Item 4 on the agenda this afternoon is a statement by the Deputy Minister for Economy and Transport on 'Llwybr Newydd—a new Wales transport strategy'. I call on the Deputy Minister, Lee Waters.

Diolch yn fawr, Dirprwy Lywydd. The coronavirus pandemic has reminded us that there are many things that we once took for granted that we now no longer do. The ability to easily go places, to see family, to work, or to socialise, are things that none of us need reminding of the importance of as 2020 comes to an end. Despite huge advances in using digital communications, there's nothing like connecting with people face to face. And, as we begin to look to the other side of the pandemic, the future shape of the transport system is very much in our minds.

Today we are launching the consultation for a new Wales transport strategy: a vision for transport in Wales that shows how we can rebuild connections between people in the short term, while reshaping our transport networks to respond to the challenges of climate change. This time next year, the Welsh Government will need to produce the next iteration of a low-carbon plan. It will need to set out how we will achieve the ambitious targets that this Senedd has committed ourselves to, to significantly reduce carbon emissions.

Transport has a big role to play in getting us onto a lower carbon path, and our new strategy will need to have modal shift at its centre: fewer car journeys and a much greater share of trips by sustainable forms of transport. Now, that is easier to say than it is to do, and this consultation needs to focus all our minds on how each of us can make a contribution to our shared challenge.

We have made a start. The early development plans for reliable and affordable regional metro systems across Wales have helped us imagine the future that we need. The steps that we have taken in recent times to bring our Wales and borders rail network back into public ownership, and to take greater control over planning the nation's bus network, and the work that we are doing to invest in networks for active forms of travel are all important long-term steps that have contributed.

We are also setting targets to encourage people to work flexibly and remotely to reduce the need to travel in the first place. And, in the spirit and of the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015, we have made hard decisions too, taking the time to rethink the need for an M4 relief road, in recognition that when the facts change, actions have to change too. We look forward, next week, to the final report of the South East Wales Transport Commission, under Lord Burns's chairmanship, for detailed recommendations of how to address congestion along the M4 around Newport.

The strategy we launch today marks the start of a genuine conversation we all need to have about how our transport networks need to change over the next generation, and when Members read the consultation documents, they will see they are the product of deep engagement with key stakeholders in the spirit of co-production that the future generations Act requires. The next step is an even wider conversation with the people of Wales, because we will only achieve change if people choose to change.

Over the last 50 years, we have created a transport system that has prioritised car use. It has allowed individual freedoms and flexibilities that we all value, but it has also locked in deep inequalities and environmental harms. We have created a culture of car dependency that will not be easy to change. Our draft strategy sets out to achieve accessibility and sustainability: more efficient movement of goods and people by tackling congestion; setting targets for modal shift to free up road space for more attractive public transport; and creating a system that doesn't just cater for those with cars, but also serves the 23 per cent of people in this country who have no access to a car.

Of course, it's not just about changing what we say; the imperative is about changing what we do. This means a fundamental change to the way we make transport decisions and investments. It means embedding a new sustainable transport hierarchy, to put provision for walking, cycling and public transport ahead of provision and investment for private motor vehicles. If that strategy is agreed, then we will need to set out specific projects and interventions in a detailed five-year national transport delivery plan. Today is about the overall direction.

Delivering on the vision we have set out will be challenging. It will require joined-up policies, not only within the Welsh Government, but from partners, too—in particular from local government who, if the Senedd agrees, will have a critical role, through corporate joint committees, to set out regional plans. We have discussed many times in this Chamber that Wales has not seen the level of investment in our rail network that our population and our share of network infrastructure deserve. The UK Government has a role in helping address this, and today I make an offer to work with them constructively as they seek to deliver on their commitment to level up the UK, if they, in turn, commit to respecting the devolution settlement.

We cannot achieve our aims without behaviour change, and that will require difficult political choices and strong leadership—not just at a Government level, but at a local level too. You, as Members of the Senedd, will have a critical role in helping to support some of the tough local decisions needed along the way. There are elements of this that will need to be drawn out in the fundamental, national debate that we now need to have. For example, what role might road user charging play? As we made clear earlier in the year, the Welsh Government has no fixed view on this yet. There is no secret plan in a desk drawer within Government ready for implementing road user charging, but we do have a responsibility to consider how it might be used to effect behaviour change in a fair, just and equitable way.   

As the Chancellor has indicated in recent days, the move away from fuel engines also means a move away from fuel tax, and we now need to work out how we fill the gap that will be left. As a first step in that debate, Dirprwy Lywydd, I am today placing in the Members' Library a report entitled, 'The Independent Review of Road User Charging in Wales', undertaken by Derek Turner. This suggests, as a first step, the development of a national framework for how road user charging decisions can be made, and I look forward to engaging with Members in more detail on this issue as we undertake the consultation.

There are those who say that the future is too uncertain to be making such plans, or that electric cars will solve all our problems, and I believe that such a laissez-faire approach is not an effective transport strategy for the twenty-first century. In fact, it is no strategy at all. It won't solve our congestion problems. It won't solve our air quality issues. It won't solve our obesity crisis. It won't make us a fairer nation. The new Wales transport strategy is a clear signal that, whatever tomorrow holds, the Welsh Government sees integrated and high-quality public transport as a vital and critical part of our future.

