The following amendments have been selected: amendment 1 in the name of Lesley Griffiths, and amendments 2, 3 and 4 in the name of Siân Gwenllian. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendments 2, 3 and 4 will be deselected.

We move on the item 7, the Welsh Conservatives debate on transport. I call on Joel James to move the motion.

Motion NDM7784 Darren Millar

To propose that the Senedd:

1. Welcomes the positive economic impact of the removal of the Severn crossing tolls.

2. Regrets Welsh Government proposals which could lead to charges for motorists using the M4, A470, the A55 and other trunk roads.

3. Calls on the Welsh Government to:

a) rule out the introduction of tolls and road pricing on Welsh roads;

b) promote greener transport through action such as:

i) increasing the provision of electric charging points on the Welsh road network;

ii) the further promotion of active travel; and

iii) the extension of free bus passes to those aged 16 to 25.

Motion moved.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. The abolition of the Severn bridge tolls has proved to be a massive benefit to the people of Wales. As the stranglehold of tolls was released by the UK Government in 2017, businesses and commuters were relieved of massive financial burdens, with some motorists saving as much as £1,400 per year. Removing the Severn bridge toll road will have undoubtedly opened up south Wales to many businesses that would have seen a toll road as a barrier to conducting commerce. As a result, axing of the tolls has generated an estimated annual boost of over £100 million to the Welsh economy. The technology sector has seen unprecedented growth in Cardiff, leading the UK's major cities at 7 per cent, on par with Manchester and ahead of London and Bristol. I believe—and indeed, my party believes—that introducing new toll roads would only serve to suffocate that growth.

As the Deputy Minister and many here will be aware, surveys commissioned by the Welsh Government have asked road users about paying to use parts of the M4 and A470 in a bid to tackle poor air quality. We understand that this is part of the Welsh Government's legal responsibility to survey for other possible actions that could help improve air quality. I asked a written question during recess, and I can also thank my colleague Tom Giffard for his question to the First Minister regarding this issue, and to the First Minister for his response yesterday. I am sure it would have gone some way to reassuring the wider public that toll road proposals were not part of the Welsh Government’s current forward plan.

However, it is without question that the Welsh Government must recognise that surveying people about toll roads and being very specific about the M4 and A470 as possible locations will put into people’s minds that this is a course of action that the Government are considering. I hope the Government can acknowledge the considerable concern among motorists and businesses that this would have caused. Therefore, the point of this motion today is that we want to rule out completely toll roads as a measure to address poor air quality in future.

In south Wales particularly, we face an air quality problem. A recent BBC article highlighted how the World Health Organization now believes that the effects of poor air quality are far worse than previously thought. This debate is therefore timely in that we get the opportunity to discuss the issue of poor air quality, which is at crisis point. We have proposed the further motions to try and address these concerns.

I would like to go on record to say that I, and my party, would oppose any introduction of tolls as a solution to poor air quality on the grounds that they will have a devastating impact on the lowest-paid workers, who will have to pay a disproportionate amount of their income to use the roads, and are those most likely to have older vehicles. Moreover, the introduction of tolls would undoubtedly push drivers to go around them and onto smaller roads. This would of course cause an increase in traffic and ultimately reduce air quality in other places. We have seen this with the pedestrianisation of Castle Street in Cardiff, a concern that the First Minister has raised himself in this Chamber.

The issue exists that electric vehicles are being welcomed as a major solution to poor air quality. However, Wales as a nation has very little provision when it comes to electric charging points. Many of those who currently use electric vehicles are able to have charging points fitted at their homes, but many people in Wales live in flats and terraced houses, where they need to park some distance from their homes and would struggle to use electric charging points.

While Scotland has 7.5 rapid charging points per 100,000 people, Wales only has 1.8. We are calling for the Welsh Government to deliver a more rapid roll-out of electric charging points, because this will be a key driver in encouraging people to invest in electric vehicles as a valid alternative to diesel and petrol vehicles. The Welsh Government says at least 55,000 publicly accessible charging points will be needed in Wales by 2030 in order to support sufficient electric vehicles. We really need to understand, without politicising the issue, whether this target is likely to be achieved, because the lack of charging points is fast becoming the limiting factor for electric vehicle ownership.

I believe that one of the best possible ways to really tackle our poor air quality is through the greater use of innovative measures. As the Deputy Minister may already know, I have already written to the climate change committee expressing my concern that the Welsh Government does not seem to be engaging enough with innovation to resolve poor air quality. For example, buses in England are being fitted with devices that can filter air as they travel, removing particulate air pollution and blowing out pure air behind them. These devices can remove up to 1.25 kg of particulates from the air each year, and I believe that it is ludicrous that these devices are not on every bus in Wales. Similarly, the Netherlands, among other countries, are now using smog-free towers, which can clean up to 3.5 million cu m of air per day. Why aren’t these towers on our roundabouts? These are quite cost-effective solutions to a major problem.

