The next statement is a statement by the Deputy Minister for Climate Change on a roads review, and I call on the Deputy Minister to make the statement. Lee Waters.

Diolch, Llywydd. The world's scientists are telling us in very clear terms that we urgently need to cut our greenhouse gas emissions. Since 1990, Welsh emissions have fallen by 31 per cent, but to reach our statutory target of net zero by 2050 we need to do much more. As the UK Climate Change Committee reminded us last week, if we’re going to keep temperature rises within safe limits, in the next 10 years we need to more than double all the cuts we’ve managed over the last 30 years.

To hit the 2050 target, the Climate Change Committee has told us we need to cut emissions in the next decade by 63 per cent, and by 2040 they need to fall by 89 per cent. On our current trajectory, we will not achieve net zero until around 2090. The challenge is stark and will require everyone, including the Government, to consider the impact of their choices.

Transport makes up some 17 per cent of our total emissions and so must play its part. Earlier this year I published the Welsh Government's new Wales transport strategy, 'Llwybr Newydd'. It sets out a bold vision for transport in Wales over the next two decades. It included, for the first time, a modal shift target, which requires us to aim for 45 per cent of journeys to be by sustainable forms of transport by 2045, up from 32 per cent currently. To achieve these targets we need a shift away from spending money on projects that encourage more people to drive, and invest in real alternatives that give people a meaningful choice.

Our programme for government commits to introducing a far-reaching bus Bill in this Senedd term to make it easier to integrate the timetables of buses and trains. Bus operators have said that the main barrier to increasing patronage is reliability and journey times, so we will take action to give buses greater priority on our roads and we will look too at bus fares.

This year we'll be spending more than any other part of the UK per head on active travel investment to encourage people to walk or cycle for local journeys. Two out of three journeys in Wales are under five miles in length. With the right investment, and with encouragement, there's huge potential to get most people using sustainable transport for most everyday journeys—not all journeys, not all people, but the majority. It's do-able, and there are many countries where it is already done.

Understanding the data in relation to transport also gives us headroom to make choices, and, as the data and the science change, the choices we have to make alter. We must use the headroom we have wisely if we are to meet our climate change targets. To this end, we are announcing a pause on all new road schemes while we review our existing commitments.

Officials are in the final stages of establishing a roads review panel, which will include some of the UK's leading experts on transport and climate change. The panel will consider setting tests for when new roads are the right solutions for transport problems, in line with the new Wales transport strategy. And I want the review to consider how we can shift spending towards better maintaining our existing roads, rather than building new ones, as was recommended by the cross-party Economy, Infrastructure and Skills Committee in the last Senedd.

We'll publish the full terms of reference for the review and the full membership in due course. It'll be for the panel to review all of our proposed road investments, whether funded directly by the Welsh Government on the strategic road network, or indirectly, by grants, on the local road network, so that all future projects align with the three priorities of the new transport strategy: to reduce the need to travel, to allow people and goods to move more easily from door to door by sustainable forms of transport, and to encourage people to make the change.

The new Wales transport strategy embeds the use of sustainable transport planning hierarchy, and the panel will use this to make sure we are encouraging travelling by walking, cycling and public transport ahead of private motor vehicles. To make sure this approach is fully embedded in our investment decisions and those taken by other delivery partners, we're also reviewing Welsh transport appraisal guidance, our decision-making framework for transport projects, so that it is consistent with 'Llwybr Newydd' and uses the five ways of working set out in the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015. The review will provide an initial report to Ministers within three months of appointment, setting out how it'll go about its task, and the final report shall be provided within nine months of that, setting out the findings of the review.

All parties in this Senedd have committed to taking the threat posed by climate change seriously, and that means acting now to reduce emissions. This will not always be comfortable or easy, Llywydd, but it's what the science requires us to do and what future generations demand of us. Diolch.

Deputy Minister, this statement today will be met with dismay and disappointment by businesses and road users alike. It's a fact that, after 22 years in power, successive Welsh Labour Governments have failed to build an adequate road network. From 2000 to 2019, the Welsh road network has increased by less than 3 per cent, despite the fact that the volume of road traffic has increased by nearly 30 per cent over the same time period. But you have today confirmed Welsh Labour has no plans to deal with the growing traffic on our roads.

