Rhun ap Iorwerth MS: Diolch yn fawr iawn, Llywydd. Let me continue
with that theme, and dig a little bit deeper if I can. For over a
year now, Plaid Cymru has called for a Wales-only public inquiry.
Your Government—and you've confirmed it now—has opted to have a
Welsh chapter or chapters in a UK-wide inquiry. I think in all
honesty that opens you up to the charge of ducking scrutiny. If you
take responsibility,...Request free
trial
: Diolch yn fawr iawn, Llywydd. Let me
continue with that theme, and dig a little bit deeper if
I can. For over a year now, Plaid Cymru has called for a
Wales-only public inquiry. Your Government—and you've
confirmed it now—has opted to have a Welsh chapter or
chapters in a UK-wide inquiry. I think in all honesty
that opens you up to the charge of ducking scrutiny. If
you take responsibility, you have to be ready to be
judged on your actions, good and bad. Now, of course,
there's also the issue that
himself at Westminster is ducking scrutiny in dithering
about when to begin the UK-wide inquiry. He's clearly in
no hurry to set up that UK-wide inquiry. Sir Robert Owen,
the judge who chaired the public inquiry into the death
of Alexander Litvinenko, recently insisted that work
needs to begin immediately, and that a long-delayed
report ceases to form a useful function. Do you agree
with that?
(Minister for Rural Affairs and North Wales, and
Trefnydd): I do think the inquiry needs to
be sooner rather than later. I don't think it's ducking
scrutiny; I'm sure the spotlight will be very firmly on
all four nations. I don't think I can add anything in
relation to the First Minister's view to what I said in
my answers to Andrew R.T. Davies. Clearly, within Wales,
we've done a review. The health Minister has led, within
her department—or officials have led within her
department—when we look at what happened in the first
wave, and then obviously in the second wave currently.
But I don't think, for the reasons I've stated already, a
Wales-specific inquiry is—. But I certainly don't think
it's ducking scrutiny.
: You want it sooner rather than later, but
let me be clear: in refusing a Welsh-specific inquiry,
you're effectively agreeing to that delay, and the
spotlight on what has happened in Wales will be
inevitably weakened with having that spotlight trying to
be shone, with equal forensic detail, right across the
UK. We need to answer questions about what's happening in
Wales. Two days ago, the Royal
College of Nursing joined with the GMB
and others to call on the Scottish Government to launch a
separate Scottish inquiry—the same principles there. If
calls for a separate Welsh investigation were made by
prominent bodies whose mission is to represent the
interests of health and care workers and patients here,
what would your message be to them?
: As I say, I don't think I can say any
more. The First Minister made it very clear that he
thinks a UK inquiry is the best, for the
interdependencies that I've just explained. I don't think
you can ever accuse the First Minister, or any other of
my ministerial colleagues, of not being open to scrutiny.
We sat all last year. When the UK Government didn't sit,
we were sitting; you were able to scrutinise every single
Minister. I'm assuming that when this inquiry is
running—and I know that the First Minister believes that
it shouldn't be something that's kicked into the long
grass; obviously, people need answers. But at the moment
the focus of all Governments is dealing with the
pandemic. We know what's coming down the road, don't we?
We are seeing a significant increase in the number of
cases of the virus at the moment. So, I'm afraid I
haven't got anything further to add around the UK
four-nation inquiry that the First Minister has agreed
to.
|