The next item is a statement by the Minister for Economy, Transport and North Wales on the future of rail and details of the new arrangements. And I call on the Minister to make the statement—Ken Skates.

Diolch, Llywydd. I would like to provide more information to Members on the new arrangements for the Wales and borders rail service and the delivery model Transport for Wales will be implementing.

COVID-19 has created serious challenges for public transport operators, challenges that the whole rail franchising system right across the United Kingdom has not been able to withstand. Despite these challenges, we remain absolutely committed to delivering our ambitious vision for a high-quality, low carbon and integrated public transport network right across Wales. We'll set out more detail on this vision with the launch of the consultation on our new Wales transport strategy, which I am planning for 16 November.

We have provided, and will continue to provide, significant financial support to the sector to ensure that services continue to operate so that those who depend on public transport are able to continue to use these services.

The impact on passenger revenue, which before COVID-19 provided roughly half of the funding needed to operate our services, requires us to take urgent action. We need to ensure that we have a stable contractual basis to deliver on our key commitments of the creation of the metro, the delivery of brand-new rolling stock and the decarbonisation of our public transport network.

Transport for Wales have now agreed the fundamentals of a new relationship between themselves and Keolis and Amey, which will provide a new robust delivery model. We are taking the urgent action necessary to protect services, to safeguard jobs and to deliver the ambitious metro programme. At this point, though, I do need to emphasise that we are still negotiating the particulars of the contract with our partners, so I'm sure Members will understand that I can't be too specific about commercially sensitive details at this stage.

The rail services that passengers use will, from February of next year, be operated by a new publicly owned subsidiary of Transport for Wales. The new publicly owned company has obtained its own safety licence and will be subject to safety and other regulation by the Office of Rail and Road, in exactly the same way as all other rail operators. We're taking public sector control over the day-to-day operation and delivery of rail services, to balance the need for best value for money for the taxpayer and to ensure the continuation of our vital rail services.

As well as protecting the delivery of rail services, we have also taken steps to secure the continued transformation of the core Valleys lines and ensure the building of the south Wales metro. This work will continue to be delivered by Amey Keolis Infrastructure Ltd, and a new partnership with KeolisAmey, led by Transport for Wales, will be established to help with the delivery of important commitments such as integrated ticketing and the ongoing integration of light and heavy rail. This is a necessary step that we have to take now to ensure the stability and ongoing operation of our rail services. We will continue to operate our rail services in this way, with our new public sector delivery model, for the foreseeable future.

We are still waiting for the UK Government to publish their long-promised Williams rail review. I expect this to recommend both greater public sector involvement in rail, and that we are finally given the powers and fair funding settlement we need to deliver rail services and rail infrastructure in Wales. The current crisis means that this need is greater than ever now.

As Members are aware, last month I wrote to the UK Secretary of State setting out the historic underinvestment in rail and the potential impact from HS2 on the Welsh economy. There is a fundamental need to reconsider the comparability factor under Barnett for the future consequentials in relation to HS2. Our ability to turn the misfortunes of the rail industry in Wales around and to encourage new passengers onto services in the future is dependent on fair and adequate investment in the infrastructure, to open up new routes, to increase service frequencies and to improve capacity.

Members will also recall that the UK Government's contention is that, unlike Crossrail, which is an England-only project, HS2 is in fact an England and Wales project. There will be no direct HS2 services benefiting Wales. According to HS2's own figures, HS2 will cause a net £150 million annual damage to the economy of Wales. As a result of the classification as an England and Wales project, we will get nothing from the £100 billion of UK taxpayer expenditure on a project that damages Wales. Scotland, who will receive direct benefits from the project, will get a share of the £100 billion. A fair share of the £100 billion would certainly allow us to transform the railways in Wales.

Now, I must be clear that we expect that the impact and the extent of this crisis on our public finances will be felt for some time. We've already provided up to £105 million of additional funding to run our rail services during this emergency period, and we'll probably need to make available a further £62 million of funding for the operation of services up until the end of March next year. This additional funding is essential to provide sufficient services and capacity within a reduced timetable to meet the travel needs of key workers and those with other essential travel needs, such as pupils and students returning to schools and colleges.

