Appendix: Government Response
The House of Commons Welsh Affairs Select Committee
published its report 'Cross-border provision of public services
for Wales: follow up' on 11 March 2010. This followed individual
reports on the areas of health, transport and further and higher
education, which were published in the 2008-09 session. The coalition
Government welcomes the Committee's follow-up report into these
areas. This memorandum sets out the Government's response to
the report.
The Government is actively engaging with devolution,
and we will continue to work to strengthen the relationship with
both the Welsh Assembly Government and the National Assembly for
Wales. The public have the right to expect the institutions that
represent them to work together in their interests, and the Government
will make every effort to do this. The Government is committed
to the Respect Agenda, and encourage participation to this end
by the National Assembly for Wales and Welsh Assembly Government
to ensure we achieve what is best for Wales, and the UK as a whole.
As matters of higher and further education, health
and transport are devolved in Wales, it is particularly important
that both institutions encourage cooperation to ensure that those
living in the border areas, who may use public services in both
England and Wales, are not disadvantaged by their geography.
The Secretary of State for Wales and the Wales Office
have a key role in encouraging those Departments that are responsible
for providing public services in Wales and England to work together
in those cross-border areas. One of the tests of devolution must
be the effect on the citizen. We will work to try to ensure that
none are disadvantaged and the Secretary of State for Wales has
committed to seek to ensure that cross-border services work effectively
for people on both sides of the border.
The Committee had identified some of these areas
in their previous reports, and the Government is pleased to note
the progress that the Committee has acknowledged. However, the
Government will continue to make efforts to work with the devolved
institutions in Wales to ensure that no-one misses out on the
high quality services they should expect because they are caught
between two different systems.
The Government's response to this report is wide
ranging, and includes contributions from the Department for Business,
Innovation and Skills (BIS), Department of Health (DH), Department
for Transport (DfT) and the Wales Office.
________________________________________________________________________
Further and Higher Education
1. The Welsh Assembly Government has assured us
that it is fully involved in the Sector Skills Council relicensing
process and that it is confident that a smaller number of Councils
can fulfil the existing remit. The Department for Business, Innovation
and Skills, the Welsh Assembly Government and the UK Commission
for Employment and Skills must ensure that the new structures
enable Sector Skills Councils to give due regard to territorial
differences in skills policies and in the configurations and weightings
of different sectors. (Paragraph 17)
The previous Government announced their intention
to substantially reduce the number of Sector Skills Councils
(SSCs). John Hayes, as Minister with responsibility
for SSCs, believes that the number of SSCs should
be determined by employers, taking account of the structure of
the economy and the need to use resources effectively. Mr Hayes
is hoping to meet with Ministers from Scotland, Wales and Northern
Ireland to discuss their views on the reform of SSCs. The
SSC Reform and Relicensing Working Group (including officials
from BIS, the devolved administrations and the UK Commission)
has now been renamed as the SSC Policy and Reform Working
Group. This group will work with Ministers to agree the future reform
of SSCs and consider proposals from SSCs on their merger, or other
such proposals as they are put forward, to ensure adequate
coverage across the whole of the United Kingdom.
2. The amount of consultation and communication
between the Welsh Assembly Government and the Department for Business,
Innovation and Skills has clearly increased, and both bodies appear
satisfied that their respective higher education policies take
appropriate account of cross-border issues. This level of engagement
must continue, particularly in relation to the English review
of student fees. We welcome the fact that the Minister is open
to discussing the co-ordination of higher education policy at
a Joint Ministerial Committee meeting and suggest that now is
the time to do this, given the recent publication of the Welsh
and the English higher education strategies. (Paragraph 27)
3. Communications and consultation between the
Welsh Assembly Government and the Department for Business, Innovation
and Skills appear to have improved since the assessment we made
just over a year ago. We wait to see whether this will result
in better co-ordinated policies in the future. We believe that
there is a need for a clear framework for routinely assessing
and comparing the impact of new policies in each of the four nations.