You broke a manifesto commitment to deal with the congestion problem on the M4 by building a relief road, wasting £157 million in the process, and you've let road users down again today. Road transport corridors are the arteries of domestic and international trade and boost the overall competitiveness of the Welsh economy. In 2017, there were over 30,000 traffic jams on Welsh roads, which cost the Welsh economy almost £278 million. A proper policy for roads should include ambitious plans to improve our road infrastructure by delivering an M4 relief road, upgrading the A55 in north Wales, and to progress the dualling of the A40 to Fishguard. It should include the bypass for Chepstow and—I apologise for my pronunciation in advance—Llandeilo that residents have been calling for. Instead, these issues have been kicked into the long grass.

Can you advise me, Minister, whether the improvements to the A40 between Llanddewi Velfrey and Penblewin, due to commence this week, will now go ahead or will be delayed due to this review? The roads review should also address the contradictions in the Welsh Government's approach to alleviating air pollution levels. Wales has some of the worst air quality in the UK. It's a fact. Cardiff and Port Talbot both have higher PM10 levels than either Birmingham or Manchester, while Hafodyrynys has the most polluted road in the UK outside of London.

The Welsh Government must commit to reviewing speed limits on major roads in Wales. A constant flow of traffic will not only reduce the amount of particulate matter released by brake wear and tear, but also reduce the amount of carbon dioxide that the acceleration of cars produces. Although the Welsh Government has implemented 50 mph zones in some areas of Wales to keep traffic flowing, and reduced nitrogen dioxide limits, some traffic safety experts have said that permanent 50 mph limits could put motorists in danger. There is evidence that increased congestion leads to driver frustration and reduces their awareness and concentration. Will you agree to address this issue, Deputy Minister? Because you seem hell-bent on letting our roads deteriorate and forcing everyone on to public transport, despite major doubts over the ability of the network in Wales to cope after years of poor management and underinvestment. Welsh workers and businesses urgently require more information about the scope of the review and your long-term intentions for our transport infrastructure, as do we. Thank you.

Well, I just flatly disagree with that analysis of the problem. Natasha Asghar has set out the traditional predict-and-provide approach to road building: traffic is predicted to increase, therefore we will increase the supply of roads. We've pursued that route for 50 years and that has produced more traffic, longer journeys, people working further away from home, higher levels of air pollution and greater levels of obesity, where we have the most obese children in Europe. That's what that approach has produced. It doesn't work, and I don't intend to keep doing the same thing over and over again. It may make for an easy headline, but it is wrong on the evidence, and it is certainly not aligned with what she was saying last week about the need to take climate change seriously. Both she and Janet Finch-Saunders said in the Chamber last week, 'You need to take bold action', and were fully behind the target of achieving climate change, and she has set out a way of doing the exact opposite.

She is quite wrong to say that we are not maintaining roads. In fact, the whole point of this announcement is to reallocate resources towards road maintenance as, as I said, was recommended by unanimous decision of the cross-party committee on the economy in the last Senedd, which recommended we stop building new roads and we prioritise money for maintaining the ones we have—under a Conservative Chair, I might add.

On the specific question of the Llanddewi Velfrey to Redstone Cross scheme, as we've said, all schemes where there are currently diggers in the ground will continue, and that is one of them. So, that's one thing at least I hope we can agree on the facts on.

Minister, thank you for your statement.  We have an opportunity, after the pandemic, to build a nation that will benefit future generations, and investing in public transport, active travel and green infrastructure will be a crucial part of this. However, it is vital that we ensure that communities that have been waiting a long time for investment in infrastructure are not left behind.

You noted that we need a shift away from spending money on projects that encourage more people to drive and spend more money on maintaining our roads and invest in real alternatives that give people a meaningful choice. May I ask what real alternatives the Welsh Government hopes to invest in? I would welcome greater clarity and detail on that point. 

And, with regard to electric transport, how is the Welsh Government ensuring that every area in Wales has a fair share of electric car charging points?

Minister, modal shift is going to be so significantly important in all of this, so what role will areas like fast lanes for public transport and electric vehicles on future roads—how important a role will that play?

And, with reference to your point on maintaining existing roads, I'd like to draw your attention to the most recent UK climate change risk assessment. It points to a number of challenges facing Wales's transport infrastructure, including a greater risk of slope failure due to increased rainfall, and the associated risks with ground subsidence and collapse of pre-existing cavities in the ground from changes in the soil's water content because of climate change. So, could I ask you what your Government will do to ensure that road infrastructure in Wales is part of this, and is going to be resilient to the effects of climate change?

And the final thing I'd ask you, Minister, is about how you'll get buy-in and support from communities who are going to be particularly affected by this. Again, think again of communities who've been waiting a long time for investment in infrastructure. What engagement will you be having with those communities who are most likely to be affected by these decisions, please?