In the longer term, while passenger demand remains at significantly reduced levels, we are likely to have to continue to make some difficult choices. Now, the operation of rail services will continue to suffer from a significant reduction in revenue until we are able to fully welcome passengers back onto our public transport network. We'll need to take decisions about resource availability, operational costs and the potential of continuing to offer a reduced level of service until demand and passenger revenues increase again. However, we will take the steps necessary to ensure that key workers and those that depend on public transport will continue to be able to make the journeys they need to. I can assure Members that I will keep them updated on the work we are doing and the choices that we will face with the delivery of rail services in Wales.

Can I thank the Minister for his statement this afternoon, and for the advance copy as well, which was appreciated? I am a bit disappointed, Minister, that you haven't brought forward a statement on the last Wednesday before half-term. Instead, I and Members had to read about it later that day in the media. But it would be useful if you could set out why you weren't able to bring forward a statement to the Senedd before the half-term period.

From my perspective, people generally don't care who runs a train service, or what name is on the side of a train; they tend to care more about the service, they tend to care about whether the train is going to arrive on time, or is it going to arrive at all, are they able to get Wi-Fi, are they able to find a clean toilet or a toilet at all on the train. These are some of the issues that passengers tend to care about, rather than who is running the service. But Welsh Government's decision to take control of the operation, regardless of the right or wrongs of that, doesn't fill me with great optimism. I think of Cardiff Airport and the cost implications for the Government and the risk associated with that, and this is on a whole new level in terms of taking on the operation of rail.

Now, it's the cost implications that I think we do need to have answers on, and I'm specifically thinking of the long-term costs of the decision that you've made. Putting aside the rights and wrongs, you've made the decision and there are going to be huge cost implications for not just your Government department, but across the whole of Government. When I raised this with you 10 days or two weeks ago at the Committee for the Scrutiny of the First Minister, you said that you're going to be working through the cost implications as part of those detailed negotiations, and that when you made the oral statement in two weeks' time, which is now, you'd be able to provide us with the costs moving forward. I appreciate your statement today talks about not being able to do that at this stage, because negotiations are still going on and you're asking Members to have patience with that process because of the commercial sensitivities, but perhaps you could tell us when you will be in a position to conclude those negotiations and answer questions around the costs. Ultimately, tell us, Minister, what it is that you won't be spending money on in the future to meet the costs of this decision two weeks ago.

Perhaps you could also tell us, Minister, what other options were Welsh Government and you considering before reaching this decision—what were your other thought processes? What were the other options on the table? Perhaps you could talk about those. Also, what are the Welsh Government's long-term aspirations in terms of public ownership of rail services in Wales? Is it the case that, ultimately, you believe that it will stay in public ownership and be operated by Welsh Government, or do you envisage that the operation will go back to private ownership at some time in the future?

And finally, and probably back to my opening comments, really, passengers care about the implications of the service for them, so what are the implications in terms of new rolling stock and station improvements, which, of course, are what passengers and the public particularly care about?

Well, can I thank Russell George for the various questions that he's raised today? I do appreciate that Members may be disappointed that a statement was not able to be made to the Senedd Chamber on the Wednesday of the week when the announcement was made. Let me outline to Members the reasons why, and they are many. First of all, sensitive commercial negotiations have been taking place during the summer and into the autumn with KeolisAmey on the future of rail services, but, of course, the heads of terms that were agreed were only agreed and then signed off at 6 p.m. on the Tuesday evening, which meant it was simply not possible to then table this for debate or for a statement on Wednesday ahead of the recent recess. Also, given the uncertainty that this date would be achieved and that slightly more time would be required for briefings, obviously, for staff, the 2,500 staff, we therefore determined that scheduling it for Thursday was prudent. Thursday of that week was also the last date to ensure that all staff could be briefed and that the 90-day Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 1981 consultation period could be instigated, and therefore it was not possible, then, to make the statement this week. Now, given our desire to ensure that not just customers but staff are at the heart of everything that we decide with regard to the Wales and borders rail services, I think it was only right and proper that workers heard first about the future of their employment and the services that they deliver. And I can add a further final but important reason why the timings were such, and it's because Keolis and Amey are two very significant international private companies, they have shareholders, and there are requirements on market-sensitive announcements and how these need to be communicated with shareholders, and therefore we were unable to say anything before those shareholders were informed.