Dirprwy Lywydd, we stand at an important moment. Our climate is in crisis. New technology is disrupting the way we think about travel,  and coronavirus is severely testing the financial and economic foundations of public transport models. This is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to put public transport and sustainable transport at the heart of the Wales that we want to build, to put us on a new path. Diolch.

Minister, can I thank you for the advance copy of your statement and also for the technical briefing yesterday, which was hosted by yourself, to opposition spokespeople? That was very much appreciated.

As this strategy is quite wide-ranging, I'm sure that Members will want to consider it in detail during the forthcoming consultation period. Myself, I certainly think that the transport strategy is well overdue. I do have a number of questions. I would be grateful if you could set out the timescales for the delivery of the transport strategy and the Welsh Government's approach to delivering the strategy. You talked about the national five-year plan. Will that be in association with local government via their local or regional transport plans? And just to have some dates around some of the context of what you talked about today.

The Economy, Infrastructure and Skills Committee has considered the decarbonisation of transport—a report that, as it happens, we'll be debating in this Senedd in a couple of weeks' time. You've outlined today, to an extent, how the Wales transport strategy will support the aims of decarbonising transport, but can I ask in particular: how will you ensure that the freight sector and Cardiff Airport will play a role in addressing the pre-COVID gaps, which were found in the Welsh Government's plans for decarbonisation? And how will you address the findings that high capital costs of investing in electric vehicles are a real barrier for operators and local authorities? I appreciate that you've talked about that particular area not being the be-all and end-all. In your statement, you did mention that

'We have created a culture of car dependency that will not be easy to change.'

To change people's travel preferences, mindsets need to change, because mindsets determine behaviour. I think the EIS committee has recently concluded in its report on decarbonisation that Wales cannot afford to miss the opportunity for a permanent culture shift in the way we travel as lockdown eases. So, I think we're in general agreement on that aspect, but I'm also conscious as well that large parts of the geography of Wales are very rural and people have no alternative but to use cars; there's no alternative for them. Also, there are those who have disabilities who also have no other choice but to travel by car. So, I suspect that we're in agreement, but I'm just conscious that we take that balanced approach, as well, and your comments on that would be appreciated.

How has the Welsh Government incorporated COVID-19 and the recovery from the pandemic into its plans? We've got homeworking and changes in working patterns. Also, as a result of social distancing and the potential long-term reluctance by some people to use public transport again, how have you considered the implications that this could have on the capacity, demand and viability of the network? You've previously told us that you don't want people to be discouraged from using public transport, but how will the Wales transport strategy encourage people back onto public transport when we know that many are turning back to the private car? And I say there as well—. I'll leave that due to time.

The threat of penalising the motorist is certainly not the way forward, in my view. Therefore, how will the draft Wales strategy seek to create an attractive and convenient alternative to the car, which will incentivise the behavioural change that is necessary? The National Infrastructure Commission wasn't mentioned at all, or rather, I couldn't see much mention of the National Infrastructure Commission—I won't say 'at all'; I haven't had time to read it all in detail. But I'm just conscious that that was set up as a body to look at infrastructure for the long term, and I'm just wondering how the National Infrastructure Commission fits into your plans in terms of the strategy and the plans that will follow.

And finally, do you agree that the performance of Wales's road transport network will be a crucial enabler of future sustained productivity and competitiveness? Road transport corridors are the arteries of domestic and international trade and boost the overall competitiveness of the Welsh economy, and I'd welcome your perspective on that statement as well.

The Llywydd took the Chair.

Thank you. There was a significant number of questions there. I'll do my best to try and answer them as quickly as I can. In terms of timescales, this is a 20-year vision but it sets out five-year priorities, and then the detailed delivery of that will be delivered through a national delivery plan, supported by regional transport plans, which will be developed by the joint transport committees. So, as I say, the important part of today is setting out—pardon the pun—the direction of travel, and, to weave in your penultimate question, the National Infrastructure Commission has been heavily involved in our consultation with officials to get us to this point, as, indeed, many others have. And the whole point now of the 10-week consultation is to go into a richer conversation to inform the final document that we publish before the end of this term.

There are in fact, for the first time, within the strategy, mini plans for different modes of transport, so the questions that Russell George asks about freight and air travel are indeed covered by discrete mini plans within the strategy that have bespoke approaches to each of those. The question of electric car infrastructure is important and is covered within the overall vision. That's not just the role of the Government to do that; the Government doesn't provide petrol stations and nor should we be expected to provide all the infrastructure. I think, as always, we should look at where we can step in where the market may not act and put our support in where it can have greatest effect.

The point on rural areas and people with disabilities is a point well made, and, in fact, a point reflected in the strategy. In fact, priority 4 makes just the point that many people, including those in rural areas and disabled people, may not have the options that others have. But the premise of this strategy is that we have to do things differently than the way we have been doing things. Even in rural areas, a large number of journeys are within towns and to towns, and there is much that can be done there. We only have to look at our European neighbours to know they too have rural areas and yet have a significantly different approach to sustainable transport than we do. So, it can be done. The way is there; I think the question that remains is whether the will is there across the Chamber. 

