3. Will the Cabinet Secretary make a statement on traffic congestion on the M4 in the South Wales West region? OAQ52617

Yes. I can assure the Member that we are taking significant steps to tackle congestion and to improve journey time reliability, through our pinch points programme, and through improvements to public transport and supporting local authorities to address, themselves, key local issues.

Well, as anybody who listens to Radio Wales in the morning will be aware, there will be a traffic jam between anywhere around about junction 47 to junction 41. This is a sort of standard every morning. Satnavs, of course, are part of the problem, because they generally produce a 'via the M4' route if you are going almost anywhere east or west. Can I ask the Cabinet Secretary to undertake an analysis of where traffic is moving between and also to examine how a metro system could reduce this congestion? Because it's getting worse, and anybody who is coming in from the west on a daily basis is caught up in it.

I recognise that the Member has a very keen interest in junctions between junctions 40 and 48 on the M4. It's an interest that his colleague sitting right next to him also has. [Laughter.] I think it's fair to say that evidencing the need to invest in transport improvements is absolutely vital, and modelling current and future traffic patterns will help, in turn, inform how we can maximise the benefits of any spend by the Government. Now, I can assure the Member that my officials, and also Transport for Wales, are looking at meeting in early October to discuss how to build the transport model for south-west Wales, and that model will be used to inform the development of the metro, and also the corridor study that is proposed for the M4 to the west of Bridgend. I'm pleased to be able to say that the commission for an initial WelTAG study to examine congestion between junctions 35 and 49 has recently been awarded, and a report is expected late this year or, at the latest, early 2019.

Well, I feel Mike Hedges's pain on this one a little bit, I'm afraid, and I'm interested, on the corridor study, in whether it covers the point that I'm about to raise with you now. During the eight months of the junction 41 closure, which David Rees referred to yesterday, the usage at peak morning time of the Harbour Way distributor road, which the First Minister opened five years ago, rose from 14.5 cars a minute to a staggering 14.9 cars a minute. The Government report on the closure stated—well, reminded us, really—that the purpose of Harbour Way is to reduce local traffic on the M4 between junctions 38 and 41 and provide a high-standard dual carriageway, which it is, parallel to Port Talbot. Those figures, collected in a time of what was local misery, I think we agree, don't exactly reflect value for money: that road cost £107 million. Nor did it effectively control pollution. And I can tell you that there is no meaningful signage from the motorway itself edging people towards that distributor road. And during this period of the extended 50 mph slowdown from Earlswood, there's nothing there that says, 'Use Harbour Way instead'. So, what can Welsh Government, and the local authority, in all fairness, do to encourage people to use that distributor road?

Harbour Way will be included as part of the modelling for an integrated metro across the region. I can assure the Member of that. But, given the interest that's been raised in the Chamber today, and I know that interest has been raised more widely recently, may I offer to meet with Members across political parties to discuss the M4 to the west of Bridgend?

Cabinet Secretary, it's estimated that congestion at junction 43 costs the Welsh economy around £6.5 million a year, and congestion at junction 41 a further £5.1 million. Billions of pounds are spent to tackle congestion around Newport and the introduction of the metro to offer convenient, reliable alternatives to the car. Cabinet Secretary, can my region expect similar treatment to the south-east, and can you outline your Government's plans to alleviate congestion in Wales?

Yes, most definitely. With the economic action plan, we're placing a new and sharper focus on regional economic development to ensure that we get a greater degree of quality of spend across Wales, and I'm pleased to be able to tell the Member today that I'll be publishing indicative regional budgets alongside the spending lines within my department, so that, in the future, it'll be more transparent about how much is being spent in all parts of Wales. I think it's something that, as a backbencher, I was keen to see implemented, and I'm pleased to do that in Government.

I think it's absolutely essential that we first of all get the evidence base that can inform the development of the metro in the Swansea bay region, and then we need to ensure that the work that's being carried out by local authorities aligns with the work that we've commissioned Professor Mark Barry to undertake, which is designed to accelerate the programmes that are, if you like, quick wins, so that they can attract immediate funding from the UK Government.

Longer term, I have confidence in the city region partners in working together with Welsh Government to find the right solutions to the problems that Members have raised today.

Cabinet Secretary, the section of motorway we're talking about is 41 to 48, but mine will focus on 41 to 42 at this point in time, where the extension to the 50 mph limit has been put on by the Welsh Government in an attempt to reduce pollution and nitrogen dioxide. Well, the report that I've got in my hand is actually a report produced for Welsh Government on stage 3 of the assessment. And in this is a recommendation to consider, as an option, the closure of junction 41 westbound. We've experienced that before. We've got the problems in the town; we can give you the history; we can show you that pollution did not ease up in the town. In fact, it got worse, because, as young children were walking to school, they had queues of cars and vehicles alongside them emitting all this pollution, breathing in at ground level. Will you look at this and tell the authors of this they should not have put that in place? They haven't done their job; they have not consulted the people who were actually involved in the junction 41 issue. Clearly, they haven't got a picture or clue about the traffic problems it created in the town, and the fact that they want to reduce pollution means that they should be looking at alternative ways and, as I say, the metro might be an option, getting more people onto the public transport system. Can you also reaffirm your decision to keep that junction open?

Well, can I assure the Member that the consultation that we launched just last week in respect of the latest WelTAG stage 3 appraisals was in response to the action that's been taken against Welsh Ministers, and whilst I am very, very familiar with the argument in favour of keeping junction 41 open—indeed, I've engaged with campaign leaders on this in recent years—we do have a legal duty to present options at this stage for reducing emissions along that particular stretch. It's one of five routes in Wales that is currently registered as not meeting our legal obligations under the European ambient air quality directive. I'm keen to ensure that we do meet those obligations, but we do so with minimum impact on commuters and on residents.

But may I also say, Llywydd, that my primary concern is with the health and well-being of people that live near those roads, not just the people that use those roads? It's now an indisputable fact that high emissions levels don't just cause health problems; they do cause deaths, and that needs to be addressed.