Now, I would agree with Russell George that people care less about the brand that is carried on the side of a train than they do about how a train operates—whether it's on time, whether it's clean, whether toilets are available, what sort of catering services are available on board—but I disagree with Russell George on his assertion that the public sector is less able to deliver regular, reliable services than the private sector. We need only look at the likes of Northern to appreciate that the UK Government would agree with me on this point. The UK Government intervened with Northern Rail, took it over, brought into public ownership. So, what we are doing is, to a degree, consistent with what other Governments are doing. And I think Members would also recognise that in other areas of public transport delivery—buses, for example—the public sector plays an excellent role in some parts of Wales, and we would wish councils to play a greater role across all local authority areas in delivering bus services.

And in terms of comparing the decision that we've made with regard to rail services to our management of Cardiff Airport, I would just remind Members that, prior to this global pandemic, I don't think there is any Member in the Chamber that was questioning the success of Cardiff international airport in recent years—passenger numbers had increased to record levels since our taking over of that particular asset; we were delivering on a hugely ambitious vision for the airport. But, of course, regional airports the length of breadth of the UK, and further afield, are suffering terribly as a result of coronavirus, and it must be said that many more regional airports are in more vulnerable positions than Cardiff international airport, and that's because Cardiff international airport has a Government sitting behind it, able to protect it.

Now, in terms of costs associated with the decision that we have made, costs for the negotiations and the outcome of the negotiations will be available before the transfer takes place in February. But there are many other costs that we need to consider—one the cost of actually maintaining services at the levels that they are operating against the reduced fare box, and, regardless of the ownership model, there would still be a need to intervene with additional public money in order to keep trains operating. In terms of set-up costs, what I can say to Members is that TfW have already identified that it'll be necessary to ascertain certain assets from KeolisAmey to ensure the smooth transition and ongoing provision of services, but the important point is that these are assets and, therefore, they have a value, rather than just a cost. Once the value of these assets has been fully resolved, I will ask TfW to provide Members with a comprehensive update.

There will, obviously, be one-off administrative costs in respect of managing the TUPE process and—[Inaudible.]—of any required contracts. This will be significantly less, it must be said, than the ongoing management and performance fee being paid under the emergency arrangements. And then the costs of this will be less, on the whole, than the performance and management fee being paid by the Department for Transport to train operators under their emergency recovery management agreement, which takes me to the next important point that Russell George was asking about, and that was what other methods of taking forward the management of and delivery of rail services were considered by Welsh Government. Well, every option was considered, and, at a UK Government level, through DfT, there is no single option or model that has been taken forward for all franchise agreements. Some train operators have had the original emergency management agreement extended, others have been put into a new agreement for up to 18 months, and those agreements are known as emergency recovery management agreements. Some, of course, as Members are aware, have been given direct awards, while some are under the operator-of-last-resort model.

Many are not giving certainty to passengers in England. What we have done is offered a clear time frame for a smooth transition, a certainty for passengers and for staff. The key difference with our franchise agreement, which we signed in 2018, was that it incorporated not just rail services, but also the transformation of the asset, the core Valleys lines. That made it distinctly different. So, whilst we were able to consider all of those models that are being adopted in various franchise agreements in England, we determined that the model that we decided on was the most suitable for Wales.

In terms of the question asked about how long can this last, well, we await a UK position in regard to the Railways Act 2005 and whether that will have to be amended in some way. But our position is that we will be taking forward this new operating model for as long as we can, and we wish to make sure that we use the agreements that we have in place, the heads of terms that we're going to be negotiating the details of, to ensure that we have a transition in terms of rail services, but that we also deliver on the ambitious metro programme and, furthermore, that we use the joint venture with Keolis and Amey to guarantee that we can deliver integrated ticketing and other improvements in the way that rail services operate in the Wales and borders areas.

