is in the public papers. It’s not quite clear
whether there is more of a journey to travel on this one, but
I’d appreciate colleagues’ thoughts. I believe Joyce
Watson, our absent colleague, has engaged quite robustly with the
issue, as well. Russell George.
|
|
[79]
Russell George: I think, Chair, sometimes, we have to just
remember what our petition is about. It’s not for us to make
decisions in this committee. Our committee is about seeing a
democratic process. I think that we’ve probably exhausted
this as best we can. So, as we have—. Over 12 months ago, our
thoughts were that we’d come to the close of this petition.
I’m probably minded that we’ve reached as far as we can
and we should close the petition, but I’m open to other
Members’—
|
|
[80]
William Powell: It has served to air a very important issue
and to, maybe, open up perspectives that some of us or those who
follow our activities wouldn’t have been aware of. Bethan
Jenkins.
|
|
[81]
Bethan Jenkins:
Rwy’n credu y dylem ni
gau’r ddeiseb. Nid yw’n pŵer ni’n
caniatáu i ni orfodi’r Gweinidog i ymateb
i’r hyn mae’r deisebwr yn ei ddweud. Felly, byddwn i’n argymell i’r
deisebwr, os oes materion o fewn ei lythyron i ni ynglŷn
â sut mae’r Llywodraeth yn gwario arian, y dylai drafod
hynny, efallai, gyda’r swyddfa archwilio. Mae’r pethau y mae’n ei ddweud
ynglŷn â sut mae arian yn cael ei rannu yn bwysig iddo
fe, ond nid yw’n rhywbeth rydym ni, fel pwyllgor, yn gallu
gwneud rhywbeth amdano nawr.
|
Bethan Jenkins: I think we should close
the petition. Our powers don’t allow us to compel the
Minister to respond to what the petitioner says. So, I would
recommend to the petitioner that, if there are matters within his
letters to us about how the Government spends money, then he should
discuss that with the audit office. There are things that he says
about how money is being allocated, and those issues are important
to him, but it’s not something that we, as a committee, can
do anything about now.
|
|
[82]
Felly, rwy’n credu ein bod wedi
rhoi lot o ystyriaeth i hyn, ac nid wyf am danseilio’r hyn
mae’n ei ddweud, ond nid wyf yn deall sut rŷm ni, nawr,
fel pwyllgor, yn gallu parhau. Rwy’n siŵr y bydd Aelodau’r Cynulliad unigol
yn gallu ymwneud ag ef mewn ffyrdd gwahanol.
|
So, I think we have given a great deal of
consideration to these issues, and not to undermine what he says,
but I don’t understand how we now, as a committee, can
continue. I’m sure that individual Assembly Members can be
involved with this in different ways.
|
|
09:45
|
|
[83]
William Powell: I think that is correct. I think anything
further is beyond our remit. I think we have, in fairness to
ourselves, given this as full an airing as we can from a number of
different angles. Russell George, you want to come back in.
|
|
[84]
Russell George: I suppose, Chair, it’s also that the
petitioner is clearly very frustrated with the Minister. I think he
should be reminded—this isn’t political—that
there’s an election coming up and we don’t know who the
next Government’s going to be. So, I think obviously
there’s an opportunity for this petitioner to get involved in
the campaign, whichever way his politics go, and make the points on
his frustrations with the Minister, if that’s what his view
is.
|
|
[85]
William Powell: Absolutely, and there’s a whole range
of possible different policy offers that could be coming up the
track from different parties contesting the election. Absolutely;
very good. I think that’s a good point to make and I think we
have unanimity that we should close the petition, writing to Mr
Stott and thanking him and his campaign group for engaging with the
petitions process.
|
|
[86]
Moving now to agenda item 3.6: P-04-519, ‘Abolition of Park
Homes Sales Commission’. This petition was submitted by
Caerwnon Park Residents Association. It was first considered by us,
as a committee, on 10 December 2013 and it’s this niche but
important issue around a commission in the case of the sale of park
homes. Of course, we’re conscious of the new piece of
legislation that was piloted through the Assembly by my colleague,
Peter Black.
|
|
[87]
We last considered this petition on 2 June, when a response from
the Minister indicated that a research proposal was being developed
to look at the economics of the wider park home industry, which
would gather information, both from owners and residents. In the
light of that, we agreed to await comments from the petitioner on
that correspondence. We’ve now got a response and it’s
clear that those comments are in the public papers. There’s
evidently disappointment from the residents’ association that
this research will not be forthcoming until July next year.