And on his final point on the road network as arteries of trade, as he calls it—of course, and maintaining our road infrastructure and adapting it to the challenges of climate change. We saw, at the beginning of this year, the impact flooding has on road and rail infrastructure, and it's crucial that we invest more than we have been on maintaining our road network, precisely for the reason Russell George sets out. But getting congestion off the roads, getting unnecessary car journeys off the roads frees up the road network for those necessary journeys where there aren't alternatives.

I'd like to thank the Deputy Minister for his statement today and for the technical briefing that he provided to us as opposition Members yesterday. I'd also like to thank his officials. It was very helpful and very enlightening. Of course, this is a very wide-ranging set of proposals. I think we all need to take time to consider them properly and to respond to the consultation, but they are ambitious, and we very much, on the Plaid Cymru benches, welcome that. And I'd associate myself with everything the Minister said about we've got to do things differently, and nobody thinks that's going to be easy. There will be challenges and there will be difficult and perhaps unpopular decisions to be made.

The work that's been done to prepare this draft will, in our opinion, provide a strong basis for whoever forms the next Government to move this agenda forward, and it is my impression, Llywydd, that the Deputy Minister will get broad support. We might have a difference of opinion about detail, but he will get broad support across this Chamber, and I think that's important. Because to deliver change on this scale may need many Governments and many terms of Government and maybe Governments of different colours, but I think people in the sector and key partners need to understand that we all understand the importance of decarbonising transport and of making sure that our public transport system works.

I have a few specific questions I'd like to raise with the Deputy Minister today—some about the process and potentially the process going forward, but also some specifics about the content. But if the Deputy Minister doesn't have immediate answers, then these are conversations that we will undoubtedly continue to have.

The Deputy Minister in his statement refers to the spirit of the well-being of future generations Act on a number of occasions. Can he tell us this afternoon the extent to which this legislation has provided the legal underpinning for the preparation of this consultation document and the actions within it? It seems to me that, particularly when there are difficult decisions to be made, a clear legal underpinning for where that's coming from can be of assistance.

The documents themselves and the Minister in his statement make reference to accessibility. That term is used in a number of ways, and I would agree that it's obviously crucially important. Can I specifically ask the Deputy Minister if he agrees with me that physical accessibility is still a real barrier for people accessing public transport, whether that's a parent with a pram or people living with a range of physical impairments? We know, for example, how many of our stations you just can't get into because there are so many steps. Can I ask the Deputy Minister if disabled people have been consulted in the preparation of this draft and how he and his officials will ensure that they're enabled to respond to the consultation?

I agree with the Deputy Minister when he says that electric cars won't solve all our problems, but as Russell George has said, they do have a role to play, and electric vehicles will be important, potentially, in rural communities particularly. I welcome the commitment in the draft to an electric vehicle charging plan, and I hear what the Deputy Minister says about not necessarily providing all the infrastructure, but is it the Deputy Minister's intention that the plan will enable an acceleration of the current roll-out, particularly in rural areas? I would put it to the Deputy Minister that we can't really wait for market failure, because we don't know how long it will take for us to know that the market has failed.

Now, I know the Deputy Minister will agree with me that if we are to facilitate behaviour change, we need real transformations in the way in which the modes of active travel and public transport connect with each other. Does he agree with me that the current proposed draft buses Bill will need to be reviewed and strengthened to ensure that it gives whoever forms the next Welsh Government sufficient power over bus services to ensure that bus companies comply with the need for that effective connectivity of modes?

And finally, does the Deputy Minister agree with me that if we are to convince people to get out of their cars—and we've talked a lot about convenience here, but for some people, it's beyond convenience—we have to ensure that both active travel and public transport modes both are safe and feel safe, particularly to potentially vulnerable users? So, can I ask the Deputy Minister what consideration has been given during the preparation of this draft to the importance of ensuring the safety of potentially vulnerable users of active travel modes and public transport, particularly women and girls? I'm thinking, obviously, here, particularly of night-time travel, people returning from late shifts at work, those kinds of issues, where I know that many women are very reluctant to use our current public transport modes, because whether or not they actually are safe, they don't feel very safe to use.

Thank you very much for those questions and for the offer of broad support, particularly for the principle of decarbonising transport. I agree this is a cross-party agenda and it will take multiple terms of the Senedd to implement, and I welcome her comments.

In terms of the legal underpinning, then, of course, the future generations Act underpins the approach we set out, among other pieces of legislation, but that is one that's been central, certainly to the way we've gone about the consultation about involving, co-operating and thinking long term, and collaborating with users and with others. So, that certainly has infused the approach we've taken.

On the question of physical accessibility and the involvement of disabled people, well, they certainly have been involved. There have been a number of sessions with equalities groups, and I think you will find when you read priority 1 in the consultation that it is very much reflecting the priorities of that sector—less, in a sense, a statement of the Government's position, more, really, a reflection of that. So we've chosen their framing to go out to consultation on. So, I think that does reflect the sincerity of our engagement with the sector.