And then, finally, Llywydd, Russell George asked the really important question about our commitment to rolling stock, that £800 million commitment to rolling stock. We remain committed to delivering that £800 million upgrade programme, new trains—excellent new trains—operating on our railways. We are committed to that, and, of course, future Governments will wish to look at spending priorities in the longer term with regard to station upgrades, but, right now, I remain committed to investing wherever we can in those station upgrades. But I have to say the UK Government needs to make good on its historic underinvestment in rail infrastructure and also invest in rail lines and in stations.

I thank the Minister very much for his statement. I do understand the circumstances that led to this statement coming into the public domain before it had been placed before the Senedd, and I do accept that the Minister himself regards that as suboptimal and not the way that he would usually wish to proceed.

As the Minister knows, Plaid Cymru are pleased to support him in this approach. When the opportunity came up a couple of years ago, we felt that there wasn't a particularly clear case for private sector shareholders needing to make a profit out of our public transport services, and there is very little evidence that doing so makes them more efficient or more pleasant to use. We will support the Minister in maintaining this arrangement for as long as possible, and if it's necessary for him to seek any amendments to legislation at a Westminster level, we will support him in doing so.

I'd like to ask some specific questions. Minister, you mention the possibility of the need to improve stations—for example, the station at Llanelli is in a pretty rundown condition at present. Will this new arrangement make it easier for the railway services in Wales to respond to Welsh public priorities? Will it, for example, also make it easier to join up timetabling? It's a particular frustration for people who find themselves coming from the west of Wales into Swansea station just as the train to London or the train to Manchester is pulling out because those timetables don't work together. Places like Kidwelly, where you have a very long walk from the railway station to the bus station—will this new arrangement make it more effective and more easy for you to guide public transport to meet public service priorities?

Can you confirm for us, Minister—and I take it from your reference to the TUPE arrangements—that there will be no negative effects on the terms and conditions of staff delivering our railway services at all levels? You have given us that assurance privately, and I know that you have had those discussions with trade unions and others, but I think it would helpful for you to be able to put on public record that staff will not be negatively implicated by this.

I wonder if you have had any indication, Minister, as to when the UK Government will publish the Williams review, because, in a sense, without knowing that, and any measures that may come from that, you are slightly operating with one hand tied behind your back with regard to rail services in Wales. I would associate myself and my party with everything that you've said, Minister, about the consequential that should be available from HS2. It is absolutely unacceptable that it's not being made available, and, again, we will support you in any representations you're making.

Just finally, I appreciate you cannot, as you said to Russell George and you said in your statement, give us details of the financial arrangements, and I appreciate the commercial confidentiality issues involved, but other than the administrative costs that you've mentioned with regard to TUPE and the costs that arise directly from the pandemic, which would have had to be met whether the franchise went into public or remained in private hands, can you give us your assurance that it is your intention that no further longer term costs will be incurred to the public purse other than those that would have occurred under the circumstances had the franchise remained in private hands?

The Deputy Presiding Officer took the Chair.

Can I thank Helen Mary Jones for her questions, and also for her support of the action that we're taking? I should have added in my response to Russell George, in terms of the timing of the announcement, that, of course, news leaked on the Wednesday evening not as a result of any action by a Welsh Government official, nor by the actions of anybody in TfW or Keolis or Amey. It leaked, unfortunately, and that is why people were discovering the outcome of our negotiations before we were able to formally announce it on the Thursday.

In terms of timetabling, well, integration with bus timetables potentially will be enhanced given the increasing role the public sector will be playing in the management of bus services in the future. So, when considered alongside the reforms that are taking place regarding bus services, I think there is a very, very positive story to be told about how the public sector will be able to better manage timetables and, on top of that, fare regimes as well. Integrated ticketing is vitally important to many of the world's best rail and bus operations, and we wish to see integrated ticketing developed as soon as possible and then rolled out across the franchise and across the bus network. That's one of the reasons why we wish to retain the expertise of Keolis. They have incredible experience globally in integrated ticketing, and through the joint venture we'll be able to tap into their experience and expertise and deliver a similar integrated ticketing system here in Wales. 