(Paragraph 44)
4. Higher education is in a period of change both
in Wales and England. Welsh higher education institutions already
receive a lower level of funding than those in England and the
Department for Business, Innovation and Skills has a responsibility
to ensure that Wales does not lose out even more from the changed
focus of research priorities described in Higher Ambitions. (Paragraph
45)
The coalition Government notes the Committee's comments.
BIS ministers are still considering these issues in the round
and will write to the Committee in due course.
5. In our previous Report, we concluded that Research
Councils should not just follow excellence, but must also foster
it, and recommend that funds be made available at a UK level to
support the development of research capacity in economically deprived
areas of the four nations. The Government rejected this recommendation,
but nevertheless included in its strategy Higher Ambitions a proposal
to concentrate research funds in centres which could demonstrate
a track record of economic impact. This appears to re-introduce
a linkage with economic development policy, which is for the most
part a devolved policy area. We ask the Department for Business,
Innovation and Skills to explain how this criterion will be reconciled
with the criterion of academic excellence, and how it will be
integrated with the economic development priorities of the devolved
administrations. The current systems for awarding funding already
favour established institutions with a proven track record rather
than ones with future potential, and the proposal to concentrate
research funds appears likely further to limit the opportunities
for Welsh higher education institutions to maintain and develop
their research capabilities. Wales is starting from behind and
looks likely to end up with even less. (Paragraph 39)
6. Some of the responsibilities of the Department
for Business, Innovation and Skills are UK-wide and others relate
only to England. The research proposals in Higher Ambitions are
clearly written from an English perspective and make no reference
to the other nations, even though the research remit of the Department
for Business, Innovation and Skills is UK-wide. We do not believe
that the Department properly considered devolution issues when
developing this strategy. We recommend that the Department for
Business, Innovation and Skills provide further details as to
how it intends to apply the research funding proposals to the
four nations. This information should be provided to the Committee
and the matter also needs to be pursued via both ministerial and
officials' meetings. (Paragraph 40)
The Coalition Government welcome the Committee's
recommendations as a helpful contribution to the debate about
the provision of public services.
Government science policy remains committed to ensuring
that public funding of research at a national level, through
the Research Councils and funding bodies, is dedicated to supporting
excellent research throughout the UK. The 'excellence principle'
is fundamental to safeguarding the international standing and
scientific credibility of the UK science and research and supporting
an excellent, diverse, expanding and dynamic science base, providing
value for money for public investment. The Research Councils
fund research on a UK-wide basis, based on excellence
as assessed by peer review. Higher Education funding bodies
for England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland are responsible
for distributing Quality Related research funding to their respective
higher education institutions.
Decisions on QR funding for higher education institutions
in Wales are the responsibility of the Higher Education Funding
Council for Wales, subject to direction from the Welsh Assembly Government (WAG). This would
include any approach to research concentration in higher
education institutions in Wales. "For Our Future",
the WAG Higher Education action plan, sets out their proposals
to "Increase the impact of university research, through
targeting support on areas of strength and national priority,
and promoting collaboration" and the WAG thinking on
a regional dimension to the planning and delivery of higher
education.
It would not be appropriate, as suggested in paragraph
39 of the Committee's Report, to equate the intention to
assess the economic impact arising from excellent research with
"economic development policy". This is not the case. The
Government recognises that scientific excellence capacity should
be and is being translated into economic and social benefits
for the UK. The Higher Education Funding Council for England
is developing the Research Excellence Framework on behalf of,
and in consultation, with all the UK Higher Education Funding
Councils including Wales, with the aim that this assessment should
take better account of the benefits which excellent research provides
for the economy and society. Higher Education Funding Council
for Wales and the WAG will be responsible for how the assessment
of research in higher education institutions produced by the Research
Excellence Framework is used to inform the Quality Related funding
allocations in Wales. The funding of research on a UK-wide basis
on an excellence criterion based on peer review would not be changed
by the inclusion of an explicit economic impact element.
Where there is UK-wide responsibility, there are
a range of mechanisms for UK wide involvement and strategic planning.
