Can I thank the Member for his question? I am sorry that the Member has failed to observe our position, which I think has been very consistent. We have persistently opposed the existence of tolls when the crossings revert back to public ownership, and we have made our position very clear to the Department for Transport, at both ministerial and official level, and repeatedly in the media. I would be happy to meet with the Member to discuss what I think is a very complicated and complex area of legal work, and I would also be happy to provide Members with a comprehensive briefing of the various Acts that the Member refers to.

I think he raises a number of important points, but, principally, we have a legal argument versus an economic argument, essentially. We have a legal argument that is being proposed by the UK Government; we have an economic argument that clearly shows that removing the tolls would be beneficial to the economy of Wales. Now, I’m also disappointed, I have to say, that the UK Government is not considering writing off the debt, which stands at something in the region of £36 million, given the UK Government wrote off the debt for the Humber crossing. It’s my view that what’s good for the Humber should be good for the Severn, and I’m baffled, I have to say, by the rationale that’s being given, especially as the Severn crossings are strategic routes, and not part of local authority networks, as the Humber crossing is.

It’s my view that the Welsh taxpayer—and, indeed, other taxpayers—have already paid off that debt, through considerable sums in general taxation over many years. Now, we were not given any advance notice of the consultation. However, I have written to express my disappointment at this, and I’d be more than happy to provide Members, through a written statement, my response to the consultation.

The Member raises a number of points concerning the Severn Bridges Act 1992. As he alludes to, it’s our understanding, based on the advice—the legal advice—that I’ve received, that the UK Government is proposing to continue tolling by virtue of a road charging scheme, as the Member mentions, under section 167 of the Transport Act 2000. Whilst we don’t think there’s any reason to consider that this is not legally possible, I am more than happy to discuss this with the Member, with lawyers. And, indeed, I revert back to the point that I made earlier: regardless of the legal merits of the UK Government’s position, I think it is entirely unjustifiable to maintain a position of taxing businesses, and of taxing commuters, across the Severn.