I can assure Members and those 2,500 members of staff within TfW Rail Services that the transfer to TfW Rail Limited will be on the same terms and conditions. And we wish to ensure that staff remain content and secure in the knowledge that public ownership will deliver the same terms and conditions, if not better, if we can improve on them in the years to come, as would have been applied through private ownership.

We don't yet have a date from the UK Government concerning the publication of the Williams review and the response to it, but I have been assured by the Secretary of State that the 'connecting the union' review won't hold back publication of Williams. And I think that's really important because, although the 'connecting the union' review will be carried out in a short time frame, I think everybody would recognise that the publication of Williams is long overdue and cannot wait any longer. 

And in terms of the costs, there are two different costs that I think we need to differentiate: one, the costs that are associated with delivering services in the context of COVID, and then the other set of costs are those that are associated with delivering rail services in the new operating model. Because we will not be paying a profit, we have the potential then to actually make savings or to reinvest all of the revenue that is taken through the fare box back into enhanced services. I am determined to make sure that it is the latter, that we improve services with any additional revenue that we are raising, rather than, as would have been the case, paying profit.

I'm grateful to you, Minister, for the statement you've just made as well, and also I'm very grateful to you for the action you've taken to sustain services at this most difficult time, both in terms of providing the funding but the public sector acting as a catalyst for action to guarantee services and jobs as well. And I think, given the statement we had earlier from the First Minister and the statement we've heard from you this afternoon, we've demonstrated the power of a united public sector in Wales being able to underpin public services, and I hope that's a lesson that we will continue to learn into the future.

There are two issues that you will not be surprised that I would want to raise with you this afternoon. The first is about investment and the second is about services serving my own constituency. In terms of investment, Russell George says that the passengers don't care whose name is written on the side of trains. That may well be the case, but they do care about investment. They care deeply about rolling stock, they care deeply about services, they care deeply about the infrastructure, and Wales has been starved of that investment for far too long. A simple look at the mathematics—my 10-year-old could explain to the Conservatives the way that Wales has been poorly treated by the current structures, and it is time for them to change. You've already referenced the Williams review in the statement, and I'd be grateful if you could update Members on where you believe we are at the moment, because we desperately need the investment that is possible to ensure that we do have the best possible services across the whole of Wales. 

And secondly, in terms of the Ebbw Vale line, you and I have discussed on many occasions throughout the last four years the investment that's required both in terms of rolling stock, and we've seen significant investment in that over the last two years, but also in terms of services. Does the current situation—? This is a really important point, I think. Do the current circumstances mean that there is any delay in the potential for additional services from Ebbw Vale to Cardiff? The current timeline is to see additional services from Ebbw Vale next year. Is that still going ahead, or is that affected? We then need the investment to allow four trains an hour down from Ebbw Vale to Cardiff, and we also want to see, of course, investment in the infrastructure serving Abertillery in terms of a new station there. So, those are really key investments to ensure that, in the Ebbw valley, we don't miss out on the advantages of the metro system. And to ensure that that happens, we do need a guarantee or certainly an indication this afternoon that that investment is continuing to be made by the Welsh Government, when we all know that the UK Government is going to walk away from its responsibilities.

Well, can I thank Alun Davies for his contribution through his questions and for his support of the Welsh Government's decisions with regard to the Wales and borders rail services?

I think Alun Davies makes a really important point in that one in five people in Wales rely on public transport. They don't have access to a car, and public transport, therefore, offers hundreds of thousands of people the opportunity to live their lives without relying on private vehicles. And had we not sustained services during this incredibly difficult period, and I know that it's cost a significant sum of taxpayers' money, but had we not done that, we would have been depriving those one-in-five citizens of Wales the opportunity to lead just a basic, decent life, and there is a massive social justice issue at the heart of what we have been doing during the course of the pandemic. We have wished to leave nobody behind. We have wished to leave nobody further disadvantaged as a result of what we are experiencing, and that principle we'll carry through to the recovery. Traditionally, during recessions and then through to the recovery from recessions, people who are most marginalised, who are furthest from the jobs market, who are the most vulnerable and who often experience their lives in a way that some of us would struggle to imagine, often they find that they are left even further behind during the course of the recovery, and we do not wish to see that happen here in Wales. That's why we remain absolutely committed to investing in public transport and in the services that so many people rely on.