Thank you for the comments, and I would hope that there's a great deal of common ground between the Welsh Government and Plaid Cymru on this issue. I note during the election campaign we were criticised for not being bold enough, not moving fast enough on climate change. I believe your party had a commitment to achieving net zero by 2035 and said that we were too slow in going for 2050. Now, already to achieve the 2050 challenges, as I said in my statement, there are considerable challenges for us to act further and faster than we have. So, as you think we should go faster than that still, I would have hoped that you'd be on side with us in at least recognising what the problem is and what some of the solutions are. So, I hope we can work together as constructively on that agenda.

These aren't easy issues and they do throw up tensions, and some of the things will be difficult and unpopular, and I don't resile from that; I think we have to confront that. We can only bring people with us if we show people there is a better alternative. In all behaviour change dynamics, people will do the easiest thing to do, and we need to make the right thing to do the easiest thing to do. We've seen that through recycling, we've seen it through smoking in public places, in drink driving. There is precedent for how we can do this, but it's not going to be easy.

You're absolutely right about the issue of adaptation, from the carbon emissions that are already baked in, and we're already seeing, in the last couple of years, the impact of wetter winters and drier summers. So, there is going to be an impact on our existing infrastructure, and, as you said, the Climate Change Committee set that out in quite stark detail. We've set aside money this year and last year for a resilient roads programme to try and address where infrastructure is collapsing. As I said in the statement, I want us to move money towards maintaining the roads we have, and, as we maintain them, to improve them, to put in measures that encourage bus use, to put in bus lanes, to put in segregated cycle lanes, to upgrade the infrastructure to encourage sustainable transport. That is part of the agenda that we have.

I think we need to work through this systematically. There is a bus Bill that we're committed to introduce; I want to make that bus Bill as ambitious as possible. The challenge we have, I think, if we're all honest about this, is that the pace of change that science demands, there's a tension with that and the pace at which we can bring about change, given how complex the landscape is and how long it takes to get infrastructure projects through the process. So, this is not easy.

On the question of communities who have been waiting a long time for improvements, I think that is a very fair challenge, and I think we just have to have an honest conversation about what change looks like. Because I think we've told people that simply putting in highways gets rid of the problem, when the truth is it shifts the problem, and it creates a different problem. The one thing we're asking this review to do is to come up with a set of rules for us as to when highways will be the right thing to do, because we're not saying we're not going to build roads again, but we are saying they'll need to be in specific circumstances—this headroom concept: it's limited, and we have to spend it wisely. So, I would anticipate them looking at schemes that have a particular safety focus or an air-quality focus, or for access to new industrial or housing estates, for example, there'll be a case for saying that road building is part of the solution. Simply tackling congestion and building to the predict-and-provide model we've heard from the Conservatives, I don't think the evidence backs that up as providing a long-term solution, and all of us have to focus on short-term difficulties against doing the right thing for future generations.

Minister, with an increase in the number of people walking, running and cycling closer to home throughout the pandemic, and with the difficulties for parents in keeping a social distance outside school gates, I was really pleased to see funding to introduce more 20 mph zones in my constituency, Rhondda, to keep residents safe. I think it's really important that we build on this work, as well as the active travel routes work already under way by Welsh Government and local authorities, over the next Senedd term.

One area I'd like to further discuss with the Minister is Rhondda Fach. We currently have a bypass that runs from Porth to Pontygwaith, leaving residents of Tylorstown, Ferndale, Blaenllechau and Maerdy in long queues of traffic at peak travel times. Air pollution is a very real threat to us and future generations, so will the Minister meet with me to discuss potential travel solutions for residents in Rhondda Fach, incorporating public transport and safe travel space for cyclists and pedestrians?

Thank you. Yes, of course, I'd be happy to meet, and that's an interesting example of where a bypass was built, what, 10 years ago now—I remember going to the opening ceremony—where that has created a set of solutions, but simply adds pressure further down the road network, leading to demands for further bypasses. That's the kind of predict-and-provide solution that I was describing earlier that we simply can't keep on doing that approach to transport if we are serious about meeting our climate change targets.

That said, there is clearly a problem in her constituency that is a very real one for people's health and for their ability to move around freely, and that is the dilemma we face. Finding a way through that is going to be the challenge of this Senedd term, and I hope the panel we've set up will help us to do that.