Possibly it’s a detailed and comprehensive piece of work.
Nevertheless, it does seem to be quite a long time frame.
We’ve got a couple of options here and I’d
appreciate—. Perhaps I’m a little close to the issue,
given the interests by my party colleagues—Peter Black, and
Kirsty Williams as the constituency Member here. I’d very
much appreciate your views, colleagues, on how best to proceed. We
could wait, but on the other hand, there’s no
likelihood—
|
|
[88]
Bethan Jenkins:
Nid wyf yn gwybod beth yw’r
rheolau ar argymell cadw deiseb ar agor a bod y pwyllgor newydd yn
ei drafod, achos ar hyn o bryd, nid ydym yn gwybod pa bwyllgorau
fydd yn bodoli ar ôl etholiad y Cynulliad y tro nesaf. Dim i
ddweud na fydd Pwyllgor Deisebau, ond nid ydym yn gwybod y
set-up, felly ni fyddwn yn hoffi argymell hynny. Rwy’n
credu ein bod ni wedi gwneud cymaint ag y gallwn, ond mae’r
adolygiad yn digwydd ar ôl yr etholiad, felly, nid wyf yn
siŵr beth i’w gynnig—ei gadw ar agor neu ei gau ac
wedyn gofyn iddyn nhw roi deiseb newydd i mewn.
|
Bethan Jenkins: I don’t know what
the rules are regarding keeping a petition open and for it to be
discussed by the new committee, because at the moment, we
don’t know which committees will exist after the next
Assembly election. That is not to say that there won’t be a
Petitions Committee, but we don’t know what the set-up will
be, so I wouldn’t like to recommend that. I think we’ve
done as much as we can, but the review is happening after the
election, so I’m not sure what to suggest—whether to
keep it open or to close it and then ask them to submit a new
petition after the election.
|
|
[89]
William Powell: It’s a difficult judgment call,
isn’t it? Russell George.
|
|
[90]
Russell George: I think it’s right—we
don’t know what’s going to happen after the next
election with this committee, but I think we could just resolve to
keep the petition open.
|
|
[91]
William Powell: We can’t bind the hands of any future
members of this committee.
|
|
[92]
Russell George: No. Why don’t we just keep the
petition open at the current time?
|
|
[93]
William Powell: That’s sending a message, I suppose,
isn’t it? Because the piece of work is ongoing, clearly. Jeff
Cuthbert.
|
|
[94]
Jeff Cuthbert: My only view was that, in light of—and
it’s not a precedent, I realise that—what we agreed in
terms of the superfast Cymru issue, which, as it was being pursued
by the local AM, perhaps we should leave it there. I don’t
know the details of all this, but I can’t see any real
justification for doing anything differently.
|
|
[95]
William Powell: So, a call for consistency there.
|
|
[96]
Russell George: I would just keep it open for now, with no
further action.
|
|
[97]
Jeff Cuthbert: I don’t feel strongly on this.
|
|
[98]
William Powell: Okay. It’s useful to have the appeal
for consistency. It often comes from that chair, so that’s
good.
|
|
[99]
Bethan Jenkins: Perhaps we can think about that in terms of
how any new committee would look, in terms of consistency.
|
|
[100]
William Powell: Absolutely. I think we’re also
looking, a little later on in the agenda, at issues around the
review of the process. So, that maybe is another little strand that
we need to give thought to. Good.
|
|
[101]
Agenda item 3.7: P-04-537, ‘Planting Trees to Reduce
Flooding’. The petition was submitted by Coed Cadw and was
first considered by us on 18 February 2014 with the support of
2,708 signatures. We last considered this on 14 July of this year,
in the last meeting before summer recess, and agreed to await the
petitioner’s views on correspondence received from the
Minister. We’ve now got a response, and the letter is in the
public papers, as colleagues will have seen. I think, clearly,
there is the request from Coed Cadw to write to the Minister,
putting a series of questions. I think, probably, that’s the
best way to pursue this.
|
|
[102]
Bethan Jenkins: Yes.
|
|
[103]
William Powell: Okay. Good.
|
|
[104]
Agenda item 3.8: P-04-581, ‘Opposition to Cuts in Provision
for Learners of English as an Additional Language’. The
petition was submitted by Helen Myers and was first considered by
us on 23 September 2014. It has the support of 37 signatures.
