Statement on the New Assembly Building

The Finance Minister (Edwina Hart): Last week, we saw the slate plaque laid in front of the Wales Millennium Centre, to mark the final stage in the construction of that building. Today, I am pleased to be able to announce a major step forward in delivering the Assembly’s new debating chamber. On 21 October 2002 I announced that formal invitations to tender were to be issued to interested bidders, which sought their outline proposals and costings for selected works packages. Over Christmas and the new year, these tender proposals were thoroughly evaluated by the project management team and the Assembly’s professional advisers. Tender interviews with the bidders took place on 9 January 2003. Following the tender evaluation process the Assembly building project board recommended a way forward and I shared this recommendation with members of the project steering group. On the basis of the professional advice given to me, and that received by the independent professional advisers on the project board, I have decided that Taylor Woodrow will be appointed as the preferred bidder for the project. Over the next few months the company will continue to develop the design to the point where I can be satisfied that its proposals meet the Assembly’s expectations in terms of quality, suitability and timetable.

Ron Davies: As the Minister will know, I was not the greatest fan of the decision, taken some three years ago, to delay this project. The waste of time and resources that has meant over the last three years is inexcusable, but that has to be put behind us. I want the Minister to know how pleased I am that she has had the courage to take this necessary decision and, indeed, the courage to return to the Richard Rogers Partnership, given the difficulties of the last few years. Does the Minister accept that many Members are pleased with the announcement that she has made and hope that she will bring this project to fruition? We look forward to the day when we have a new building that befits the National Assembly for Wales.

Edwina Hart: I thank Ron Davies for his kind comments. It is important that we put the past behind us. We are in a new position—we have a design and build contract, rather than a management contract. This is the best way forward and I am certain that we will get the contract and design that we want, at the cost we want.

Dafydd Wigley: I welcome the fact that, at last, we are moving forward with a much needed building, as any sensible person who works here knows. Looking at the Millennium Centre, and how it is being built, reminds us of the need to proceed quickly. Will the Minister confirm that a fixed-price contract gives greater security in terms of price control and that that will be better than our past experience of the project and better than the system that exists for building the new Scottish Parliament building? Will she also confirm that the final price, given the forecasts, will be substantially lower than the wild estimates aired the last time that this matter was discussed? Will she give an assurance that there will be no compromise on the quality of this important building and will she state that every Minister is fully committed to proceeding with this important project?

Edwina Hart: I can give that commitment on behalf of my Cabinet colleagues, who are all delighted that this situation has now been resolved. We support the building and want it built as soon as possible. I will be delighted if we can sign contracts in June and have contractors on site in July.

The building means a lot to Wales and to Cardiff Bay, and it means a lot for us in terms of our democracy. I assure Dafydd Wigley that there will be no compromise on quality or design or on the inherent sustainability issues, which are particularly important. I cannot comment on price matters until negotiations with Taylor Woodrow are concluded, but there have been some wild exaggerations in the past. I assure you that it will not approach anywhere near the amount that is being spent on the Scottish Parliament building. We are taking the right way forward. I thank you, Dafydd, as Chair of the Audit Committee, for the work of that Committee. I have been grateful for that and for the work that the Auditor General for Wales has done on the building. We all agree that the option that we are now taking forward—a design and build contract rather than a management contract—is the best one. It will mean cost certainty, and that is what we as an Assembly require before we make a decision in June.

Nick Bourne: The sorry saga continues. How many times have we seen you take the walk of shame to the podium to announce what you claim to be good news, which we know is bad news that you are trying to dress up as significant progress? When you say that this is a great blow for democracy for the people of Wales, you know that it is pie in the sky, because nobody in Wales, other than a few politicians, wants this building.