In terms of the 20 mph point, from two years' time, we are committed to introducing default 20 mph speed limits for all residential areas, not just for small schemes, but for a whole area, because we need to reduce the speed of traffic to save children's lives, and as part of the whole changing of the environment, to shift the power away from the car being the king in the community to people being king. And that, I think, will improve people's quality of life overall.

Deputy Minister, what assessment has the Minister made of the economic impact of not proceeding with plans that were already proposed for construction, supply chain and local economic benefits? Which developments reliant on new roads, junctions or bridges will now be stopped as a result of this announcement, in particular, the impact on the proposed new cancer centre in Cardiff, which can only be accessed by new Welsh Government-funded roads and bridges? And in my own region, the development of the windfarm at Margam mountain requires solutions other than going through the town of Maesteg.

In May, the BBC reported that the UK Government was reviewing its road-building programme because more people were working from home. It would be interesting to see if this is the basis on which this Welsh Government statement is also being made. Welsh Government is responsible for trunk roads and motorways, whilst the local authorities are responsible for local roads. There are some schemes already in progress and planned for development; does this review potentially cancel any of these out? In any review, we did want an assurance that local government would be properly resourced to maintain and fix existing roads to ensure that they are safe and that councils participate in that review. Thank you.

Well, I think quite a number of the points that Altaf Hussain mentioned were actually addressed in my statement, so I'll just give him a chance to reflect on that, and if he has further questions I'm happy to answer them.

On the specific question of the cancer centre, that is not covered within the scope of this review, because that is a scheme to give access to a project; it is not a local authority or Welsh Government highway scheme. And similarly access roads to windfarms. Again, we are not being fanatical about this. There is a case for road building, I'm not saying there isn't, but it can't be the default response to every single transport problem we have, which it has been often.

He interestingly mentioned the UK Government. Of course, as well as committing to reaching net zero by 2050, they've announced a £27 billion road programme. They seem to think those two things are compatible, I don't. But they are indicating a change of thinking, as he mentioned, because of the fact that people are commuting less to work and that is likely to continue. So I'd very much welcome a change of heart by the UK Government. I think we have been quite consistent in our approach: we've set out a Wales transport strategy, that has a commitment to modal shift, and that requires a shift of resources and focus.

We're not stopping building infrastructure—in terms of his point about the economic impact—we're just building different infrastructure, infrastructure that is resilient to the changes of climate change, which all parties say they want to tackle. But again, when it comes to the particulars of making the difficult choices necessary to make that real, people resile from it. We will not.

Thank you very much for the statement, Deputy Minister. I agree with the main principles contained within it and the objectives set out in terms of tackling the huge challenges of climate change. But I must express my disappointment today on behalf of the people of Llandeilo with your statement, which ceases the work on the bypass for the town. As one who lives two or three miles from Llandeilo and shops and socialises in the town, I know how disappointed people will be on hearing today's news. 

As you know, Llandeilo has very high levels of air pollution, which are higher than the acceptable standards. I heard you mention last week the importance of a clean air Act, and I agree entirely with you on that. But the road through the middle of Llandeilo is dangerous. This is the highway, as you know, from the south-west of Wales to the A40, going on to the midlands. And I have seen myself on so many occasions lorries and buses trying to pass each other and having to mount the pavements in order to pass. The people of Llandeilo fear going to the town centre because of these difficulties and problems. It's a road that was originally planned for a horse and cart, not for HGVs, buses and coaches, and there is no way of widening that road. 

Now, I fully accept that we need to take a step back and consider how we reduce our use of private vehicles and tackle climate change, particularly, as you said, in relation to new projects. But the Llandeilo bypass is not a new project.

Deputy Minister, you will be aware that the need for a bypass in Llandeilo isn't something recent; the people of Llandeilo have been crying out for this for over 50 years. The case in my view is clear; it's been won. Indeed, the Welsh Government agreed in 2016 to fund this bypass as part of a package deal agreed with Plaid Cymru at the time. Since then, we've had numerous Welsh Government studies and consultations, even as recently as two years ago. But instead of delivering, we've seen delay after delay, with the announcement last year that it would be delayed until 2025. Today's announcement is a further let-down for the town and its people again.

So, the question is: what's your message for the people of Llandeilo today, who have been let down once again by the Government, and how do you intend to plan to meet their hopes and aspirations in terms of clean air in the town, and traffic safety for those walking on pavements in the town too? Thank you.

Thank you. I think it's important we take a consistent approach. We're saying that all schemes that currently aren't under construction need to be within the scope of the review, because the review needs to make a set of judgments about when road schemes, are the right solution to problems in the future. I think it would look very odd if we'd left Llandeilo out of the whole-Wales review and I would have certainly raised some questions.

