I’d like to thank the Member for his questions and say at the outset that I actually feared being scolded rather than congratulated for issuing a written statement ahead of giving an oral statement in the Chamber. So, I’m pleased that the Member actually recognised the value in my doing that, and it’s something that I would consider in the future. Again, I’m going to go back to the sequence of events that led to the decision to put back the commencement of the public local inquiry until the end of March next year at the latest. What happened was that, earlier this year, in spring, there was an indication from the Department for Transport officials to my officials that there would be an update to TEMPro data. In spite of my officials’ efforts, unfortunately, Department for Transport officials did not involve them in the case for TEMPro 7, in the development or in any consultation. That’s what caused the delay, because the data that were then produced—and I’ll come on to the actual questions that we’re asking about the methods and the statistics that are being used—raise questions about the business case that we put forward for the black route. TEMPro 7 would have an impact on all major road schemes in terms of the value for money. So, we will have to look at the case for many of our infrastructure schemes. The reason being—and the Member says that the model at the time should be used. That’s absolutely right. But, so too must the data of the moment, not data that are years old. Unfortunately, it appears that part of the problem with the data that are being used in this forecasting, in this modelling, is they do not recognise all of the LDPs that are being submitted. So, unfortunately, it appears that the modelling that has been used—and this is in spite of us being able to say to the Department for Transport, ‘Here are the data, this is what we’re using and this is our model, here are the predicted flows of people, here is the population growth’—unfortunately, they didn’t use those data. I want to know why they didn’t use those data.

More importantly to this project, I need to understand the implications of using data that are not up to date and accurate, because, in terms of the review that’ll have to take place, we will need to assess whether we amend the TEMPro 7 figures to actually take account of the position that we are in as of right now. That work will take place at speed, and, of course, subsequent to the review, I’ll make public the data and our modelling, and I’ll ensure that they are published. I think it’s only fair to everybody involved in this project, both supporters and objectors. It’s only fair that everybody should have the most accurate, up-to-date evidence possible.