I find it extraordinary that at the start of your statement you rather unwisely drew attention to the progress that has been made on the Wales Millennium Centre. That is great news, and we have been fully behind that project. However, we will only have one Wales Millennium Centre, whereas we will have two Assembly buildings. We do not need two. The use of north Wales slate in the Wales Millennium Centre is a great tribute to north Wales. We would welcome a stronger Cabinet commitment to north Wales, with some Cabinet members from there—we used to have a good Minister from north Wales—and perhaps a few meetings held in north Wales. We support projects that mean a lot to Wales, such as the national archive project in Aberystwyth and the Wales Millennium Centre. Nobody wants this project.

I was stunned to hear that Richard Rogers will be involved again. I was not surprised that you faltered at that part of your statement and skirted on from it rather quickly, because we know the history, and how much it cost us. The Welsh taxpayer had to fund the dispute that you had with Richard Rogers to the tune of hundreds of thousands of pounds. We note that you are not closing off your options. You call them 'your’ options, but they are options that must be funded by the Welsh taxpayer. If this is a statement of significant progress, why do we not know who will be behind the project? You said that there is not certainty and that negotiations with Taylor Woodrow may well fail. This seems to be an announcement that is not an announcement, because there is no real progress. Will you clarify the situation?

You sensibly indicated that there may be a fixed-price contract. What is the fixed price that you have in mind? The people of Wales would be interested to hear that figure before the election, rather than afterwards, which is undoubtedly what you have in mind. It would be handy to know that price. So far, £8 million has been spent on nothing. Some £2 million has been incurred simply because of an inflationary delay. I do not want this building and neither does my party nor most people in Wales. However, if you are going to build it, build it. It is not sensible to incur a cost of £2 million just through delays.

You said, remarkably truthfully, that there has been a consistent approach to this project from the start. It is consistent in that you seem to have been playing it for laughs—or at least it would be funny were it not such a waste of Welsh taxpayers’ money. That is the consistency, the shame and the disgrace, and we do not want anything to do with it.

Edwina Hart: The people of Wales do not want anything to do with you, because you take the democratic process so lightly. A majority in this Chamber wants a new building, and a majority in this Chamber represents the majority of the people of Wales, who voted for us. That is democracy. The only 'sorry saga’ is when I have to listen to your comments on my statements on the Assembly building. For the so-called party of business, your lack of understanding of contractual positions, design and build contracts and management contracts is sad.

I have made clear what is going on with the building clear, and I do not see anything wrong in mentioning the Wales Millennium Centre. It had a tortured history, but now has a successful future ahead of it. The new Assembly building may have had a tortured past, but we will have a successful future and debate in the new Chamber. The important fact is that we have done this properly. It would be nice to be able to make an announcement about the costs before the National Assembly elections, but I cannot. I must negotiate this contract with Taylor Woodrow for a fixed price. I must then present it to the Assembly for its agreement before I can proceed. I have considered what happened previously and realise that if we do not get the price I want, I need somewhere else to go. I have that option in David McLean, another reputable builder with another reputable consortium. The difference between you and me is that I understand this process, and you do not.

3.30 p.m.

The Leader of the Welsh Liberal Democrat Group (Michael German): I congratulate you on your statement. It will bring a high degree of certainty to the conclusion of this important project. It will provide Assembly Members and the people of Wales with a public, open space, a public Chamber and public Committee rooms, which have been much wanted. This project has been bedevilled by the legacy that was handed to this Assembly before it was even established, both in terms of the nature of the contract and the nature of the building. Will you confirm whether your announcement means that we can now be confident that the people of Wales will have their public building delivered for an agreed cost, to an agreed quality and on an agreed completion date? Will you also confirm that moving away from the management contract we inherited, with all its associated cost uncertainty, to a design and build contract will give us a firm, fixed price? Do you agree that we will know with certainty the cost of our new building, and that, for the first time, we are in the driving seat on this project? Do you agree that this building will be an icon for democracy, an icon for Wales, and will pull in visitors, regenerate the economy and repay the people of Wales’s investment in it? I wonder whether any Conservatives left in four years’ time will still be calling for this building to be abandoned, or whether they will dare to sit in it.

