[R] signifies the Member has declared an interest. [W] signifies that the question was tabled in Welsh.

I now call on Neil Hamilton to ask the second urgent question. Neil Hamilton.

Will the Cabinet Secretary make a statement on the announcement today on the public inquiry into the proposed M4 relief road? EAQ(5)0099(EI)

The Minister’s statement this morning simply states the date of the public inquiry and it says that:

‘The project shall proceed to be considered by independent inspectors at an inquiry determined by the planning inspectorate to commence on 28 February 2017, with a pre-inquiry meeting…on 27 January.’

Can I thank the Minister for that statement and welcome today’s announcement, and, indeed, point out that when the Cabinet Secretary made his statement on this last on 3 October, he said it would start no later than 31 March next year? So, it’s welcome news that it’s going to start a month earlier than the latest possible date.

David Cameron, in one of his more memorable statements, described the current situation of the congestion on the M4 as a

‘foot on the windpipe of the Welsh economy’.

It is vital, therefore, that this inquiry should be concluded at the earliest possible date.

Does the Minister have any indication how long the inquiry’s likely to last? In the statement in October, it was said to last around five months. Has that estimate been revised? Since October, the traffic forecasts for the future on the M4 have been revised to a lower level and I wonder if the Government’s enthusiasm for the black route has dimmed—[Interruption.] I’m asking a question now. [Interruption.] If the Government’s enthusiasm for the black route has diminished and therefore the blue route will get proper consideration as an alternative, I wonder if the Minister can also tell me whether she or any of her colleagues has had any meetings with Professor Stuart Cole or anybody who has been an advocate for the blue route to work up the case for that as an alternative to the black route in the context of this inquiry, and therefore whether she will confirm that the Government will take a reasonably open-minded view about this, that there is more than one way of solving this problem and that the evidence that the Government gives to the inquiry will take full account of the alternative propositions that are on offer. [Interruption.]

Thank you. Minister, will you answer, please?

In the spirit of openness and transparency, full technical economic and environmental reporting that informed the review of the data is published on the Welsh Government website, allowing everyone to consider it. The public inquiry will take into account the views of everybody concerned. It will take as long as it takes. I’m well aware that there is a range of views towards this project across the Chamber and elsewhere across Wales, and the whole purpose of the inquiry is to allow those views to be heard and taken into account in the decision-making process.

Minister, can you confirm—? The Cabinet Secretary today said that works would commence in 2018, but clearly the end of 2018 is 24 months away from now. Can you confirm when in 2018 it may start? Can you refine that date a little, subject, of course, to the public inquiry outcome?

In your statement today, you say that the Cabinet Secretary said the latest assessment indicates that future traffic levels, taking into account the latest metro proposals, will continue to grow, but slightly slower than previously thought. Will the new modelling have an impact on other infrastructure projects in the pipeline? And finally, can you confirm that the project is still viable at the estimated costs, with the revised data for population added?

Well, Deputy Presiding Officer, I’m now at risk of reading out the written statement made by the Cabinet Secretary this morning, which contains all of the information. The written statement this morning simply sets out the latest position on the review of data that was announced by the Cabinet Secretary earlier. The statement simply states the date of the commencement of the public inquiry, which I’m sure all of us welcome, and it sets out some possibilities as a result of a public inquiry.

Thank you very much. We now—. [Interruption.] Go on.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I’m genuinely seeking clarification as a new Member in this Assembly. I’m seeking clarification—and I don’t have the rule book in front of me—on the relevant part of Standing Orders referring to urgent questions, and what constitutes an urgent question. I say that not with any disrespect to the urgent question that we’ve just heard, but it does seem that some urgent questions are neither urgent nor new, nor a question [Laughter.] As such, I genuinely seek your advice and guidance, as a new Member, as to what we should put in, in future, as an urgent question.

Thank you. If the question that’s tabled is then accepted by either the Presiding Officer or, in the absence of the Presiding Officer, me, it’s deemed to be an urgent question. Therefore, it should be heard in the same way as urgent questions that you may think would be urgent, not necessarily that everybody else thinks are urgent. So, it’s down to the Presiding Officer. I think that the criteria that were used today were that this is the last sitting of the Assembly before the break, and therefore it gives Members an opportunity to question relevant issues that may have already just been issued as a statement. It was accepted on that issue. But thank you for raising that point of order.