I'm going to talk briefly about both the Williams and the Burns recommendations as well, because they have implications in terms of the Ebbw services. First of all with regard to Williams, and Alun Davies is absolutely right that we do need fair funding for infrastructure, well, our position is very clear. In our submission to the Williams review, we made the case for devolution of responsibility for rail infrastructure and for a fair funding settlement. And in terms of the South East Wales Transport Commission's work, we await the publication of the final Burns report, but I can tell Members today that I've asked Transport for Wales to start developing a strategy for a joint delivery unit to ensure that the necessary skills and resources will be available to ensure that we can deliver on the recommendations of the South East Wales Transport Commission. And I can assure Alun Davies that we remain entirely committed to taking forward those rail projects, such as the Ebbw Vale frequency enhancement, which will deliver better integrated public transport networks for the region and offer a viable alternative to relying on the M4. So, I can assure Alun Davies that there should be no delay in terms of delivering the enhanced frequency that he spoke about, but I must caveat this with the obvious point that we're also reliant on Network Rail in delivering those enhancements on time.

Thank you. David Rowlands. Can somebody unmute David Rowlands's mike? There you go.

Good afternoon, Dirprwy Lywydd, I'm afraid I didn't have the indication to unmute there.

Can I thank the Minister for your update today and for your statement? It is, of course, excellent news that you were able to put in place the interventions outlined, not only for those using the rail network, but also for those whose jobs are being secured by your actions. And can I assure the Minister today that my group are fully supportive of your interventions, and not only that, but we will support any representations you make to the UK Government to help finance the rail network in Wales going forward?

Despite your assurances, Minister, we have to be pragmatic about this, and there may be an interruption in the roll-out of the upgrade to the rail network previously envisaged. So, could you give us an idea as to which parts of those upgrades may be most impacted by the changes you've outlined today?

Now, you spoke with regard to the integrated ticket services, and these are fundamental to make sure that travel in Wales goes on both uninterrupted and as easily as possible. So, can you assure us again that you're using the private enterprises that you're taking over from, that you will be able to deliver on those integrated services?

I have to say that I really do believe that there was no other alternative for you than to take the actions that you've taken, and I applaud you on those actions. I'm sure it's the only way that we could have kept the travel services in Wales going forward.

Can I thank David Rowlands for his questions and again for his support for the decisions taken by the Welsh Government? I really do welcome his comments, and I would agree with David Rowlands that 2,500 people feel far more secure now in their jobs, and we look forward to working with those dedicated and committed members of staff in improving services across the Wales and borders areas in the years to come. 

In terms of the upgrade to infrastructure, and principally to the metro programme, well, work started on the metro transformation over the summer and it will continue as planned, uninterrupted by these changes. There will be no effect in terms of the new operating model; we will proceed as planned. But it should also be said, Llywydd, that that might not have been the case had we experienced an unmanaged exit from the contract, had we seen a catastrophic collapse. Then, we would, I am absolutely certain, have seen a significant delay in the delivery of the metro upgrades, and that, of course, would have had implications; it would have had challenges in terms of the draw-down of European funds. So, this isn't just a necessary step to provide the security for workers and for customers; this is also a necessary step to secure the metro and the time frame for delivering the metro. 

In terms of the delivery of improvements and the delivery of the infrastructure that David Rowlands has questioned whether I'm confident that we have the expertise, that we have the capacity and the capability to be able to do that, well, the beauty of what we've been able to agree with Keolis and with Amey is that whilst we'll be taking the operation and management of rail services into public control, we are still going to be retaining their expertise in terms of being able to deliver the metro and to be able to deliver improvements in rail services, and as I've already said, in terms of integration and in terms of establishing a fairer and integrated fare regime.

Minister, can I just say how pleased I am that we've been able to take this step? The privatisation of rail and the deregulation of buses has been really one of the great disasters, one of the great disastrous legacies of the Thatcher era, and it's led to us having one of the most underinvested public transport systems in the whole of western Europe. And sometimes we forget the history of this: 1947, when the railways were taken into public ownership, it was because they had gone bankrupt in private hands. You referred earlier to Network Rail, which, of course, before that, was Railtrack, which was privatised and then went bankrupt in 2001, and we've seen that as a consistent trend because public transport belongs in the public sector, accountable to our local economy and accountable as a public service.