The issue, really, of physical barriers to public transport does tie in with the question Helen Mary asks about bus connectivity as well, because that is about getting a loosely regulated private market to engage in public goods, which is difficult to do within the current legislative framework, for all the competition laws and impediments that will be very familiar to her and others in this Chamber, which is why we wanted to bring forward legislation in this term to put a strategic footing for public transport, which we haven't been able to because of COVID.

Now, through the terms and conditions we are setting for our bus support grants in responding to COVID—because, in effect, these bus companies would go bust without them—we have given significant financial support and we are requiring co-operation in return, and that includes, for some of those, particularly around the ability for us to co-ordinate. That's work in progress, and we still think there's a role for legislation, and we are preparing a piece of legislation for whoever forms the next Government to take that forward if they wish to. But we think the requirement for that is definitely there.

On her point on electric charging in rural areas, she is right: there is more that needs to be done. The UK Government have set out what they call the ultra-low emission vehicles, which is a decarbonised transport fund for electric vehicles, which is too modest currently, at around £29 million—it needs to be far more than that—and I think that is one of the things that we need to be looking at when it comes to the delivery plan, about how we prioritise our investment for that against other things.

Her final point on the perception of safety and the reality of safety, I think, is a really important one, and it goes to the heart of everything we do here, really, because perceptions of public transport are one of the impediments. We know from research that people think public transport takes longer to get to your destination than it actually does, people perceive it to be less safe than it actually is, and one of the behaviour change devices we need to see to make this work is to change people's perceptions by encouraging them to try public transport, to change their perceptions, and of course, in doing that, you have safety in numbers. The more people use active travel networks or public transport networks, the safer it feels and the safer it becomes. So, in a sense, this is a chicken-and-egg argument, and it's why the whole modal shift movement, which goes beyond decarbonising—we've talked in the past about decarbonising the transport system; well, that's essential, but modal shift goes beyond that, because it's saying, 'We'll have a greener powered electric system, but we need to get more people using it, and fewer people using individual cars.'

I welcome the statement and I'm grateful to the Minister for that. People in Blaenau Gwent want a transport system that provides effective connectivity for all of us, connecting us with people, places, services and jobs. We need a vision for public transport that sees transport as a public service and not simply a failing business that puts profit ahead of public need. We saw, Presiding Officer, how Margaret Thatcher destroyed the bus services that we enjoyed across the whole of the Valleys, and then we saw how John Major destroyed the rail network, and we've seen since then how we have not had the investment in rail that we all require.

But I would like to see this strategy be one that is rooted in people's experience and people's needs. We need the integration of buses and train services. We need the re-regulation of bus services. We need the Williams review of rail investment across the United Kingdom to lead to the devolution of rail infrastructure investment, to enable this Government to ensure that we're able to invest in the services that meet the needs of the people, and services that are integrated with other public transport options.

We need to look into services that serve people in towns. I fear that, all too often, we hear of policy initiatives that work well in cities, but don't deliver for towns. Most people in Wales live in small towns, wherever they may be, whether they're in rural Montgomeryshire, rural Dyfed—perhaps I shouldn't use that term—or the Valleys of south Wales, and it is the towns that will be the acid test for this policy. Can somebody travel from Cwm to Rassau to get to work at 8 o'clock in the morning? Can somebody travel from Sirhowy to the bottom end of town to visit a doctor? How will we visit friends and neighbours who are in the Grange hospital in Cwmbran? These are the tests of a transport strategy, and these are the tests that I will be placing on this transport strategy when it is introduced by the Government. Thank you.

Thank you. I agree with Alun Davies that those are the tests, and I welcome his challenge to make sure that Government meet those tests, because unless we can meet those tests, then public transport will not be a realistic alternative to the car, and, on that basis, our vision and our strategy will fail. So, I completely agree with the aspiration there. Of course, operationalising that within a fragmented, privately owned transport system has been what has devilled us to date, which is why we do need to address the regulation, as he says, and we do need to address the co-ordination. Now, I think the creation of corporate joint committees will help that. I think giving Transport for Wales a greater role as the co-ordinating mind behind our public transport system will address that, as well as creating the capability and the capacity of professionals who are able to operate the networks and plan them and co-ordinate them in that way will be essential to achieving that, too. 

As well as embracing innovations. Alun Davies will know from chairing the Valleys taskforce the aspiration to have a demand-responsive bus service in Blaenau Gwent and in other places that is able to move beyond the timetabled service towards one that responds to consumer demand. And I'm pleased to say, from that work that he began, we now have the flexi service being piloted in five, I think, communities across Wales, coming soon to Blaenau Gwent. It's currently being trialled in Newport and proving very successful. So, I think that partly answers his test about how to get from different places in a flexible way by changing our concept of what buses are and what they look like. And I certainly think that there's much more that we can do about that. 

His point on rail is well made, and this is where the UK Government really does need to play its part. I said in the statement that we want to constructively engage with the UK Government. The Burns report, coming out next week, as we know from its teasers, is going to focus heavily on rail as a solution to congestion around Newport, and that is going to require the UK Government to step up to the plate in a way it hasn't done on the electrification and it hasn't done on overall rail investment. We've seen HS2 pursued to the negative effect on the Welsh economy, and we need to make sure that we do get our share of rail investment to enable us to achieve our ambitions. 