For example, the Research Base Funders Forum, which has representatives
from Administrations and Funding Councils in the four countries
of the UK, is well established and informs priorities and planning
at strategic level. Ministers in the former Department for
Innovation, Universities and Skills agreed to establish more formal
arrangements for bi-lateral and quadrilateral meetings with Ministers
in the Devolved Administrations on this matter, and BIS Ministers are
willing to continue these commitments. There is always
scope for better sharing of information when producing UK
policy and BIS Ministers remain keen to consider how
they can work more effectively together with devolved
administrations.
Health
7. The revised cross-border health protocol and
accompanying financial transfer from England to Wales has resolved
most of the outstanding disputes with regard to the commissioning
and funding of hospital care in England for patients resident
in Wales. Monitoring of the protocol's implementation will be
a key issue as policy continues to develop and change on both
sides of the border. This should be carried out in a way that
is transparent to providers and patients. We recommend that our
successors return to this matter in the next Parliament. (Paragraph
55)
The revised cross-border protocol has been in place
since April 2009. The protocol, and the financial arrangements
put in place at that time, have been well received on both sides
of the border and, as the Committee suggests, appear to have resolved
many of the significant issues that had been previously identified.
The current protocol is effective from 1 April 2009
to 31 March 2011, when it will be reviewed. This will provide
an opportunity to evaluate its impact and make changes where required,
as the health systems in England and Wales are continuing to evolve.
The Department of Health and the Welsh Assembly Government are
monitoring the supporting funding arrangements prior to agreeing
future funding.
As the Committee is aware, the cross-border protocol
sets out the agreed procedures for the commissioning of NHS services
for those residents living in the four English Primary Care Trusts
(PCTs) or three Welsh Local Health Boards (LHBs) adjacent to the
border. There will be other issues, outside the scope of the protocol,
which will continue to require attention at the appropriate level.
Many of the cross border issues that emerge are local or regional
issues that are resolved locally by the NHS. There will also be
issues arising that may require the attention of officials in
the Department of Health or the Welsh Assembly Government.
8. We welcome the commitments from Ministers in
both England and Wales to evaluate the effects of their policies
across the border and to establish a robust reporting structure
so that local problems can be highlighted and resolved more swiftly
in future. (Paragraph 58)
The coalition Government agrees that new processes
should help resolve problems in the future. The Department of
Health is committed to working with the Welsh Assembly Government
and the NHS on both sides of the border to monitor the implications
of policy changes and to ensure that funding and services reflect
patient flows and needs. This includes issues that may be the
result of unique local circumstances or ongoing changes to health
policy and service delivery in both countries.
There is considerable contact between officials from
the Department of Health and the Welsh Assembly Government on
a range of areas during policy development and implementation.
Where issues emerge there are clear channels so that,
where necessary, issues can be appropriately escalated within
the NHS to PCTs and Strategic Health Authorities (SHAs) and if
required to the Department of Health or Welsh Assembly Government.
The NHS on both sides of the border continues to
work together. In border areas there are a range of contracts
in place between the NHS in England and in Wales to support the
large number of patients who cross the border for treatment. For
example, in the West Midlands, the Powys LHB is part of the local
Cancer Network, in recognition of the reliance on cancer care
services in England. In Bristol and Gloucestershire, where there
are well-established flows of patients across the border, the
NHS has regular communication with the NHS in Wales and formal
contracts and reciprocal arrangements in place.
9. We were pleased to hear examples of excellent
cross-border co-ordination, including in negotiations on the draft
EU Directive on cross-border health care. We consider that the
sharing of best practice across the four home nations of the UK
can improve the provision of services for the whole population
and we would urge further work in this area, including the establishment
of a dedicated forum to share experience on the treatment of veterans.
The development of a clearer regional focus within England, including
Regional Ministers and Regional Select Committees, may well provide
a more sophisticated level of comparison on a variety of issues.
This would be particularly helpful to all-Wales policy making
and scrutiny and we urge the Cabinet Secretary and the Permanent
Secretary to the Welsh Assembly Government to ensure that this
is built into future developments. (Paragraph 68)
The coalition Government is committed to devolution
and resolving local issues at every level. The Department of Health
and the Welsh Assembly Government updated the Devolution Concordat
on Health and Social Care in March 2010, re-affirming a commitment
to co-operate on matters affecting the NHS, public health, wider
health issues and social care. The concordat provides a framework
for co-operation between the Department and the Welsh Assembly
Government.