Edwina Hart: I agree that it will be an icon for democracy. I hope that it will also be iconic in terms of good standards in building. It will certainly be iconic in terms of value for money and in terms of public buildings that come in within cost and within the timescale we want. Importantly, it will be also be an icon in terms of sustainability issues, because we are aiming for the best standards in this building. That is crucial in view of the Assembly’s commitment to sustainable development. We also believe in the appropriate use of indigenous materials and local craft, and that will be in evidence. All those issues are important. However, the most important fact is that we now know where we are going with this building. It has been a long, hard slog. It is much easier to announce good news than to take flak, but we must be responsible. The majority of us here are prepared to do that. Members may be interested to know—and Mike German was with me—that I answered a question in Haverfordwest on the new building. All my Cabinet colleagues thought, 'Oh, not a question on the new building’. However, when I answered the question and gave the explanation, I had a round of applause. Perhaps the Conservatives are not in touch with what the population of Wales wants.

Cynog Dafis: I sympathise with the Conservative group for having to sit behind their leader and listen to such empty rhetoric, which showed such ignorance about the way in which business is run. His comments revealed the truth about the Conservatives, namely that they are not pro-Wales, or serious about the Welsh project. That is the message that will go out to the public, and that is the reason why there is a danger that they will have fewer Members in the next Assembly to take their place in the new building.

I press you on the issue of sustainable development and the way in which the new building will be an example of that. Will you do your utmost to ensure that the building’s energy comes from sustainable sources, that there will be a high level of energy efficiency in the building, and that the methods of dealing with waste will be sustainable? Finally, will you ensure that Welsh materials—and I welcome the fact that you have mentioned this—in particular, Welsh timber, will be used in the roof and in the building in general?

Edwina Hart: We will do what we can within European procurement rules. If I can go further to ensure that we have quality materials from our own nation in this building, I will.

The energy issue is a key matter, and we continue to discuss it. I would welcome Members’ views on that. It might be helpful if, in due course, these wider issues were discussed among Members more generally, and not just in the House Committee. If there is a need for a further presentation, I will arrange that.

Lorraine Barrett: I welcome your statement. If the Tories are so against the project, will you invite them to boycott the new building, and to not take up their seats—should they win any—at the next election? Do you agree that the Tories’ friends in the construction industry are probably disappointed that they have spoken against such a world-class project, which will create hundreds of jobs in this area? More specifically, will you ensure that the contractors are aware of the sensitive issues that surround the seafarers’ memorial, which is located near to what will be the entrance to the new building? Will you ensure that the contractors contact the Seafarer’s Association early on to discuss any possible disturbance to the services that are held at the memorial? The memorial is much loved. We have already confirmed that it will not be moved, but I want to be sure that the contractors are aware of the sensitive issues surrounding it.

The Presiding Officer: Order. I look forward to what the Minister has to say about the seafarers’ memorial. However, as far as I am aware, she does not have responsibility for the Welsh Conservative group.

Edwina Hart: The issues surrounding the seafarers’ memorial need to be borne in mind, and that matter will be taken up by my officials. Construction jobs will be created. Arup is based here, and the Welsh economy will benefit from the project. You raised the issue of confidence and the Welsh Conservatives. We are confident that we can deliver the new building, so perhaps the Conservatives had better not even bother to stand in the next election.