I think we all have to acknowledge that reforming the transport infrastructure in Wales is a very considerable task, but I think we all agree that we do have to have a fundamental shift in our transport usage, especially the need to encourage the public away from the use of the private car. It is a little bit unfortunate that your statement included a hint that you would be considering a charging system for private cars, because after all, it's the UK Government, the Treasury, that will be losing the revenue as we transfer from carbon-using vehicles to electric vehicles. So, can I suggest that, before any charges are introduced, we make sure that we have a first-class public transport system in place in Wales, and that public transport infrastructure is affordable, even for the most economically disadvantaged in our society? I don't want to be negative in any way about this, but I think we all have to acknowledge that, whatever public transport system is in place, there will still be many thousands, particularly in our rural communities, who will not have any other alternative but to use cars to get to work. So, any charging system that you might have will have to take that into account.

I'm sure, actually, reading your statement, Deputy Minister, we welcome the considerable efforts that you'll be making to consult with the general public, and I think that it's fundamental that we bring the general public along with us on this journey. There has to be both the carrot and the stick if we're going to achieve exactly what we want to achieve here. And I think that, across the Chamber, we all accept that we cannot go on in the way that we have over the last decades, because we all suffer from the traffic jams, et cetera, that are happening, and that's a huge economic cost to Wales as well. So, can I ask, in your consultation with the general public, that we can have your assurance that you will take their suggestions and ideas into account, even if they don't accord with the Government aspirations?

Thank you. I think David Rowlands perfectly outlines the dilemma there. He says, on the one hand, 'We need to have a carrot and a stick', but then he bristles at the stick. You do need to have them both together. The point about road-user charging is the current model that we rely on—the Treasury relies on, as you rightly say, to bring in revenue—will fall away as we move to electric charging, because you're not filling up at the pumps, and the whole taxation model we've had for many years disintegrates. So, there does need to be a different way of raising revenue.

Now, I think, in principle, a way that raises revenue based on how often you use your car—bearing in mind that one in four households don't have a car and the system needs to be equitable to them—I think, in principle, makes sense. Now, the Turner review that we've published was set about because, you will remember, that Cardiff council set out plans for road-user charging in Cardiff, and we wanted to make sure that there was a national framework that guided decisions about road-user charging so that we didn't have different councils going off and doing different things. So, the report itself is nothing to get too excited by, frankly. We'll place a copy of it in the Library and publish it. It's quite a conservative analysis of a way of dealing with this issue sensibly. So, I don't think there's anything to get excited about in the review itself, but it does raise the issue that we do need to think differently about how we raise revenue and how, as you say, we can't go on as we have over the last decade. That is right. And what role does a disincentive play alongside an incentive? And you need to have both.

But you're absolutely right: it needs to be done in a way that brings people with us, and in my view, it shouldn't be the first thing we do. We should focus on service improvement first, and then, through disincentives, try to lock in behaviour change, because there's no shortage of people who will look to exploit this, to whip up hostility about what we're trying to do, and we mustn't let them do it, because, done properly, this is a way to get us where we want to go.

I haven't had time to read the document in full, but can the Deputy Minister give us an update in terms of the Government's intentions in terms of reopening the rail line between Carmarthen and Aberystwyth, and then extending along west Wales to Caernarfon and Bangor?

Can you also give us some idea as to your vision on villages? Alun Davies mentioned towns, but I'm particularly thinking of villages in rural areas, particularly in terms of cycle paths, where it isn't possible to use the roads—I know that living in the Towy valley. But there are exciting plans to create a cycle route between Carmarthen and Llandeilo. Does the Government support that?

Four years ago, the Government had pledged to publish a strategy for a metro for Swansea bay and the western Valleys, including the Amman and Gwendraeth valleys. Can you give us an update on that?

And finally, are you still committed to delivering another pledge in terms of creating the Llandeilo bypass, where air pollution and the latest evidence on the impact of that, for example, on intellectual abilities, is causing great concern to people, and parents particularly, in the area?

Thank you very much for the questions.

A number of points there. In terms of connecting villages, I absolutely agree, and as I mentioned to Alun Davies, the flexi system of demand-responsive transport, which is also being piloted in Pembrokeshire in a rural setting at the moment, I think, does offer us a way of being able to supplement the scheduled bus service with a more malleable form of public transport that is able to respond, based, of course, on the Bwcabus service that's been piloted in north Carmarthenshire and Ceredigion for some time. It's that model in a more up-to-date form. So, I think, that, from a public transport point of view, is one of the easiest ways we can achieve those objectives.