Can I just say how pleased I am also that the headquarters of Transport for Wales and this new body is based in Pontypridd, where it's contributing also to the regeneration of the town? And also the difference it's beginning to make when you start looking at public assets, like stations in Pontypridd, as a community asset: all the buildings on that station are now being looked at as to how they can possibly be used by community groups and organisations within the community, and that's the difference, I think, public ownership actually makes. 

Can I just ask a couple of questions with regard to the investment in that and the difference it will make? That is, firstly, the investment in all the new stations that are taking place along the Valleys lines, and of course, that will continue. Can I ask also about the issue of the progress that's being made with regard to the integration and development of the rail services now, and the opportunities with integrating with bus transport? Can I also ask about your views on the opportunity now to reopen former railway lines? We have already a commitment, I think, for over £0.5 million for the business plan for the reopening of the north-west railway line, Cardiff to Llantrisant, a former railway line that really offers a new opportunity for public transport. And finally—

Finally, thank you.

In terms of the long-term future, section 25 of the Railways Act, which the Tories put in to prevent public ownership of public transport—will you campaign for the revocation of that? It is a hindrance and it is an anachronism in terms of the future of public transport in Wales.

Can I thank Mick Antoniw for his support for the action that we've taken? I'd agree with everything that he said, actually. We only need to look at the public ownership of some of the most successful international airports around the world to recognise that public ownership works, and I'm sure Members will be quite surprised to learn that some of the most successful international airports are in the hands of the public sector. That demonstrates just how important it is to have a degree of public ownership over not just services, but the actual physical assets as well—the infrastructure—and that's why we wish to see rail infrastructure devolved to the Welsh Government, and for a fair funding settlement to accompany it.

Now, in terms of the Pontypridd headquarters, I'm delighted that TfW chose Pontypridd for their headquarters. It will make an enormous difference in terms of placemaking, in terms of improving the vibrancy of the community, and I'm pleased to be able to tell Mick Antoniw that we see that particular location as being amongst the first of our remote working hubs. Our 'town centre first' approach being led by Hannah Blythyn is going to be important in terms of regeneration, but also in terms of providing alternative opportunities for people to be able to work away from large office blocks within city centres, and instead within their communities, contributing within the Valleys communities to the important Better Jobs, Closer to Home agenda as well. And I'm hoping that we'll be able to look at other stations across the Wales route as opportunities for opening remote working hubs, opportunities that will lead people to be able to leave their cars at home, utilise active travel routes or public transport to get to and from work, and in so doing, also contribute to the regeneration of communities across the length and breadth of Wales.

In terms of reopening railway lines, we remain committed to all of those projects that we've been working on. We remain committed to the stations that we wish to see reopened, those stations that we wish to see built, but of course, there is a requirement of DfT funding for those projects to be delivered, and we are regularly pressing the case for the necessary infrastructure improvements and funding to come to Wales. I would agree with Mick Antoniw regarding the Railways Act; obviously, it's a matter for the UK Government, but I think revocation of that particular section will be necessary, because at the moment, operator of last resort can only be utilised for what is described as a temporary period. Well, let's face it, a huge number of franchise agreements are going to be subject to OLR for some time to come, and therefore I think it makes perfect sense for the UK Government to visit this issue with a degree of urgency, and to deal with section 25 in an appropriate way, and that means revocation.

Minister, you'll know that I chair the Senedd co-operative group—a great bunch of people there. So, can I ask, now that we're rightly, I have to say, taking greater control of the rail franchise in Wales, whether Welsh Government will now seek to embed mutual principles in the governance of the Wales and borders rail franchise, giving a greater say to rail users and rail workers, and look to successful mutuals such as Merthyr Valleys Homes for best-practice principles and the Wales Co-operative Centre for governance expertise in doing so? That would be really welcome, and we'd welcome a discussion on that.