The healthcare needs of those who have served in
the Armed Forces, including those injured, remains an important
priority. The Ministry of Defence/UK Departments of Health Partnership
Board was established by Concordat between the MoD and UK DH in
2005 ("Delivering our Armed Forces Healthcare Needs, A Concordat
between the UK Departments of Health and Ministry of Defence,
2005"). The key purpose of the Partnership Board is to foster
and strengthen the relationship between the defence and civil
healthcare services for the benefit of the Armed Forces population,
including veterans.
The Partnership Board comprises senior representatives
from the MOD and DH/NHS from across the UK, including the Welsh
Assembly Government. It is supported by two working groups, which
draw upon expertise from across the civilian and military healthcare
services to jointly address key issues. As part of its work,
the Partnership Board oversees the implementation of the health
commitments contained in the Service Personnel Command Paper ("The
Nation's Commitment: Cross Government Support to Our Armed Forces,
their Families and Veterans, July 2008"), which emphasised
improvement of information and awareness of veterans' healthcare
needs, prosthetics provision and the roll-out of community mental
health services.
Services for veterans is a key area of the Partnership
Board work programme where emerging research and learning are
shared. An example is the six veterans' community mental health
pilot programmes, including one based in Cardiff, sponsored by
the MoD/NHS. These are currently being evaluated, with a report
expected in the autumn. These community based mental health services
are expected to continue their work beyond the trial period and
the findings will provide a national evidence base for the commissioning
of services geared towards the mental health needs of veterans.
However, we recognise that more work needs to be done.
The Committee's recommendation to establish "a
dedicated forum to share experience on the treatment of veterans"
is welcomed. It is the coalition Government's view that this
recommendation be implemented through strengthening the role of
the Partnership Board in this area.
10. We were pleased to take evidence for the first
time as part of this inquiry from the relevant English Regional
Ministers and agree that they are well placed to increase awareness
of cross-border issues within their regions. We note that the
challenges and opportunities are quite different in relation to
North Wales and the North West region, Mid-Wales and the West
Midlands, and South Wales and the South West region. We are particularly
encouraged to hear of local initiatives to improve co-ordination
between North Wales and North West England where the flow of patients
across the border is significant. (Paragraph 74)
11. There is likely to be continuing divergence
in the structures of NHS services in England and Wales in the
coming years. We were pleased to hear that a co-ordinating group
bringing together the North West, South West and West Midlands
SHAs with their counterparts in Wales has been established to
identify any potential problems at an early stage. This group
will need to maintain its initial impetus to ensure any unintended
consequences are recognised and dealt with swiftly. It is important
for the remit of this group to be clear and that it should be
able to look beyond health issues to ensure there is a joined-up
approach across policy areas. For example, the violence reduction
programme in Cardiff shows benefits for the NHS, which is devolved,
and criminal justice, which is not. We request a regular update
on the work of the coordinating group. (Paragraph 82)
As the Committee notes, the NHS is accountable to
the patients and public it serves and often must respond to unique
local challenges. PCTs and SHAs have established strong relationships
with NHS colleagues in Wales and have put arrangements in place
to enable patients to access primary, secondary and specialist
health services across the border from where they live.
Officials from the Department of Health, the Welsh
Assembly Government and representatives from the NHS in England
and Wales attend meetings of a cross border forum that also includes
representatives from government and regional offices, local authorities
and others.
Officials also attend a health and social care task
group where operational and policy issues are reviewed. The task
group promotes closer cross border working and collaboration.
It considers health and social care policy developments across
the border and their potential impact. The health group's terms
of reference are currently being reviewed to ensure that emerging
issues continue to be scrutinized and resolved quickly.
The Wales Office has a role to play in ensuring that
in circumstances where action taken by either Government has an
effect on the policies of the other, that they work together to
mitigate any problems, while learning from each others successes.
