4. Will the Minister make a statement on how the Welsh Government will improve disabled access to railways in Wales? OAQ54423

Well, as part of our plans for a fully integrated public transport network across Wales, we are fully committed to public transport for disabled people that removes barriers to travel, that empowers people and that promotes rather than inhibits independent living.

It was November of last year when there was a picture of you in the local paper, The Leader, announcing investment to improve disabled access to Ruabon station, in your constituency, of course. It’s almost 12 months since then, and that investment hasn’t yet happened. Constituents tell me that they feel that they’ve been misled in that regard. So, can I ask you whether you regret being vocal in the local papers that there was going to be investment, when that clearly hasn’t happened? And do you take responsibility for the failure to implement your pledge?

Well, quite the opposite. We've made available £10 million as match funding for the UK Government's Access for All programme. We nominated 15 stations for the Access for All programme. We were pleased, of course, that seven of our 15 were accepted, but eight were not—Ruabon was one of them. However, I can tell the Member today that we will be progressing, again, with the latest round of Access for All nominations, and those stations that were not included in the last priority list by the UK Government will be put forward again. But in addition to this, we've also announced that there'll be £15 million of funding available for stations across the Wales and borders franchise to improve accessibility, and we'll be looking at those stations where disabled passengers at the moment face the biggest barriers in terms of accessing services.

Ruabon station I'm more than familiar with because it's my local station, and I was bitterly disappointed, therefore, that the UK Government decided not to utilise the money that we, as a Welsh Government, were putting forward for improved facilities. But I do hope that in the spring, when they put out the call for additional nominations, that they will accept Ruabon station.

Minister, many of our railway stations have been inadequate when it comes to disabled access for a considerable length of time now. I know, as you've said, you've been trying to address this. You've just mentioned the list of Access for All stations. Abergavenny station was on the list, I believe, that was put forward by the Welsh Government, and I think was successful following discussions that you had with the UK Government Department for Transport and the hard work of local campaigners, including the local county councillor Maureen Powell—I know all have been in touch with you. I wonder if you could update us on the current status of Abergavenny station. It's clearly an important station locally, for me as the local Assembly Member, but also an important part of the network in Wales as a whole. So, where are we with the upgrade of that station and the implementation of disabled access?

Well, I'd happily write to the Member with details of the work that's been undertaken as we develop plans to make it step-free, and it will be a wholly step-free station. But I'll also happily update Members on the other six stations and the work that's been undertaken to draw down UK Government funding, through the Access for All programme, as soon as progress can be made and I can report back.FootnoteLink

Information further to Plenary

Minister, I've been contacted, obviously, by a number of disabled people for whom access to railways does relate to, often, the availability of toilets, and I'm aware of the comments you made in the answer to the last question. Where the issue seems to arise now is that what you seem to be saying is that, certainly on heavy rail, there will be toilets, but that, as with buses, on light rail, it would be effectively contrary to regulations. It would be illegal to actually do that, therefore it is not legally possible to do. Could I ask, then, that what we actually have is a briefing that sets out clearly what the regulatory framework is and why it is, because at the moment my understanding until now, and I'm sure of others, was that this was a matter of cost or whatever, whereas in actual fact it seems there are other reasons? It's very important that we have an understanding of the basis of the decision making.

There are numerous reasons why toilets can't be fitted to light-rail tram-trains. One of the reasons, of course, is the additional weight and lack of manoeuvrability if you install such facilities. Another includes the risk of discharge on streets from those toilets if you don't carry enough tank capacity. There are also issues with manoeuvrability—the whole point of having those light-rail solutions is you can accelerate and decelerate quicker, that you can go around sharp bends and that you can go up and down steeper inclines. Having somebody in a toilet when you do that can be very dangerous indeed.

But, of course, there's also the challenge of compliance, as Mick Antoniw says, with PRM legislation, and by the end of this year, all of our trains, all of our rolling stock, have to be PRM compliant. We have not been able to identify a single system on the planet that is PRM compatible—not a single system. If one becomes available, if science can be defied and it's possible to put a disabled access toilet into a tram-train, and have it operate safely on-street, i.e. so that the driver can see through the carriageway, then, of course, we would adopt that technical solution. But as of today, there are no such solutions available.