You mentioned the studies that we've gone through. The way that the WelTAG approach works is not to start the process with a road in mind; it's to start the process with a transport problem in mind and work through that transport problem. Too often, local authorities have gone through this process—I visited Pendoylan in the Vale of Glamorgan this morning; another case in point, a road that's no longer going ahead—where people start that process with a predetermined view, 'We want a road', without sincerely going through the process of how do we address the problems consistent with the future generations Act, consistent with our climate change emissions, to tackle the problem. Maybe the problem can be tackled in ways other than building a road.

What I've said in the case of Llandeilo is that the WelTAG stage 2 process is nearing completion. I'm not going to stop that process, even though the review is undergoing; I'm going to let it reach the next decision point, in which case we expect some short-term recommendations from WelTAG of improvements that can be made soon in Llandeilo to help alleviate the situation. I'm very familiar with it, and I have great sympathy with the people of the town. It's worth noting that there's not a unanimous view in the town about the desirability of a bypass, but there's certainly a unanimous view that there is a problem in the town, and I fully agree with that. So, I think we'll let WelTAG finish its process, we'll look at what it comes up with, and we will support and fund those. Then, as part of the broader review, one of the questions for the panel when there are cases like Llandeilo—and there are cases in my own constituency where there are demands for bypasses to tackle air quality; cases, I must say, that I have argued against on climate change grounds, and I think it's important to be consistent—is whether in cases of air quality a road is the right solution. That's something I expect the panel to take a view on in the case of Llandeilo.

Thank you, Minister, for your statement today. I note your comments about future roads aligning with the Welsh Government transport priorities and tests that can be set by the panel, so could you provide us with any wider context, building on your earlier replies to Delyth Jewell and Cefin Campbell, around what might be considered a good road that's suitable for investment?

Secondly, I note your comments about improving and better integrating bus provision. Are you able to provide any more information about how we can ensure that we meet this objective, providing joined-up services that are actually fit for purpose and will encourage people onto buses? I accept your point about the majority of journeys in Wales being under 5 miles, but if that 5 miles is uphill, on steep roads such as Monk Street in Aberdare or Darran Road in Mountain Ash, with two or three bags of shopping, then there are greater barriers to active travel for many, and buses would seem to be the most appropriate solution.

On that final point, I would note that 50 years ago, we had significantly higher levels of public transport use, walking and cycling, and the hills haven't suddenly appeared in the last 50 years. I think what has changed is our attitudes, our expectations and our habits, and that is the challenge for us, in behavioural change. There is no one solution to tackling carbon emissions in transport; there is a battery of solutions. I think we've seen through the increase of remote working one that we didn't think was available to us—to reduce the need to travel in the first place, and the creation of co-working hubs as we have right across the Valleys, through the Valleys taskforce, as part of our broader project of trialling different approaches so that people don't have to make a long commute every day.

In terms of public transport, we need a legislative set of proposals in place, we need to look again at the subsidy and the commercial arrangements, and we need to look at the fares. There's a great deal that we need to do. The Fflecsi project that we've been trialling in Newport of demand-responsive buses has got a real potential for us. Because one of the difficulties we've got with buses is that buses have become a social justice issue as much as a climate change or transport issue. Transport for Wales surveys show that 80 per cent of bus passengers have no alternative other than to use the bus, and I'm afraid, because of the direction of transport policy over a long time, buses have become the preserve of people who have no option. They've been the preserve of people on lower incomes and older people, and we need to make buses for everybody. The demand-responsive model, I think, has a chance of attracting new people onto buses who otherwise would not have thought buses are for them. I think that is part of our challenge.

In terms of the first question—to complete my going in reverse through the points made—the question of what is a good road, as I think Vikki Howells put it, I wouldn't quite put it in that way. When is a road the right solution? I don't have a fixed view on that. That's something for the experts on the panel to come up with, because that's what we need help with. That's why we've set up this project. I'm clear that roads have a role to play in our transport system. I strongly believe we've not been maintaining the current roads we have well enough. And again, the inquiry that I believe she sat on with the Economy, Infrastructure and Skills Committee in the last Senedd heard lots of evidence and made recommendations on the state of our roads. I think we should be spending more money on maintaining what we've got, but then still building roads when that is necessary. The question of when that is necessary is the advice I'm seeking from this panel.