Adam Price mentions the Towy valley path in his constituency, which I'm very familiar with. As I've discussed with him previously, one of the challenges we have around active travel is where we focus our investment. Now, active travel is for purposeful, everyday journeys. It's not cycling as a leisure activity, it's cycling to get people from A to B so we achieve modal shift, and I think there is a strong argument for saying we should focus our efforts where we're going to get the maximum impact, especially in the early stages, to show people this is an agenda that can deliver modal shift. So, routes like the Towy Valley one, which have primarily been leisure routes and tourist routes, have great value, especially for getting people to return to cycling as a family activity, but, as a day-to-day activity, tend not to score the highest in terms of return on investment. So, there's a challenge for us, and this is a challenge that I've posed to Dafydd Trystan, who I've established as our independent active travel commissioner, to think where the balance lies between investment for leisure cycling and investment for daily, purposeful cycling, Because I think it is a tricky one, where we put scarce resource to have the greatest climate impact. But I can absolutely recognise the value of the scheme. I've just not been—. I think there are more valuable schemes in his constituency for achieving the objectives of this transport strategy. I'd much rather see urban networks in Ammanford and in Carmarthen and in other villages and towns, rather than primarily leisure routes. But that is a debate I think that we need to keep having, because it's not a straightforward one.

The Swansea bay metro—he is absolutely right; I fully support that. We had left that to the local councils to take the lead on it in the area. We've now brought that into Transport for Wales to take the lead to try and up the pace. It is probably the least developed of the regional metros that we have, and I hope that is something that we can accelerate. The initial scoping has been done and it is part of Transport for Wales's mission to build that metro up in the next period.

And in terms of the Llandeilo bypass, as I mentioned in the statement, today is not about individual schemes; it's about direction of travel. The commitment to the Llandeilo bypass remains as was set out in the summer. We have had disruptions to lots of capital schemes because of COVID, which have delayed things, and there is a WelTAG process that is being gone through, but there is nothing today that suggests any of the schemes we're committed to will be other than we've announced. I think the question will then come for the next Government in the delivery plan as to how the principles that have been set out in this plan, if they're accepted, apply at a scheme level.

Thank you for your statement, Deputy Minister, and, while I know absolutely the emphasis of your statement, it would be remiss of me at this point not to welcome the recent announcement regarding the contract for the A465 Heads of the Valleys improvements. That is a strategic and regionally important decision to ensure safe and well-managed transport infrastructure is delivered, and it shows the importance of both shaping and holding to a long-term vision. And of course, as you recognise, a good-quality road network has to be part of any strategy, because other forms of transport—particularly some active travel options—are not always practical for everyone in some Valleys communities, where topography can make that very, very difficult, although I accept absolutely that that doesn't necessarily mean that we throw decarbonisation out the window—far from it.

But the draft strategy does emphasise one of the key lessons of the pandemic, which is the importance of local transport infrastructure, and there's no doubt that the COVID-19 period has shown us the true value of our local bus network. Now, thankfully, in Merthyr Tydfil, we have the development of the new bus station to reinforce this message, but we do need to move beyond just a new bus station, and, while I think you've already dealt with a number of the questions on this subject, I, like others, regret that we had to lose the buses Bill from this Senedd's legislative programme, although, like others, I hope we'll see it back after the election next year.

But, while I think, as I say, you've already largely dealt with my question to a large degree, I'd like to know how the improvement of the infrastructure of our local bus networks, developing ever smarter and more responsive transport in our communities, will sit within this strategy, and how much of the work of the Valleys taskforce that you referenced in your answers to Alun Davies will form part of your thinking in this respect.

Thank you to Dawn for her question, and I must pay tribute to her as a member of the Valleys taskforce and the chair of the transport subgroup that's been leading the work on the Fflecsi demand-responsive scheme. And as I say, we are trialling it in four or five different areas at the moment and the results are very encouraging. And particularly in Newport, we think there is an early opportunity to try and ramp that up at scale to try and learn lessons to see whether or not it lives up to its early potential. So, certainly, it is our intent, as part of this strategy, Dawn, that schemes like the Fflecsi bus offer a real alternative to car use for everyday journeys in rural and urban areas. It's, as the title suggests, flexy.

She's entirely right, of course, that we're putting significant investment into the Heads of the Valleys road, and one of the things we now need to make sure is that we maximise the return on investment for that and we use it as a lever for economic development across the Heads of the Valleys, and that's something the Valleys taskforce is continuing to look at.

Minister, you say that when the facts changed, actions had to change too, about the M4 relief road, but what's changed? The environmental value of the Gwent levels has been there for centuries and millennia. You talked a lot about climate change in your remarks now, but the 11-page decision notice on the M4 relief road didn't mention climate change, didn't mention a climate crisis. I think the line was that there wasn't enough capital in the budget to do it, yet, when we hear suggestions UK Government might pay for it, you respond with outrage. 

When you say 'setting targets for modal shift to free up road space', does that mean blocking roads off so cars can't use them? You say on the rail nationalisation—you seem to have quite some pride about having nationalised it and made a start and the steps you've taken, but surely that's a crisis response to a collapse in demand and revenue. Now that Transport for Wales is providing services, you're funding them, and now those services are nationalised, how do you deal with the tension of having a substantial amount of borders network that's within England? Should Welsh taxpayers be paying for frequency of service at small stations for people in England going into Birmingham or Shrewsbury—to what extent is that a priority for Welsh taxpayers? And I agree with you there's a tension between having the devolution of the rail services but rail infrastructure not devolved—couldn't that tension be resolved by the UK Government taking back oversight of the rail services?