Colleagues will recall the issues that were of concern, in terms of
the reduction of the minority ethnic achievement grant and the
impact it would have, disproportionately, on members of the ethnic
minority community. We last considered this, again, at the same
meeting on 14 July and agreed to await the petitioner’s
comments on the ministerial correspondence. We’ve now got
that and you can see the petitioner’s response indicates that
the whole issue has been overtaken by events, really. So, I think,
probably, in the light of that, we should take the opportunity to
write and thank them for engaging with us, but to close the
petition. Happy? Yes.
|
|
[105]
Agenda item 3.9—the last update on this section of our
agenda—is P-04-516, ‘Make Political Science Compulsory
in Education’. This petition was submitted by Mark Griffiths
and was first considered by us on 26 November 2013. It has the
support of 12 signatures. We last considered it back in March of
this year, on 24 March, when we agreed to write to the petitioner
asking whether he had any comments on Professor Donaldson’s
report or, indeed, on the related ministerial statement of 4 March.
We’ve got a response from the petitioner, and it seems to me,
again, that we’ve—
|
|
[106]
Bethan Jenkins: I just wanted to ask whether we—I
can’t remember—whether we’d asked in relation to
Donaldson of the Minister—you know, he’s setting up
these groups, these task and finish groups—whether there was
a strand on political education that the petitioner could be either
involved in or could be kept abreast of what the work of the group
is doing, so that we could close, but on that basis. I thought
I’d asked, but I may have just dreamt it.
|
|
[107]
William Powell: I don’t recall us asking that specific
question or—
|
|
[108]
Mr George: I don’t recall.
|
|
[109]
Bethan Jenkins: Can we do that, then? We’re minded to
close, but to—
|
|
[110]
William Powell: And in doing so, make that point and see if
we can get a response on it, because I don’t recall us going
down that—
|
|
[111]
Bethan Jenkins: It would be useful for me to know, because
people come to me—young people—all the time saying that
they want more political education. So, if I know that
there’s going to be a strand of the task and finish group
looking into it, for Donaldson, then I think that’s something
we could all use as AMs anyway, to encourage people to get involved
in the process.
|
|
[112]
William Powell: Absolutely, that’s right. Our
education service, I think, is busy organising the special
conference on that theme for February of this year. I saw some
correspondence relating to that. But that would be a useful
question to ask, while moving to close the petition, because I
think we’ve got to respect the observations of the lead
petitioner, Mr Griffiths. Good. Okay.
|
|
09:54
|
|
Cynnig o dan Reol Sefydlog 17.42 i Benderfynu
Gwahardd y Cyhoedd o’r Cyfarfod
Motion under Standing Order 17.42 to Resolve to Exclude the Public
from the Meeting
|
|
Cynnig:
|
Motion:
|
|
bod y pwyllgor yn penderfynu gwahardd y cyhoedd
o’r cyfarfod ar gyfer eitemau 5 a 6, yn unol â Rheol
Sefydlog 17.42(vi).
|
that the committee
resolves to exclude the public from the meeting for items 5 and 6,
in accordance with Standing Order 17.42(vi).
|
|
Cynigiwyd y cynnig.
Motion moved.
|
|
Derbyniwyd y cynnig.
Motion agreed.
|
|
[113]
William Powell: I now propose that we have a brief,
five-minute recess before moving to the remainder of the
agenda.
|
|
Daeth rhan gyhoeddus y
cyfarfod i ben am 09:54.
The public part of the meeting ended at 09:54.
|
|
Ailymgynullodd y pwyllgor
yn gyhoeddus am 10.29.