Of course, traffic congestion itself is polluting, and people, having more options than they did 50 years ago, will continue to use cars because of convenience, necessity, weather, locality or simply the freedom of the road. As you say, you're going to pause on all new road schemes while you review your existing commitments, so as you say, it's not an absolute door shut—it's a delay. Of course, the cars of the future are going to be different vehicles, more environmentally friendly, very different technology, so it's not simply a trade-off, pro or anti-environment. It's different technology, different options, different choices in the future.

In 2007, a Welsh Government consultation identified eight options for easing traffic congestion crossing to and from Anglesey, including a new bridge. I raised this with the previous First Minister exactly four years ago, in June 2017, here. I said:

'clearly, congestion on the existing Menai and Britannia bridges has been a problem for many years. It’s a decade since a Welsh Government-commissioned report identified eight options, including a new bridge, but that didn’t go forward to delivery. You said last May'— in 2016—

'that you’d promise to make the third crossing your priority for north Wales if you form a Government and, of course, your Government announced before Christmas'— in 2016—

'that it had appointed consultants to look at routes for a proposed new crossing to Anglesey, which could begin by 2021 if it gets the go-ahead.'

I asked him to

'provide an assurance that we’re not going to have a re-run of 2007 when we had similar assurances after a commissioned report was produced for the Welsh Government and that you envisage this going ahead'.

The First Minister at the time replied:

'We have appointed Aecom to support our next phase of the development work. That will result in the announcement of a preferred route in May 2018. Our aim is to see the third Menai crossing open in 2022.'

That was a pledge four years ago. How watertight are pledges today, or do you have something to tell us about the Menai crossing?

Finally, speaking here last month, I called for a Welsh Government statement on its current position regarding the A55/A494/A548 Flintshire corridor. The Labour Welsh Government announced in 2017 they'd decided on the Flintshire red route option to the A55 at Northop. I subsequently raised constituents' concerns regarding this with the former economy Minister on many occasions, highlighting issues including environmental impact on habitats, meadows and ancient woodland. Last September, he said that they were due to carry out some environmental investigations along the preferred route in autumn 2020. Last October, he said, 'We're continuing with the next stage of development on the Flintshire corridor improvement, and are currently procuring a designer to develop the design of proposals in more detail'. It sounds like a lot of money's been spent.

Last December, he told me that this route was determined to be the most suitable for the challenge that we face in that particular area of Wales. Personally, I oppose the red route and I'm grateful if this delay might lead to that route actually being cancelled. But, nonetheless, earlier this year before the election I attended a briefing with Welsh Government transport officials, who told me that the Welsh Government traffic forecasts for the Flintshire corridor were up, up, up. They weren't going to go backwards, whatever scenario the Welsh Government had modelled. So, what consideration have you given to alternative options to deal with that Welsh Government-forecast traffic increase? 

As Mark Isherwood said, he has persistently made the case against the red route and, as the old line goes, some people just won't take 'yes' for an answer. We've now responded to that by freezing the scheme and reviewing it. I would have thought he would've welcomed that. I know he's not one to praise the Welsh Government easily, but I thought that was something that he would be a little more gracious about. He is right; the problems remain. This is true across all of Wales. These roads have been developed because there are problems, and if roads aren't going to be the solutions to all of them, then we do need to look at other solutions. That is the challenge before us, and that is partly the challenge that we're going to give the commission to come up with solutions to. 

On the case of the second Menai crossing, a key part of the case—[Interruption.] Sorry; the third Menai crossing. We're struggling to have a consensus on how many crossings there are on the Menai. On the Menai crossing—let's at least say that and be ambiguous about the number of bits of it—a key part of the case for that obviously was to deal with the traffic for the new nuclear power station at Wylfa that was anticipated. As we know, sadly that is not now going ahead, and the case for that road has been impacted by that change of circumstances. As I said in the statement, all schemes not currently in the ground need to be reviewed, and there needs to be a set of metrics developed to decide which ones should go ahead and which ones shouldn't. In the meantime, we can reallocate some of that funding towards road maintenance and improving public transport. So, the problems that Mark Isherwood identified can be dealt with in other ways. 

The work of the Burns commission in Newport has been quite instructive in this, where there was a very clear view by many that the only solution to dealing with that congestion was a motorway through the Gwent wetlands, whereas the detailed work of the Burns commission shows that, actually, that traffic can be dealt with by creating a modern public transport system for half the price. That work is now going forward through a delivery board and through close working with Newport council, Transport for Wales and the Welsh Government. That, I think, provides a blueprint for other parts of Wales where there is congestion, and where public transport is a realistic alternative for many of those journeys—as I said in my statement, not for every person, not for every journey, but for a sufficient number to make a difference to the problem.  