The Deputy Presiding Officer took the Chair.

Well, thank you for those questions. As he said, when the facts change, you change your mind. When he was responsible for writing the UKIP manifesto, he was against the black route, and then the facts changed, he changed parties and he changed his mind. So, you know, I think he's putting that principle into practice there. What did change, to answer the question, is that the costs changed. At the time of the 2016 election, the M4 relief road was priced at around £700 million, and, by the time the First Minister made the decision, it was priced at £2 billion. Now, there's a massive opportunity cost from investing £2 billion in 40 miles of road through protected wetlands, which means you can't spend it on other things. And he's wrong to say that climate change—. Sorry, Deputy Llywydd, he's continuing to heckle; I'm happy to have an informed conversation with him, but it's hard to respond to it when I can't hear what he's muttering away about. There was strongly, in the First Minister's justification, the case around biodiversity loss, which wasn't properly judged in the inspector's inquiry, and that is absolutely intrinsically linked to climate change.

His characterisation of modal shift being about blocking off roads I think signals the sort of politics that we can expect from Mark Reckless. It's not about blocking off roads at all. It's about allocating road space to the sort of modes we want to see. We've seen this during the coronavirus pandemic response, where we have created additional space in town centres for people to be able to socially distance on pavements. We have seen, during the pandemic, people cycling and walking in a way they didn't before, because there was less traffic on the roads. And we want to try and lock in that behaviour, because there's a lot of evidence, if he's interested in it, from the sustainable travel towns in England over a period of years, showing that you can bring about behaviour change, but the way you sustain that behaviour change is by reallocating road space, so you encourage more people to do it. So, it's not about blocking off roads; it's about enabling behaviour change.

And in terms of rail nationalisation, yes, it was something that came out of a crisis, but, in a crisis, we had choices, and those choices were informed by our values. We faced exactly the same crisis as the Department for Transport faced in England. They took a choice to use the operator-of-last-resort mechanism to keep those franchises being run in the private sector for a fee and a profit. We took the choice to bring those within Transport for Wales, an option that they don't have in England, so we don't have profit being taken out by the private sector, but we have it run in the public interest.

Minister, devolution has presented us with tremendous opportunities in respect of developing the integrated transport system. I think that we should actually celebrate that we actually now have, for the first time in decades, an opportunity to completely re-evaluate our public transport sector. Can I say how pleased I am that Pontypridd is going to be the hub of Transport for Wales? The prospect of a train every five minutes going through Pontypridd is not only good, I think, in terms of the Valleys transport system, but also the way that it is actually contributing to the regeneration of the town, the creation of jobs and so on.

Can I also say that the tremendous opportunity that we have, since Beeching, of looking at the reopening of railway lines—? In the Taff-Ely area, as the Member will know, we have some of the largest growth, and planned growth, of housing in any part of Wales. The road network can no longer provide a means of those persons travelling around the area, social engagements and also travelling to work. So, the possibility of reopening some of the railway lines that used to exist many decades ago, where, fortunately, we have still retained most of those lines, really offers a whole new opportunity. I really welcome the £0.5 million that's being invested to look at the business plan for the reopening of the north-west Cardiff corridor, or, as I refer to it, the Cardiff to Llantrisant railway line. I think that we should actually be celebrating that we have now that opportunity to do something really, really unique.

Can I also raise the issue, then, of the bus and taxi transport aspect? I live in Tonyrefail. There is no bus direct into Pontypridd, which is incredible, or from Gilfach Goch into Pontypridd. When you ask the operators, they say, 'Well, there isn't the demand.' Well, of course, these are self-fulfilling prophecies. Until you actually provide the opportunity, the demand doesn't actually exist. So, the opportunity now to actually integrate where people live and work properly, on a service basis as opposed to a short-term profit basis, I think is really exciting. But I wonder if you could comment on your thoughts on the role that taxis might actually play within that. I know that that's an issue that is emerging as one of some importance during COVID.

Can I also make just one point? Because I welcome the fact—  

Can you just wind up as well, please? Thank you.

—that we are going to have the consultation. That is that, in consideration of congestion charging, we have to look at where transport is coming from, and it mustn't be seen as a tax on the Valleys, and I know that that is very much in the Minister's mind. The very final point is: will the Government be campaigning for the revocation of section 25, now, of the Railways Act, so that the issue of public ownership of our transport system isn't one that just has to revert back to old, defunct, out-of-date legislation?

Thank you very much. I completely agree with him that the location of the headquarters of TfW in Pontypridd offers a real opportunity for regeneration of the town, and I think is a really good example of the principle of 'town centre first', which the Government has adopted for public sector location of offices. It's unfortunate that the offices are ready at a time when people aren't using offices, but I think it does show the real potential, once people start returning—and I must pay tribute to him for the way that he has campaigned to take an eyesore of a shopping centre into a really first-class building, which has lifted one of the principal towns in his constituency.