The committee reconvened in public at 10.29.
|
|
Sesiwn
Dystiolaeth—P-04-522 Asbestos mewn Ysgolion
Evidence Session—P-04-522 Asbestos in Schools
|
|
[114]
William Powell: Bore da. We move now to agenda item 7, our
evidence session on petition P-04-522, ‘Asbestos in
Schools’. The petition was submitted by Cenric Clement-Evans. It was first considered by this
committee on 10 December 2013 and has the support of 448
signatures. It’s a great pleasure to welcome the Minister for
Education and Skills, Huw Lewis, and your colleague Joanne
Larner this morning. I wonder if you could just introduce yourself,
please, for levels, and then, if we can move straight into
questions, that would be great.
|
|
[115]
The Minister for Education and Skills (Huw Lewis): Okay. My
name is Huw Lewis, and I’m the Minister for Education and
Skills.
|
|
[116]
Ms Larner: My name is Jo Larner. I’m acting programme
director for the twenty-first century schools and education
programme.
|
|
10:30
|
|
[117]
William Powell: Excellent. Okay. Russell George, I believe
you wanted to kick off.
|
|
[118]
Russell George: Thank you, Chair. Can I just ask in general,
first of all, what you believe are your responsibilities, and the
Welsh Government’s responsibilities, with regard to asbestos
in schools? In what ways do you support duty holders in
schools?
|
|
[119]
Huw Lewis: Well, thank you, Chair, and thank you, Russell,
for the question. In part, you’ve answered your own question
in some regard. Our role is primarily to support the duty holder.
It’s also, of course, to be aware of developments that might
be happening elsewhere in the UK and respond accordingly, and to
ensure that current guidance is being adhered to. We regularly
review that guidance. The current iteration was published in the
spring of 2014, if I remember rightly. We periodically remind the
duty holders of their responsibilities in regard to the management
and removal of asbestos. We are, of course—and it’s
worth mentioning this—undertaking a very large and ambitious
capital programme across our school estate, which supports duty
holders in either new build, which, of course, doesn’t by
definition contain any banned asbestos, and the management of,
and/or removal of asbestos in terms of refurbishment. So, there is
a rolling programme of removing this stuff from the environment
around children.
|
|
[120]
Russell George: Do you feel that there is a more prominent
role that the Welsh Government could play in providing a strategic
direction?
|
|
[121]
Huw Lewis: Well, the strategic direction is really a matter
for the Health and Safety Executive, which is the body charged with
the enforcement of the legislation of health and safety law around
asbestos. It’s hard to interpret what you might mean by
prominence. We are continually revising, updating and ensuring that
we do have the very best information and supply the very best
information to duty holders. For instance, Joanne and her
colleagues now are working very closely with colleagues across the
border in England, in terms of the review that has gone on in
England, to ensure that we have all the information that that
review can supply to us so that we’re satisfied that
everything we do in Wales is the best it possibly can be.
|
|
[122]
Russell George: I asked the question of whether there is a
more prominent role, and you said, ‘Well, that’s a
matter for the HSE’, but there is some guidance that you are
already providing to schools.
|
|
[123]
Huw Lewis: Yes.
|
|
[124]
Russell George: So, where is the balance between it being
your responsibility and the HSE’s responsibility?
Where’s that point?
|
|
[125]
Huw Lewis: Well, the duties are very clear. The management
of asbestos is the duty and business of the duty
holders—that’s local authorities, a diocese, or a board
of governors, depending on the status of the school. HSE then is
the England-and-Wales body charged with the enforcement of the
legislation. Our role in Welsh Government is an enabling role, I
suppose, and one of ensuring that information that’s
available is up to date, that it’s as rigorous as it can
possibly be, in terms of guidance, and that we’re on top of
any developments in the field that might lead us to the conclusion
that we need to tighten up procedures in any particular area.
|
|
[126]
Russell George: So, my final question would be, in the roles
that you have identified as your responsibilities, rather than the
HSE’s, is there anything that you can do, do you feel, to be
more proactive in supporting a strategic direction in the areas
that you are specifically responsible for?
|
|
[127]
Huw Lewis: No. My conclusion was, given the information and
the law as it stands, I don’t see that there’s much
more that the Welsh Government could be doing.
|
|
[128]
William Powell: Minister, as you’re aware, in recent
years there have been some particularly high-profile examples, and
Cwmcarn High School obviously comes to mind. Teacher representative
trade unions in Wales have been taking quite a high-profile role in
campaigning on this issue on behalf of their members, but are you
aware of any surge in demand from parents or, indeed, school staff
to be informed of the presence of asbestos in their schools?
|
|
[129]
Huw Lewis: No. Aside from this current petition, I’m
not aware of any real upsurge or notable quantity of requests for
information or voicing of concerns coming from parents, teachers or
other organisations.