David Ian Jones: It pains me to say it, but I must take issue with my colleague Nick Bourne. I am prepared to be much more open minded about the new building. After all, Labour’s record on such matters is a proud one. There is the Greater London Authority building, which is such an adornment to the Thames riverfront, and beautifully complements St Paul’s Cathedral on the other side of the river. We have the Scottish Parliament building, which is a sort of Tower of Babel. It is still being built, was supposed to cost £40 million, and now the cost is £340 million and rising. I am sure that we can replicate that in Cardiff. I am also delighted that you have appointed the distinguished architect and litigator Richard Rogers to the project. I hope that he reverts to his original design, which I believe was called 'crystal balls’, because 'crystal balls’ is another way of saying 'transparent nonsense’. A casual visitor to the present building might be struck by the fact that it is completely adequate, that it serves its Members well, and that does the job. Of course, that visitor would be wrong. What we need in Cardiff is our own pleasure dome, our own people’s palace. If it costs £40, £50, or £60 million, what does that matter? I am so glad to see the Rogers and Hart partnership back together again.

Edwina Hart: I am not sure in what spirit I should take those comments. However, I will respond as I think appropriate. You have obviously not had many visitors to this building, or you would not say that people believe the facilities to be adequate. When visitors come here, there is nowhere for them to have a cup of tea, to put their wet coats, or to engage with their elected representatives. As I have always said, Lord Rogers is an eminent, world-renowned architect, who has produced excellent buildings across the globe. Lord Rogers is part of a consortium that has been put together by Taylor Woodrow. However, Taylor Woodrow is responsible for delivering the contract.

Alison Halford: Minister, it takes a woman of your calibre to deliver what has been a difficult project. I support what you have salvaged from this. It also interests me that north Wales appears to be so popular this afternoon. Can you provide us with a summary of what was discussed at the tendering meeting held on 9 January? In particular, was the need for disabled access discussed—given that I think that it was omitted from the Richard Rogers Partnership design? Have you noted the uncharitable comments made about the Richard Rogers Partnership in the Audit Committee when the Permanent Secretary addressed it recently?

3.40 p.m.

Edwina Hart: I am aware of the comments made in the Audit Committee, but I will leave that in the capable hands of the Chair of the Committee and the Auditor General for Wales for them to deal with in due course. My officials have held lengthy discussions on disabled access with those who wish to tender, and I think that we have dealt with the disability issues to the satisfaction of the Disability Rights Commission and others. However, I cannot go into the detail of the tenders.

Glyn Davies: Over the last three years, I have sought to persuade the Assembly not to continue with this project. The First Minister seemed to agree with me on occasion, but now seems to have come on board with you, Minister. You are looking forward today, and I accept that. However, to pick up the point that Alison Halford briefly touched upon, it is not good enough for you to dismiss the matter by saying that it is for the Chair of the Audit Committee to deal with. At that recent Audit Committee meeting, the most senior civil servant in Wales said that,

'the original estimate submitted by the Richard Rogers Partnership in the design competition was too low and that, if the true costs had been known at the time, its entry would have been rejected from the competition as non-compliant.’

I am sure that the Richard Rogers Partnership will challenge that, because when it has gone to court, it has won against the Assembly on every count, and has cost the National Assembly for Wales and the people of Wales a huge amount of money. How will you square the circle in going forward with this project with the Richard Rogers Partnership when the Audit Committee has heard evidence from the most senior civil servant in Wales suggesting that it should never have been involved in this project in the first place?

Edwina Hart: My comments regarding the Chair of the Audit Committee were not dismissive; they indicate my full confidence in the Assembly’s processes, the Chair of the Audit Committee, the audit process, the Permanent Secretary as accounting officer, and the role of the Auditor General for Wales. I am happy that those matters should be dealt with in that forum because I am sure that they will be dealt with properly. I was not being dismissive. Your contribution seemed to ask whether we could trust the Richard Rogers Partnership. However, its appointment now is on a different contractual basis to that it held previously. Taylor Woodrow is responsible for delivering this project on time and to an agreed budget. I have no doubt that the Richard Rogers Partnership will attend meetings with Assembly officials when necessary, as will all other members of the design team. However, we are into a different ball game with these new arrangements. You well know the reasons why we dispensed with the services of the Richard Rogers Partnership, but its architectural ability, and the architectural merit of the building, were never in doubt. I have always keenly supported the building. I am also sick and tired of comments about the First Minister and my Cabinet colleagues. They have been enormously supportive of me in getting the new building up and running.