12. More needs to be done to raise public awareness
of the differences in services they can expect to receive in England
and Wales, as recommended in our earlier Report. The improvements
in co-ordination at governmental level should be matched by transparency
for patients and citizens. (Paragraph 93)
We agree that patients should have access to the
information they need to make choices about their care and it
is important that they understand the implications of their choice
of GP. This is particularly the case for patients who live near
the England-Wales border and who choose to register with a GP
across the border from where they live.
The NHS is best placed to provide specific local
information to patients about registering with a GP. PCTs are
required to publish information about the range of services available
to patients. Best practice guidance issued by the Department in
2008 included recommendations about what should be included in
each PCT's guide to local health services. This stated that PCTs
should publish information about GP practices and other available
services. PCT's should also explain what patients should do if
they are experiencing difficulties accessing primary care services.
The provision of information to patients registering
with a GP across the border is a matter that the cross-border
health group is continuing to explore.
To improve transparency the coalition Government
intends to make available more information about all aspects of
health care. Patients will be able to rate hospitals and clinicians
according to the quality of care they receive and in future it
will be easier for the public to see where unacceptable services
are being provided and to exert local pressure for them to be
improved.
13. Foundation Trusts should be bound by the same
dispute resolution procedure as other providers. The Department
of Health should ensure that Welsh patients treated in English
hospitals have the same rights to raise a dispute as those resident
in England and vice versa. The criteria should relate to fairness
to the citizen and not the convenience of the respective bureaucracies.
(Paragraph 96)
The cross-border protocol sets out the agreed procedures
for commissioning NHS healthcare for residents in England who
are registered with a GP in Wales and residents in Wales registered
with a GP in England. The dispute resolution process in the protocol
is available so that PCTs and LHBs can resolve a dispute should
one arise. The dispute resolution process within the protocol
was not intended to be the mechanism through which all cross-border
disputes would be resolved.
In England, FTs and NHS trusts are bound by the dispute
resolution procedures in the standard NHS acute contract. There
are some differences in the escalation process - FTs may escalate
disputes to Monitor and the Centre for Effective Dispute Resolution
(CEDR) and other NHS trusts may escalate disputes to the SHA.
The contracts English foundation trusts or NHS trusts
enter into with Welsh LHBs are local contracts and should include
dispute resolution provisions as standard. It is the responsibility
of the contracting parties to agree the terms of the agreement,
including the dispute resolution procedures.
In England, legislation[1]
governs the NHS complaints procedure, setting out various obligations
on NHS bodies, GPs and other primary care providers, and independent
providers of NHS care in relation to the handling of complaints.
Patients have the right to have any complaint about NHS services
dealt with efficiently and to have their complaint properly investigated.
The complaints processes operating in the NHS in England are open
to patients regardless of their place of residence. English patients
may also lodge a complaint with their PCT and Welsh patients with
their LHB. In England, if a complaint is not resolved with the
provider then a complaint can be referred to the Parliamentary
and Health Service Ombudsman.
14. There is a serious and persistent lack of
comparative data on which to build any solid research comparing
the performance of the NHS in the devolved nations. Ministers
expressed little enthusiasm to tackle this situation, and we consider
this to be a serious mistake given the acknowledged benefits of
learning from different practice in each of the home nations of
the UK. We strongly recommend that they reconsider their approach
and find ways of working together to that end. (Paragraph 104)
Although an inevitable consequence of devolution
has been some divergence in health policy between England and
Wales, the core principles of the NHS continue to apply across
the UK.
It is for the Welsh Assembly Government to determine
its own health policies and priorities to meet the needs of people
in Wales. Similarly, it is for the Government and the NHS in England
to establish its own policies and priorities.
Given this, we do not believe it would be appropriate
for the health departments to undertake assessment of the comparative
performance of the health service in the four UK countries. In
each country, the health service serves the public according to
local priorities. It is important that the health service learn
from good practice wherever that is found and we believe that
mechanisms exist to enable this to happen. It is also important
that where care for individual patients "crosses borders"
patients know their rights and receive the service that they are
entitled to. The mechanisms we have put in place are achieving
this objective and the cross border group will continue to monitor
this.