|
|
[130]
William Powell: Okay, thank you for that. Up to this point,
you’ve resisted calls, I think it’s fair to say, for
information on asbestos to be made available online. What do you
consider would be the benefits and drawbacks of such an
initiative?
|
|
[131]
Huw Lewis: The reason we haven’t gone down that path
is that I find it difficult to see what the benefits might be. It
is, of course, perfectly in order for anyone with an interest to
ask a school or local authority for information on the current
state of play as regards the asbestos management plan for that
school. It’s worth bearing in mind also that it’s not
just schools that contain asbestos; right across the public realm
and, indeed, the domestic realm, we spent 30 years building this
stuff into our buildings, and it’s ubiquitous—this
stuff is all around us all the time, unless we’re spending
all our time in very modern buildings.
|
|
[132]
As regards the school estate, as I say, that information is there
and available on demand. I would be wary of placing onerous duties
on local authorities to proactively publish details on each and
every school. It would be quite an enormous job, and obviously it
would have to be kept up to date if it were to be reliable and,
again, there would be a burden on local authorities in that
regard.
|
|
[133]
William Powell: Thank you. Jeff Cuthbert, on this point?
|
|
[134]
Jeff Cuthbert: On this point, thank you. You’re quite
right that, in the 1970s, we built almost everything with asbestos;
it’s present everywhere. But asbestos becomes a problem when
it’s disturbed. So, do you think there’s any scope in
terms of giving information to parents and other interested people
to forewarn people of significant remediation works in school where
it is a possibility that asbestos could be disturbed?
|
|
[135]
Huw Lewis: As I say, the duty holder has a responsibility to
have a management plan in place, and, of course, that plan would be
utilised if, for instance, refurbishment work was to be undertaken
in a school. Those are the steps and actions that the local
authority might take as it’s going through that building
work. Whether that information should be publically available on
request from members of the public—I don’t know,
Joanne, if you want to come in on this one.
|
|
[136]
Ms Larner: Yes, of course. There are two types of review you
can do with asbestos. One is a normal, day-to-day management of
asbestos review, and the second is a specific review that’s
used if you’re going to refurbish a property. That is then
incorporated into the plan. And I think it’s very clear, in
terms of our guidance, what we tell the duty holders and what they
have to do under law is to inform those who might disturb asbestos
and those who are going to be working with it, and ensure that
appropriate people are put in place to remove it safely.
|
|
[137]
Jeff Cuthbert: Thank you.
|
|
[138]
William Powell: Bethan Jenkins.
|
|
[139]
Bethan Jenkins: I just wanted to come back to the issue with
regard to the responsibility, because the HSE has said that
regulations do not include any requirement to provide information
to parents or online, and the Welsh Government could decide to do
this. So, I just wonder why, as Minister, you decide not to do
this, given the fact that there have been high-profile cases in
Wales and the fact that Wales is not included in the steering group
on a UK level; in fact, they’re only looking at English
schools. So, how do we know that there will be a read-through to
Wales without Wales being a clear part of that discussion at the
moment?
|
|
[140]
Huw Lewis: To answer the final part of your question first,
we may not be a part of the English steering group, but we have our
own working group and we do observe on the English working group.
We have interplay between officials in terms of making sure that
anything that goes on in England we’re absolutely satisfied
here in Wales that we’re doing something that is at least as
rigorous in terms of those issues.
|
|
[141]
In terms of the proactivity around information, I can only repeat
my previous point, really: this would be a very onerous burden in
terms of public buildings. It would be hard to argue, for instance,
that it should be just confined to schools, in my view. If we were
to head down that path, we’d have to consider very carefully
what the worth of it would be. As Jeff Cuthbert has mentioned, we
know that asbestos, when undisturbed, is safe, and so the benefits
of some kind of rolling register of what’s
happening—and it would have to be a live register, because of
course refurbishment and rebuilding are going on
continually—the maintenance of that, in terms of keeping it
up to date, would be quite an onerous job for local authorities to
undertake.
|
|
[142]
Bethan Jenkins: So, in relation to the steering group,
you’re keeping a watching brief on it. Do you know,
therefore, when that finalises its work, whether you would be
adopting the recommendations in full, or whether you would be
asking your working group to adapt any of them so that they
correspond to Wales? Can you give us an idea as to what you would
be doing with that work in relation to Wales, therefore?
|
|
[143]
Huw Lewis: Well, I’ll bring Joanne in in a second, but
the recommendations were for England, and we reviewed those,
obviously, as they came forward, and there wasn’t anything
within those recommendations that brought anything new to the
debate, in my view. There is the issue of—. Well, they are
going ahead with sampling in England of air quality within schools.