Deputy Minister, you will know that the content of this statement will have a big impact on residents in my constituency, particularly children, who are significantly impacted by the air pollution that this investment was supposed to address. Can I ask you, Minister, how confident are you that this will be addressed by the outcome of the review and that any future measures will have a measurable impact on air pollution on roads in Alyn and Deeside? 

Secondly, Minister, you will know that businesses in my constituency need people to travel across north Wales and the north-west of England to work—to travel to work in them, and also to connect efficiently with their supply chain across that region. Can I ask you how confident, therefore, you are that this review will answer the questions those businesses are asking when considering important investment decisions in Alyn and Deeside?   

In terms of the impact on business, one of the problems businesses have is congestion where you have people using cars to make journeys that could be made by other ways, but instead are snarling up the road network. So, if we get this right, we can take traffic off the road that doesn't need to be there, where there are practical alternatives. I repeat the figure that two-thirds of all journeys are for distances of under 5 miles; they're not these long-distance, complex business journeys that we often hear about. It's freeing up the road for those journeys where there isn't an alternative to take place without being delayed by traffic that could be displaced. So, I think that's an important thing to say. 

In terms of air quality, this is one of the issues that this Senedd is going to have to face: what goes into a clean air Bill, how ambitious and bold we want to be about that, what package of measures improves air quality. There is a vision for simply building bypasses all across Wales, to shift the problem from one place to another. I'm not convinced entirely that that deals with the issue of air quality. Clearly, as tailpipe emissions fall away, as cars are increasingly electrified, that's going to have a significant impact on local air quality within town centres, and behaviour change is a very important part of it, too. If we can achieve modal shift, we can reduce traffic, we can reduce pollution and we can reduce congestion. We can do that quicker than we can through heavy engineering interventions, and we can do it cheaper, and reproduce other benefits too. So, I think there is a complex mixture. I think the go-to default option that too often has been had, that air quality is best dealt with by a road, I think needs a more granular look, and that's one of the things I hope the review will deal with, because I completely recognise the point, and as I said, I'm familiar with it in my own constituency. Cars pollute. They kill. They produce air that damages the health of people, and we need to tackle it. The best way to tackle it—I think that's something that we're still figuring out, and that's what I hope the review will help us with.

Thank you very much to the Deputy Minister for your statement this afternoon, and I hope it wasn't a traffic jam that caused your delay this afternoon, as that would be slightly ironic. I'm sure you'll agree with me that most roads are necessary, and we will not address the climate emergency by simply banning road building. In order to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, we must look at the journeys taking place on the roads and, wherever possible, look to active travel.

My constituents in the Vale of Clwyd lost a vital active travel route when storm Christoph washed away the Llanerch bridge, removing the only viable active travel route between Trefnant and Tremeirchion. Imagine the dismay when the Welsh Government informed the local communities that there were no moneys to replace the bridge, meaning that residents of Trefnant, going westbound on the A55, have to take a 2-mile to 3-mile detour in order to get home, which is in essence causing more pollution to the environment. Deputy Minister, will you now reconsider that decision and ensure the Llanerch bridge is replaced with a structure that's more able to withstand the severe storms that are now more likely due to climate change? Thank you very much.

Thank you very much. I'm afraid I'm not familiar with the situation in Trefnant, but I'm very happy to look at it and have a further conversation with the Member. We are providing this year a record amount of investment for active travel infrastructure—£75 million, which is more per head than any other part of the country—and there is money available this year, on an ongoing basis, for local authorities to bid for schemes that will create local journeys so that people can take everyday journeys, end to end, by foot and by bike, for all those journeys, we know, under 5 miles, where for many people it is a realistic alternative, particularly journeys to school. So, as I say, I'm happy to look in detail at the scheme and to have a further conversation.

Minister, I am as pleased as anyone else that Welsh Government is putting climate change at the centre of its programme for government. Decisions made today must take into consideration the impact they will have on generations tomorrow. However, I am also keen to ensure that all aspects and implications are taken into account when deciding whether road building projects will go ahead, as my colleague, Jack Sargeant said earlier. In particular, public health, in the light of poor air quality levels in residential areas, is a concern of mine—for instance, along the A494 in Flintshire. Will public health concerns be central to the decision-making process going forward?