15. Many of the acute problems we identified in
our earlier Report on cross-border access to health services appear
to have been resolved. In particular, the revised protocol for
cross-border healthcare commissioning should ensure that Welsh
patients continue to receive treatment across the border where
this is the most convenient solution. However, it is likely that
health policy in Wales and England will continue to diverge in
future. The Department of Health and Welsh Assembly Government
will need to ensure that the cross-border liaison structures they
have established in response to recent difficulties are sustained
in order to have an enduring effect. Long term monitoring must
be carried out in a way that is transparent and accountable to
providers and patients. (Paragraph 105)
As a result of devolution, many decisions made by
health Ministers in the UK Government now only apply in England
and the Welsh Assembly Government make their own health policy.
The coalition Government has made a commitment to
increase health spending in real terms in each year of the Parliament
and to creating an NHS that is accountable to the patients and
public it serves.
The successful delivery of NHS services should not
be about structures and processes, but about setting priorities
that will improve health for all. The Government is committed
to working with the Welsh Assembly Government and the NHS to ensure
that high-quality health services are available to all patients,
including those living near the England-Wales border and patients
from Wales using the NHS in England.
The Committee's reports have made a valuable contribution
to the debate on the provision of cross-border health services.
TRANSPORT
16. The development of the proposal for electrification
of the Great Western Main Line is an example of good communication
between Wales and Whitehall. We particularly welcome the planned
use of bi-modal electric/diesel trains, which should reduce disruption
for passengers, and that electrification work will take place
as a rolling programme along the length of the line. We urge our
successors in the next Parliament to continue to monitor progress
on this work, which promises significant economic benefit to South
Wales. (Paragraph 115)
We support further electrification of the rail network.
The coalition Government believes that a modern transport infrastructure
is essential for a dynamic and entrepreneurial economy, as well
as to improve well-being and quality of life.
However the deficit reduction programme must take
precedence and plans for rail infrastructure will depend on decisions
to be made in the Comprehensive Spending Review. This caveat
also applies to recommendations 24, 25, 26, and 34.
17. We urge all parties to continue to work towards
improvements in the Wrexham-Bidston service, with electrification
as the ultimate aim to provide a service fully integrated into
the Merseyrail commuter system. Any other solution will mean passengers
between Liverpool and Wrexham still have to change trains. (Paragraph
118)
The Welsh Assembly Government is responsible for
the specification, funding and management of Arriva Trains Wales'
services between Wrexham and Bidston. The Department for Transport
will continue to keep in close touch with the Welsh Assembly Government
and Merseytravel about options for the Wrexham-Bidston line, and
about its plans for rail infrastructure in England and Wales.
18. Our joint evidence session with the National
Assembly for Wales Enterprise and Learning Committee was extremely
productive and we look forward to continuing links between scrutiny
committees in Parliament and the Assembly in order to explore
our complementary interests. We support the view of that Committee
that the Swindon-Gloucester-Severn Tunnel Junction diversionary
line between South Wales and London is strategic to Wales and
should be considered for electrification. (Paragraph 123)
For reasons of affordability, the coalition Government's
priorities for electrification in England and Wales do not, at
present, include the Swindon-Gloucester-Severn Tunnel diversionary
route.
19. £45 million has now been promised to
redouble the Swindon-Kemble line. The Regional Minister for the
South West had a key role in securing this funding and we congratulate
him on his engagement and commitment to this issue. The importance
of this line as a diversionary route when the Severn Tunnel is
closed will be heightened during electrification of the Great
Western Main Line. We urge the Government to ensure that final
costs are agreed as soon as possible so that work can begin. (Paragraph
129)
The Department for Transport continues to have detailed
discussions with Network Rail to determine if an acceptable cost
can be agreed for the redoubling of this section of the Great
Western route.
20. A new high speed rail link running between
London and Scotland can have benefits for North Wales if connections
are managed properly. We urge the UK and Welsh Assembly Governments
to work with Network Rail to ensure that these plans are factored
in at an early stage. (Paragraph 132)
The coalition Government will work to establish a
high speed rail network. This will contribute to its ambition
of creating a low carbon economy and will help to secure the long-term
economic prosperity of the country. Our vision is of a truly
national high speed rail network for the whole of Britain, including
Wales, to be achieved in phases.