We’ll keep a very close eye on that. Our understanding is
that it’ll be a limited sampling amongst a selection of
school environments, beginning next year. We’ll keep a very
close eye on that, obviously, to see if it informs the debate
further, and to see if there are any other actions or updates of
guidance that we need to make. Was there anything that you wanted
to add?
|
|
[144]
Ms Larner: I just think that we have very carefully looked
at their review, we have compared it to Wales, and the things that
stood out were that they would continue to fund asbestos in schools
removal, as we do through our twenty-first century schools
programme; they would update their guidance, and our guidance is
updated and compares very favourably to that of England; and the
two other areas, which the Minister referred to, were in terms of
their sampling. We’re actually working with them to
understand what they’re going to do, and we’re using
our working group to ensure that we have a Welsh perspective on
what we should do in Wales.
|
|
[145]
Bethan Jenkins: I just want to finish on the comment the
Minister made with regard to there not being the demand from people
about having access to information. In my mind, that’s quite
worrying, because I don’t think always parents or guardians
would be potentially aware of what asbestos is, what it does, and
its effects. For me, I would rather that the school, or the duty
holder, be more proactive in at least advising on what it is and
the potential dangers, so that if something did happen, or if the
school were changed in any way, they’d be fully aware of the
situation. So, I just wanted to ask whether you would commit to
what might be a desktop study of how the local authorities or
schools are communicating with the parents or the guardians of
children, so that we would know across Wales if there’s a
trend, or if they’re not communicating and just waiting for
people to ask them questions, so that we can at least have an
understanding as to how it’s operating currently in Wales.
For me, it’s a bit concerning that it’s all on demand
when some people will not know that that’s a question they
need to be asking of the school.
|
|
[146]
Huw Lewis: Well, if such a desktop survey were to be done,
it would pretty much consist of the management plans that are
currently in place under the auspices of local authorities and are
available to the public. It would be hard to see—. Those
things have got a statutory underpinning. By necessity, they are
rigorous and should be up to date, and they’re the things
that should be consulted if any kind of disturbance of asbestos is
about to be undertaken through building work or refurbishment. So,
the information is there. The question around proactivity and the
publishing of this information on a regular basis is perhaps where
we part company. To my mind, it doesn’t add to public safety
in any way in particular, but it would certainly add a tremendous
bureaucratic burden onto local authorities.
|
|
[147]
William Powell: Minister, following up on that last question
from Bethan Jenkins, you often refer to the crucial role that
governors play in terms of the governance and forward planning of
schools.
|
|
10:45
|
|
[148]
Is it the case that asbestos awareness currently constitutes a
component of initial governor training, when they first are
recruited as governors? I’m a governor myself and although I
may not be up to date in this regard, I don’t believe that
I’ve had any specific guidance on this, although the issue
does arise from time to time in the two governing bodies to which I
belong.
|
|
[149]
Huw Lewis: I’ll need to get back to you on that,
Chair. I would have assumed that it would be part of the general
health and safety training that governors should embark upon,
periodically obviously.
|
|
[150]
William Powell: In each case, there is a dedicated governor
for that, so it may be that there’s additional training made
available for the person who holds that portfolio, but it’s
something I’m not quite aware of.
|
|
[151]
Huw Lewis: No; I’ll write to you with details on that
one. Of course, some governing bodies have more onerous
responsibilities than others, obviously, in terms of the being
themselves—
|
|
[152]
William Powell: Depending on the nature of the estate that
they’re managing.
|
|
[153]
Huw Lewis: Yes; and they could be themselves the duty
holders.
|
|
[154]
William Powell: Thank you for that. A final question from me
on this one: following the Committee on Carcinogenicity of
Chemicals in Food, Consumer Products and the Environment’s
report on the vulnerability of children to exposure to asbestos,
have you given any consideration to undertaking a formal
consultation on the issue of asbestos in schools, with a view to
adapting policy?
