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.