Minister, one other point. Whilst really welcoming the Sunday service we've had on the Llynfi line, the tremendous co-operation that we've had from Welsh Government and funding to explore options around Pencoed, and releasing the bottleneck that we have there, can I ask whether we're likely to see, now, progress on an update for my constituents on the rail frequency enhancements on the Maesteg-Bridgend line? It would be great to hear more about that sometime soon.

Can I thank Huw Irranca-Davies for his questions? I'd like to assure him from the outset that Maesteg has certainly not been forgotten during the course of pretty intense negotiations. I can tell Huw Irranca-Davies actually that I'm pleased that TfW are going to be taking forward work on the Welsh transport appraisal guidance stage 2 process late next month or early January. I think that's vitally important, because we need to be able to demonstrate that, during the course of the transition period, work will continue in enhancing rail frequency and in delivering the sort of upgrades that are required to provide more frequent services.

In terms of the work that Huw does on the co-operative group, I'd like to congratulate him for that sterling work, and I'd agree that the mutual principles are vitally important in terms of the new operating model. We've already offered worker representation on the TfW board, and I'm keen to extend mutual principles to the establishment of TfW Rail Ltd, who will be responsible for that publicly owned delivery of rail services under the new operating model.

And finally, Rhianon Passmore.

Thank you, Deputy Llywydd. Can you hear me?

Yes.

Thank you; it's not showing. I'd like to thank the Minister for his statement today updating the Welsh Parliament on the vital matter of the future of the railways in Wales. I welcome the joint delivery unit and what has been said about mutual principles.

Everybody in this Chamber and throughout Wales knows that the last few months have been extremely challenging for public transport in Wales and across the United Kingdom. The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted passenger revenue, but it remains absolutely critical for the workforce and our economy. Minister, let there be no timidity in supporting your swift intervention and sustaining services, because we know that the majority of the Welsh and British public support the principles of nationalisation of the railway system in Britain. And let us not forget that this was a privatisation of John Major's Tory Government in the early 1990s, continuing the Thatcher British sell-off legacy—once again, a step too far—or, as the Minister reminds us, the Wales infrastructure consequential, with great missing millions lost, or the ongoing great train robbery of HS2, once again denuding Wales of its due and legitimate finance. 

Minister, you and the Welsh Government have, despite this, committed £1 billion to build new trains and the south Wales metro. So, when do you envisage the new line from Ebbw Vale running through Islwyn to Newport will become operational? And secondly, Minister, isn't chief executive of Transport for Wales, James Price, absolutely spot on when he asserts that this allows us to reduce the profits we pay to the private sector massively over time, and make sure that when that revenue comes back, it comes back to the taxpayer, and shouldn't every Member of the Senedd welcome that? Thank you.

I'd like to thank Rhianon Passmore for her comments and for her support for what we have done. And yes, I'd agree with James Price, CEO of TfW, and what he stated; I think he stated the obvious, he's absolutely right. In terms of the Ebbw Vale to Newport service, I've already said to Alun Davies that work is proceeding as planned, with the caveat that we are obviously reliant on Network Rail to deliver against our published time frame. I would agree with everything that Rhianon Passmore said about our decision to take swift action and bring services into public ownership, but I would also say that the decision that we took in no way reflects on the operator's performance. In fact, performance was improving very significantly under the operator. And that is one of the reasons why I was determined to ensure that we retained their expertise and their experience. They are one of the world's greatest operators, and we are pleased to be able to have secured their partnership for years to come through the joint venture.

COVID has, obviously, broken the model in the UK. No private business would have been able to shoulder the enormous costs associated with operating during the pandemic. I must also warn Members that public ownership offers opportunities, but it doesn't provide the answer that would enable us to overcome coronavirus without difficult questions about future service provision having to be answered. We will endure a lengthy period of financial challenge in the public sector, no matter who is operating rail services anywhere in the UK. The costs are going to be increasing as a consequence of the pandemic. That will lead to difficult decisions, obviously, having to be made. But the fact of the matter is that with public ownership we are in fuller control of what we do, and that is something that I think, generally, Members across the Chamber would endorse.

Thank you very much, Minister.