I also similarly applaud his role in campaigning for the reopening of the railway line to Llantrisant. As he said, the study is going on as part of that. It's why we have been really keen to ensure—. One of the reasons why we've brought the rail contract in-house, rather than following the English model, is to try and maintain the development of the metro that's been going on. Even though people are staying away from the railways in the short term, we think it would be remarkably short sighted of us to choke off investment in metro development, which will be there in the years to come, when people do return to the railways. That creates a short-term financial challenge, but it is, I think, a key strategic investment.

He's absolutely right to point to the role that taxis have, and we do set out within the national transport plan a mini plan for taxis and public service vehicles, highlighting that we see taxis as a key part of an integrated transport network. It says in the mini plan that we hope to develop national standards for taxis and for dealing with issues like public hire vehicles, the suitability of applicants, safety vehicle measures, vehicle testing, driver training. There is a huge reform agenda that we had hoped to take forward in legislation this term. We will now look to do it in the next term if we are in the position to form a Government. Simplifying the licensing system is one of the key demands, I know, of taxi drivers and their unions, and that is a key part of what we want to achieve. So, I completely agree with him that taxis form a really important backbone, and we know that taxi drivers are having a really hard time at the moment, as many of their customers are not using their services. There is economic support available to them through the economic resilience fund, but I think more work needs to be done to help them to understand how to access that. I know Ken Skates, the Minister, met with transport unions this morning to discuss what support we can give to the taxi industry in this incredibly difficult time.

And a final couple of points. Road user charging: we absolutely don't want it to be presented as a tax on the Valleys, as he puts it, which is why we have encouraged a regional response, and why, through the publication of this report today, we want to see that as part of a national framework. If this is to be done, it will be done in an orderly and sensible way.

And just a final point on the legislative basis. We anticipate that the rail industry is going to be under emergency measures for some time to come. As I say, this is not just a Welsh situation; this is a UK situation. We do think that the legislation does need to change for us then to put the basis on which we've put the rail industry in the short term on a longer term footing, and that will require legislation at Westminster, and that's something we hope to discuss with the UK Government.

And finally, Jenny Rathbone.

Hello.

Yes, we can hear you. That's fine.

Okay, fine. I was getting mixed messages there. Thank you very much for calling me.

I just want to welcome your hierarchy of priorities. Twenty-five per cent of people in this country have no access to a car, but in many of the communities I represent over half the households do not have a car, and therefore we are very grateful for the bus drivers who've kept going to enable people to get to work and school and to do their shopping. People with disabilities don't necessarily have a car at all. I can think of many of my constituents who have to struggle up the hill with their shopping despite their disabilities. So, we really do need to have a think about those who are least able in our communities, and I want to ask you, Deputy Minister, about this 20-year strategy, because I think we can't wait 20 years for change. For example, we could have more safe zones around schools by closing off or confining roads to the use of pupils getting safely to and from school by bicycle or by walking at the beginning and the end of the school. We could be thinking about road user charging, because we have to think about the impact on the health of people who live on the main artery roads into Cardiff. They don't have any choice about living there. They don't choose to live there. They live there because they have to live there, and we are shortening their lives by not doing more to clean up our air. So, 20 years is far too long to wait.

If we travel by train, we don't expect to travel for free, so why not having to—. Car drivers need to also think about whether they actually need to travel by car when there are other modes of transport available, and there are, within Cardiff, other modes of transport available. Therefore, I think it is right and proper that we do control the use of cars travelling around our city, because otherwise it will be unliveable. So, I wondered how long you think it's going to take before we get that change by having this regional approach. I am extremely concerned that this could mean no change.

Well, I agree with Jenny Rathbone that there is an enormous social justice element to the transport system. The poorest people are more likely to live in an area where they are subjected to higher levels of pollution; the poorest people are more likely to be involved in a collision and hit by a car; and the poorest people are forced to dedicate more of their household incomes towards the cost of running a car, because services are located at places where they have little choice. That's the transport system that we have developed over many decades and that's what needs to change by having a far more equitable transport system that tackles both inequalities and environmental hazards.

So, her suggestion of clean air zones around schools, I think, has considerable merit. This is a consultation exercise and I'd strongly encourage her and others to respond to it with ideas for how we could put the principles that we've laid out in this document into practical effect in as fast a way as possible. I completely agree with her. Twenty years is not—this is not the minimum time we're setting for this strategy; this is the time frame, the horizon we're looking at. The climate doesn't have 20 years. We know from the warnings of every report that the UN panel on climate change has issued that this is an urgent matter, and we simply don't have a long time to turn around our transport system; we have to make changes urgently.

As I said, the low-carbon plan that the next Welsh Government will have to publish next year, of whatever colour, is going to have to meet considerably more demanding climate change targets for transport. This is an attempt to try and get ahead of that, to try and shape thinking of all parties of how we meet those challenges that we've all signed up for. Every party that signed up for those climate targets of a 95 per cent reduction in carbon emissions have all signed up to that pathway of decreasing emissions from all sectors, including transport. And all of us have to put our heads together to come up with ways as to how we're going to do that.

Now, it's not easy. As we've seen in the Chamber today, that can be exploited by people who want to exploit it, but if we do it properly, it'll bring benefits to all parts of society.

Thank you very much, Deputy Minister.