Peter Black and South Wales West Liberal Democrats

The Accessibility of Public Transport in Wales

Peter Black: I thank everyone who has taken part in this debate, and I thank the Minister for responding in an almost positive light to the issues that we have raised today. The seriousness of this issue has been underlined by Members' contributions today and the need for action has been clearly set out in the contributions made today not only by my colleagues in the Welsh Liberal Democrats, but by others here.

Equality legislation has done a great deal to improve the lives of disabled people in trying to eradicate discrimination in the workplace and in public services by improving access to public and private buildings, by improving street layout and by trying to tackle social attitudes. However, it is clear that we are failing to keep up with the need for change in public transport.

Gareth Jones-and the Minister to some extent-talked about the fact that access to public transport is not a devolved matter, and said that that is why the Assembly Government cannot bring forward an action plan as we propose in our motion. In fact, Gareth went into some detail about how much public money we would need to put forward this action plan and how powers prevented us from doing so. Read what the motion says, Gareth. It says an action plan-

Gareth Jones rose-

Peter Black: Let me finish, Gareth. Our motion does not call for a fully funded action plan from public resources, nor does it ask the Assembly Government to put together an action plan that it will put in place using legislative powers. Our motion calls for 'an action plan', which can mean several things. We accept that the Assembly Government only has partial powers relating to this area and we accept that resources are not as great as we would like them to be, but we think that it is possible for the Assembly Government to talk to all those who have a stake in this issue; it can talk to rail and bus companies, to local authorities and anyone else with a potential interest in this, and it can put together a joint action plan and a timetable for how it will tackle these particular issues over a certain period.

That may involve doing the easy things first and the harder things later. It may involve an element of public subsidy to pump-prime a particular development. Let us not pretend that the Assembly Government cannot do that, because the Minister has just outlined a number of instances where the Assembly Government has done precisely that. All we are asking for here is for all of that to be brought together into a plan that is deliverable and achievable. I do not think that that is unreasonable. I certainly do not think that that is unrealistic. I think that it is a responsible way forward, despite your accusations, Gareth, that we have no responsibility-at least we do not pass the buck back to Westminster at every opportunity.

Gareth Jones: Thank you very much indeed, Peter, for allowing me to intervene. An action plan has to be synonymous with financial underpinning. I accept that different forms of action can be taken, but a true action plan in the context in which you have presented it in your debate this afternoon has to involve financial resourcing.

Peter Black: I have just referred to the fact that there are different kinds of action plans. There is the Stalinist kind, which you seem to want to bring in, and then there is the kind where you work in partnership and bring things together, bring in private money, and public money where you can, and put together a scheme that is workable and affordable. That happens in so many other areas of Government business and there are many other ways in which the Government works with other bodies to deliver such schemes. There is no reason whatsoever why it cannot be done in this regard, and no reason why it cannot make a difference.

I will give you an example of how much of a difference can be made with a small amount of money. In my region, Port Talbot Parkway has wheelchair access to the platform and to the train, although it does not have accessible toilets. However, level access to the platforms is available only via a gate at a level crossing, which is only unlocked during staffed hours. That could be put right with a small amount of money.

I will give you another example. In Maesteg, the problem is that there is a single step between the car park and the platform. It does not cost a great deal of money to put a ramp in. It is not a huge commitment. There are small things that can be done, as well as bigger things. Those can be done in partnership and can make a huge difference to the quality of life of disabled people in accessing stations. Therefore, I think that the Government's amendment not only is cowardly in the sense that it has backed off from taking any action, but also deliberately avoids the point. You can take action, but you need to co-ordinate it and do it properly. That is why I ask you to support the motion unamended, not the watered-down version offered in the Government amendment.