|
|
[155]
Huw Lewis: Well, as I said, we regularly review our
guidance. The last iteration was very recent—in the spring of
2014—and we are now alive to the developments in England, and
will take any lessons that emerge from the English sampling survey,
for instance. We are satisfied that our guidance is every bit as
good as that across the border, and that has been very recently
looked at, as you know. So, I believe we are up to date, but always
alert to the possibilities that more may be learned about the
situation that could improve guidance or toughen up the regulations
around the problem.
|
|
[156]
William Powell: Excellent. Minister, thank you very much
for—
|
|
[157]
Bethan Jenkins: I just wondered if we could have
details—and perhaps they are in the public domain—of
the people who are on the working group for you.
|
|
[158]
Huw Lewis: Yes, of course.
|
|
[159]
Bethan Jenkins: To understand their terms of reference and
the work that they do in terms of advising you, so that we can
understand better.
|
|
[160]
Huw Lewis: Absolutely. Of course. I’m unaware of the
names—and I can get you the names—but we have the NHS,
the Health and Safety Executive, Public Health Wales, and Welsh
Government. Is that everyone?
|
|
[161]
Ms Larner: Yes.
|
|
[162]
Huw Lewis: That’s the lot. But, obviously, there will
be—
|
|
[163]
Bethan Jenkins: Do they publicly produce their minutes or
their agenda items?
|
|
[164]
Ms Larner: We will be. We’ve established membership of
the group. The group will be meeting in January or February next
year, because that’s straight after the English steering
group, so we can then—
|
|
[165]
Bethan Jenkins: So, this is a new group, is it?
|
|
[166]
Ms Larner: The group had a first meeting back in June or
July last year, following the review that came out. We’ve now
established it formally as a working group, because we felt it was
of value to Wales.
|
|
[167]
Bethan Jenkins: How have you decided upon the membership of
that group, then?
|
|
[168]
Ms Larner: These are the Welsh bodies that are most
appropriate to represent the views of Wales, and—
|
|
[169]
Bethan Jenkins: And are there trade unions or trade union
bodies on that group?
|
|
[170]
Ms Larner: We’ve kept it as being officials from HSE,
NHS Wales, Welsh Government and Public Health Wales at present.
|
|
[171]
Bethan Jenkins: But would you be open to considering wider
membership of the group?
|
|
[172]
Huw Lewis: If there were usefulness in terms of the role of
the steering group. What the group is there to do at the moment is
to reassure Welsh Government, and by extension the Welsh public,
that we are as up to date as we can possibly be and that there is
no shortfall in terms of the way that we approach this very serious
issue in Wales, as compared to how it may be approached elsewhere
in the UK or further afield.
|
|
[173]
Bethan Jenkins: Okay; thanks.
|
|
[174]
William Powell: Minister, I’m particularly pleased
that we have such a full public gallery, including young people
from schools in Wales, and also our lead petitioner this morning
who has brought this matter to our attention. Thank you very much
indeed for coming this morning and to your colleague Jo Larner for
having contributed so fully to our discussion of this petition.
Thank you very much indeed.
|
|
[175]
Huw Lewis: You’re very welcome, Chair. Thank you.
|
|
[176]
Bethan Jenkins: Are we considering this petition now?
|
|
[177]
William Powell: We have a couple of moments in which to
consider our next steps.
|
|
10:49
|
|
Cynnig o dan Reol Sefydlog 17.42 i Benderfynu
Gwahardd y Cyhoedd o’r Cyfarfod
Motion under Standing Order 17.42 to Resolve to Exclude the Public
from the Meeting
|
|
Cynnig:
|
Motion:
|
|
bod y pwyllgor yn penderfynu gwahardd y cyhoedd o
weddill y cyfarfod yn unol â Rheol Sefydlog 17.42.
|
that the committee
resolves to exclude the public from the remainder of the meeting in
accordance with Standing Order 17.42.
|
|
Cynigiwyd y
cynnig.
Motion moved.
|
|
|
[178]
William Powell: I resolve, in that context, that we move to
private session to consider giving weight to the evidence
we’ve just received. There are no objections.
|
|
Derbyniwyd y cynnig.
Motion agreed.
|
|
Daeth rhan gyhoeddus y cyfarfod i ben am 10:49.
The public part of the meeting ended at 10:49.
|
|
|
|