Another concern of mine, following this statement, is that we are currently in a situation where existing roads are not fit for purpose, following public funding cuts to local authorities as a direct result of the last 10 years of Tory austerity. I know that Flintshire has a backlog of £40 million, and Wrexham's backlog for road repairs is £60 million, so the £20 million from Welsh Government, although it was greatly welcomed last year, needs to significantly increase, just to keep up with the existing road maintenance. Investment is needed in our highways across north Wales, along with active travel and public transport.

Will the Minister make a commitment that funding that has been earmarked for road building projects in north Wales, including the red route of Flintshire corridor and the third Menai crossing, will still be invested in north Wales, whether that be for investment in the maintenance and adaptation of existing highways or for public transport? Could you please let me know if you would look at trunking the A470 in light of the Flintshire corridor, the red route not going ahead? Thank you. Diolch.

Thank you. I certainly agree that we need to be spending more money maintaining the highway network. The highway network is the largest asset that the Welsh Government has, the network within our own ownership, and obviously, that also applies to the local government-owned road network too. I think we need to be spending more money on looking after it. That's one of the consequences that I hope will flow from today's announcement and from our commitment in the Wales transport strategy. So, I entirely agree on that.

I've hopefully addressed many of the points that Carolyn Thomas makes to Jack Sargeant and to others. We are committed to helping people to travel in ways that benefit their health and the environment, that tackle climate change but also serve the other purposes that public transport and transport is there to do. But none of us can avoid the fact that transport accounts for 17 per cent of all our carbon emissions, and if everybody in this Chamber is signed up to achieving net zero by the latest of 2050, those 17 per cent have to go in the mix of us deciding how best to spend that headroom that we have. And the science is only going to get more demanding, let's be clear about that. It may well be that the 2050 target will have to be brought forward in response to that science, and we do need to be prepared to confront the fact that transport decisions and the way we've always done things will need to change in light of that science and that evidence. And that's what this review is meant to start, so that we can have an evidence-based discussion and make informed choices of when the road is the right thing to do and when an alternative is the right thing to do.

Thank you for the good-news story that this is eminently doable, because two thirds of all journeys less than five miles means that most of us can bicycle that short journey, and for those who live in the highlands of my constituency, we now have electric bikes, which we didn't have 50 years ago, so that's another good-news story.

I just want to ask you about something slightly different, which is that there's been a lot of talk in the last 48 hours about the shortage of lorry drivers across Britain and the missing 13,000 lorry drivers who have gone back to other parts of Europe because of the hostile environment created by the UK Government who doesn't think that these are people filling essential skills gaps. Obviously, HGVs are noisy, dangerous and very punishing on road maintenance, and that's certainly not reflected in the HGV vehicle tax. So, I just wondered if the expert roads review panel will be looking at how we use roads to distribute goods and whether we could create a more rational hub-and-spoke distribution network so that the HGVs could deposit their goods at important road interchanges or wholesale markets so that the last part of the journey could be made by small electric vehicles, or, indeed, bicycles in some cases. I just wondered if you could tell us whether that's something that you could start to institute as a matter of urgency.

Thank you. That doesn't fall within the remit of the roads review, but it does fall within the Wales transport strategy that we published in March, and we are looking at that last-mile delivery network and the potential for doing things differently. And as part of this year's funding, we are funding a pilot project using electric bikes to cargo bikes in Swansea, Aberystwyth, Newtown and in Cardiff—particularly adapted bikes—to see what role they can play. Because there's significant evidence to show that they can have a real impact in addressing air quality in towns and cities and efficiency for businesses, because you can deliver much quicker using an electric cargo bike for the last mile than if you were racing around the city in a white van. So, I do think that electric bikes are a game changer, both in towns and cities in terms of deliveries, but also in rural areas for other types of journeys.

And one thing we haven't discussed today in any detail is the implication of today's announcement on rural areas. And I'm very clear that rural areas need to be part of the solution. The approach that we need to take in rural areas will be different from the approach that we take in urban areas. Nonetheless, modal shift is eminently achievable in rural areas too.

We did do some work, which I presented to local authority leaders from rural areas in March, as part of the Wales transport strategy, looking at European countries and their rural areas. We looked at how they, in very similar circumstances—indeed, sometimes more sparse than ours—have, in some examples, far higher instances of bus use, far more frequent services, far more use of active travel, partly through electric bikes, but also through segregated routes. So, there is definitely a rural element to our ambition of achieving modal shift. There has to be. It is a different one, but it is just as important, and we are committed to doing that too.

Thank you, Deputy Minister, and that brings today's proceedings to a close.

The meeting ended at 17:41.