Ministers are therefore reviewing the options for
taking forward such a national network with a view to providing
the maximum benefits for the country and making rapid progress
towards construction.
21. Forecasts of rail passenger numbers have historically
underestimated the growth in demand, leading to overcrowding on
many services. While forecasts have been adjusted upwards more
recently, they should be comprehensively reviewed to ensure that
planned infrastructure meets demand. We expect that our successors
in the next Parliament will ensure that the Secretary of State
for Transport keeps them informed of changes in the forecasting
techniques. (Paragraph 135)
The Department for Transport monitors actual growth
rates to ensure that the infrastructure outputs that it has specified
for Wales are likely to meet demand. In addition the rail industry's
Passenger Demand Forecasting Handbook is regularly updated, to
ensure all research is both relevant and based on the latest available
evidence. The latest edition was published in August 2009 following
consultation with a wide range of industry experts and revisions
to the guidance to reflect recent research findings.
22. Although not all design options would be suitable
for transport use, the Government must not miss the opportunity
of considering new transport links as part of any Severn Tidal
project. Given the size of the project, it would be very short
sighted to limit the planning horizon for such links to only 20
years. (Paragraph 139)
The existing Severn transport links have the capacity
to meet the forecast increase in demand over the next two decades.
If new transport links are needed beyond 2025-30 further assessments
would need to be undertaken nearer that time.
23. While we understand the need for regional
ownership of regional planning, there are strategic issues that
go beyond the region, just as there are strategic issues that
go beyond Wales. Some strategic routes are too important to leave
to regional authorities. The A483 is the clearest example of a
road which is not important to the English region in which it
is located, but is vital to those travelling between North and
South Wales. We request an update on the outcome of the meeting
between the Department for Transport Minister and the Regional
Minister to discuss the A483, so that we can consider this issue
further. (Paragraph 144)
24. The Department for Transport appears to have
washed its hands of any strategic responsibility for cross-border
roads, such as the A483, which are not receiving the funding they
need through the existing system of regional prioritisation. Given
the lack of any interest in resolving this issue on the part of
the Department for Transport, we urge regional ministers to take
the lead by emphasising the benefits of cross-border engagement
to their regions and the Secretary of State for Transport to take
ownership of strategic issues. This is a glaring case where the
Secretary of State for Wales should seek to broker a common strategic
approach between the Department for Transport and the Welsh Assembly
Government. (Paragraph 145)
Ministers will be considering local funding arrangements
for transport in the context of their longer-term spending plans
and the coalition Government's localism agenda. The Department
for Transport will encourage a dialogue with the Welsh Assembly
Government on cross-border issues.
One of the key roles of the Secretary of State for
Wales and of the Wales Office is to promote dialogue between UK
Government departments and the Welsh Assembly Government wherever
possible. The Secretary of State has regular discussions with
Ministers from both the Welsh Assembly Government and the UK Government
and has committed to seek to ensure cross-border services and
projects dovetail sufficiently.
25. We note that proposals for a change to the
legislation governing the Second Severn Crossing have recently
been raised in order to allow motorists to pay by credit card
and we urge the Government to consider any changes to the toll
structure as part of this proposal. (Paragraph 147)
The tolls are in place to recover the costs associated
with the construction of the new crossing and to finance the costs
associated with the operation and maintenance of both crossings.
The toll amounts are set by legislation, The Severn Bridges Act
1992. Under this legislation an annual Order is required to be
made in December each year fixing the toll amounts to rise in
line with RPI for the following year.
The Secretary of State for Transport does not have
the authority to set the annual tolls below the level of RPI increase
without the Concessionaire's agreement. The Concessionaire would
not be able to agree to anything which would affect their net
revenue without compensation and agreement from their shareholders
and lenders.
The regulations to allow card payments came into
force on 19 March and the Highways Agency are working with the
Concessionaire to introduce a card payment system as a matter
of urgency.