The Presiding Officer: Despite the operational difficulties in seeing Members properly in this Chamber, I see that two further Members wish to speak—or is it three? Sorry, it is four. I call Delyth Evans.

Delyth Evans: I welcome the progress that we have heard about today, Minister, which is largely due to the hard-headed approach that you have brought to your leadership of this project. Unlike the Welsh Conservatives, I applaud the involvement of the original architect in the future of the building. Nick Bourne must be too much of a philistine to understand the importance of iconic buildings and world-renowned architects in terms of promoting the image of Wales at home and abroad, and in terms of the success of the regeneration project in our capital city. You referred earlier to the use of indigenous materials. What discussions have you had with Taylor Woodrow on this matter? Does it accept the Assembly’s wish for Welsh materials to be used in the building as far as is practicable?

Edwina Hart: I do not believe that there will be any difficulty in that regard. Taylor Woodrow and everyone else is aware of our needs in terms of sustainability issues and the use of indigenous Welsh products, which is important. I thank you for your comments about iconic buildings, because they are important. When we visit cities, we all stop to admire such buildings and, when we leave, we remember them. If our forefathers and foremothers had thought like the Welsh Conservatives, we would be sitting in a wasteland.

Alun Cairns: If a fixed-price design and build contract is right now, why did the Minister reject the Welsh Conservative amendment proposing such a contract at the outset of the project? If the Government had taken our advice at that time, we would not have this fiasco now.

Edwina Hart: The project was up and running by the time that the National Assembly was established. Certain arrangements had been made before I took responsibility for the project. We are now in the right place at the right time for this contract.

Brian Hancock: I welcome this important news. As others have said, I regret the delays. However, you may be interested to know that an important hotelier, who is located near here and is a well-known Conservative supporter, asked several Assembly Members, in a meeting to promote the Welsh capital, when the new Chamber would be completed. Our Conservative friends should remember that the building will attract people to Wales and make Cardiff a true capital. Perhaps they would then support it.

Edwina Hart: It is important that we give confidence to the nation by having this building. If it also gives confidence to business people, then that is also important. The building is important for the image of Wales throughout the world, and I thank you for you comments.

David Melding: If I have understood your statement correctly, sometime in June, you will tell the people of Wales how much the new building is likely to cost them. You boasted that that date had been brought forward. Is it not a cynical move that, one month after the Assembly elections, the people of Wales will know how much this iconic—to use the Deputy First Minister’s ridiculous description—building will cost? Is this your idea of being transparent and fair with the electorate? Also, as you have derided our requests for some idea of the likely price range of the contract, why were such emphatically precise figures predicted in the Labour Party’s White Paper on devolution and in its 1999 manifesto? If you could give an indicative figure or price range then, why can you not do so now? I presume that you have abandoned all pretence of it costing between £12 million to £24 million and that we are already in the upper ranges. Would it not be more honest to say what the likely cost of this building will be now and then allow the people of Wales to judge through the ballot box?

Edwina Hart: You could swear that it is new information that we do not know the figure now. I told you on 21 October 2002 what the process would be and that it would be discussed in the summer. I am pleased that it has been brought forward to early summer. I do not intend to endanger the Assembly’s negotiating position on this contract with Taylor Woodrow. I would do that, were I to start talking in a blasé fashion about what upper price ranges I anticipated. That is not the reality of business, and you know that as well as I do. I am sorry that I cannot agree with you on this; I normally agree with many of your points, David. The National Assembly for Wales will decide on this matter in June. It will be the decision of the Members in the Chamber then whether to proceed and the matter will be debated at that time. My job as Minister is simply to try to get the contractual position correct, get a good price and secure a good timescale. That is the duty that I am undertaking on behalf of you all. I know that I have the support of the majority of you in that.