26. We repeat our view, shared by the Welsh Assembly
Government, that there should be a dedicated Traffic Commissioner
for Wales. We do not accept the Department for Transport's argument
that the location of a Commissioner should be determined solely
by the annual caseload (which might mean that Scotland had no
Commissioner). Wales has developed distinct transport policies
which means that it is not appropriate to treat the country as
simply another region of England. (Paragraph 151)
Department for Transport officials are involved in
ongoing discussions with colleagues in the Welsh Assembly Government
on this issue. However, at present, there is no operational justification
for a dedicated Welsh traffic commissioner or office, as the overall
volume of 'local' work does not support such a case. For example,
in 2008-9, the traffic commissioner and deputy commissioner held
109 public inquiries involving Welsh licence holders. This compares
to 308 in the North East, 240 inquiries held in the Western traffic
area and 205 in Scotland. In the West Midlands, there were
188 inquiries, the reason why the joint traffic area is based
in Birmingham, not Wales.
Although traffic commissioners are independently
appointed by the Secretary of State, they are funded from fees
levied against the bus and haulage industry by the Vehicle Operator
& Services Agency (VOSA). VOSA also provide the staff support
to traffic commissioners, again through industry fees. Any proposals
for a dedicated traffic commissioner and office in Wales would
need to be on the basis of a sound business case, as funding would
also need to be provided from fees income. We have discussed this
situation with the Welsh Assembly Government.
27. Since our earlier inquiry there has been some
improvement to the cross-border rail services between Manchester
and Birmingham airports and Wales. There remains, however, a significant
need for more frequent and convenient services as well as better
integration of bus and rail services. We look forward to further
updates on the progress of the Department for Transport's work
in this area. (Paragraph 156)
In February 2010 Network Rail published a future
strategy for improving rail services across the North of England
through increasing capacity and tackling bottle-necks around Manchester
and key routes across the Pennines ("the Northern Hub").
Network Rail is carrying out further development work which forms
part of its planning process for the period 2014-2019.
Any decision on investment in the period after 2014
and the level of train services to be specified would be confirmed
in the coalition Government's second High Level Output Specification
expected to be published in July 2012.
28. We are disappointed that the Department for
Transport is unwilling to accept our recommendation that it should
collaborate with the Welsh Assembly Government to develop a distinctive
ports policy for Wales. Our inquiry found clear evidence that
the needs of Welsh ports differ significantly from those in England.
(Paragraph 163)
The Department for Transport is keen to continue
to engage and collaborate with the Welsh Assembly Government over
issues concerning Welsh ports. Officials have visited the port
of Holyhead to discuss the matter of potential cruise operations
with officials of the Welsh Assembly Government, Cruise Wales,
Stena Ports and Anglesey Aluminium.
The UK ports policy was reviewed in 2006 and the
Welsh Assembly Government was fully consulted. The fundamental
policy of a national market-oriented approach was reflected in
the draft National Policy Statement on Ports for England and Wales
which was published for consultation in November 2009.
Wales Office Ministers are planning to visit key
Welsh Ports to assess their needs first hand.
29. Since our earlier inquiry, there has been
good progress in some areas of co-ordination between the Welsh
Assembly Government and the Department for Transport, particularly
in rail where we warmly welcome work on electrification of the
Great Western Main Line. We consider that the role of the regional
minister can be an important driver of increased communication
and co-operation, for example in the case of the Swindon-Kemble
rail redoubling. However, this is in contrast to the situation
with ports, where the distinct needs of the Welsh economy have
not yet been recognised, and with roads, where the Department
seems to have washed its hands of any strategic responsibility.
This suggests that parts of the Department, at an operational
level, are inflexible in their approach to policy development
and unwilling to engage positively with their Assembly colleagues.
(Paragraph 164)
The Department for Transport is pleased to note that
the Committee recognises good progress has been made on some transport
issues. The Department seeks to ensure good, collaborative relations
between all policy areas and the devolved administrations. In
response to the recent consideration of relations between Whitehall
and the Devolved Administrations, the Department is seeking to
improve awareness and understanding of devolution and to encourage
open and co-operative relations.
1 Local Authority Social Services and National Health
Service Complaints (England) Regulations 2009). Back
| 