This Government has placed considerable emphasis on their active travel plan, encouraging people to cycle and walk. Academically, this is a great solution to the problem and one that I and my party support. We want to see the active travel plan expand to meet its real potential. However, it is held back by two major issues, which in my mind need resolving for the active travel plan to really succeed. The first is that roads are not safe enough for cyclists. Whilst the dedicated cycle paths provide safe travel routes, travelling on roads to and from the dedicated paths is extremely dangerous. The inside of roads are very often full of potholes and stones, which not only make cycling unpleasant, but hazardous. There is also the threat of being hit by cars, vans and lorries. Whilst a majority of drivers are considerate of cyclists, there remain some drivers who are far too aggressive around cyclists, hurling abuse at them and sometimes even deliberately trying to knock them off their bikes. Very often, cars and lorries drive too close to cyclists as they become frustrated at the speed of travel. Cyclists are forced into the curb by motor vehicles, they have to deal with car doors opening suddenly, and if they get pushed off their bikes they frequently end up on road verges that are often full of broken glass, nails, dead animals and litter of all descriptions.

In 2019, there were two motor vehicle deaths per billion miles, whilst for cyclists it was 29 and for pedestrians it was 35. In terms of serious injury, motor vehicle users had 29 serious injuries per billion miles, whilst cyclists had 1,255 and pedestrians 504. In the national travel attitudes survey, two-thirds of the population above 16 years old agreed that it is too dangerous to cycle on roads. Ultimately, for cyclists it doesn’t matter who is at fault—they will always be worse off with the impact of a motor vehicle. On Monday, there was a BBC report about the death of Andy Fowell, a retired consultant who died when his bike was in a collision with a bus in Snowdonia. Whilst cyclists and walkers use the active travel routes, they are exercising and with that they are breathing more heavily, which in areas of poor air quality can only be a bad thing.

Finally, I want to say about free bus passes and how extending them for those who are 16 to 25 years old would be a great way of encouraging teenagers and young adults to prioritise the use of buses throughout their lives. I and my party believe that this would help encourage the behavioural change that we need to promote bus travel as a viable alternative to the car. Dirprwy Lywydd, I move the motion.

I have selected the four amendments to the motion. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendments 2, 3 and 4 will be deselected. I call on the Deputy Minister for Climate Change, Lee Waters, to formally move amendment 1 tabled in the name of Lesley Griffiths. 

Amendment 1—Lesley Griffiths

Delete all and replace with:

To propose that the Senedd:

1. Recognises that we are in a climate emergency and notes that 17 per cent of Wales’s emissions come from transport.

2. Calls on the Welsh Government to:

a) follow the advice of the UK Climate Change Committee to reduce the number of car journeys made and to encourage people to shift transport modes to public transport and active travel;

b) follow the advice of the UK Climate Change Committee to decarbonise vehicles and invest and co-ordinate the charging infrastructure to enable people to transition to electric vehicles and bikes with confidence.

Amendment 1 moved.

Formally.

I call on Delyth Jewell to move amendments 2, 3 and 4, tabled in the name of Siân Gwenllian. 

Amendment 2—Siân Gwenllian

Delete points 1 and 2.

Amendment 3—Siân Gwenllian

Delete point 3(a) and replace with:

‘Improve public and greener transport infrastructure before considering the introduction of tolls and road pricing on Welsh roads’.

Amendment 4—Siân Gwenllian

Add as new sub-points at the end of point 3(b): 

seeking full devolution, with adequate funding, for all rail services in Wales;

tasking Transport for Wales with creating an all-Wales rail network, connecting the north with the south and enabling rail traffic between the major centres of population;

combining rail with a regulated bus service to ensure a public transport option is provided for all parts of Wales, including small towns and villages that currently have only sporadic public transport facilities;

giving local authorities the power to establish their own municipal bus companies;

setting out a national target that 10 per cent of all trips are done via cycling or scootering by 2030;

explore proposals for electric-only highways and tunnels in areas of high air pollution and congestion.

Amendments 2, 3 and 4 moved.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. I move those amendments. 

When the Welsh Government declared a climate emergency in 2019, many of us expected radical action, and in some policy areas we've seen strong ambition on homes, energy, forestry—the list goes on—all tied together by a bold net-zero target for 2050, but we all know that more radical ambition is needed, and more action to underpin it. Today's debate concerns transport, an area of policy where the Welsh Government, I'm afraid, has fallen short despite the fact that 17 per cent of Wales's emissions derive from this area. 

Let's talk about tolls, what's already come up. The Welsh Government has floated the idea of motorists in Wales paying to use roads in a bid to tackle air pollution. Obviously, a clean air Act is something that I very much champion, but the Welsh Government has not gone further so far than consulting the public on the issue, suggesting tolls around the M4 around Newport and the A470 around Pontypridd. Following criticism—and I know that this has already come up in the previous contribution—the Welsh Government has said that there aren't any concrete plans for these tolls. And this is difficult—I recognise this is a difficult issue. We all want to get to grips with the climate emergency, it's a very difficult situation, but these tolls, if introduced, would hurt the poorest in society.

We know that tackling both the climate crisis and the pollution crisis requires integrated thinking and ways of encouraging people to change their habits in ways that will bring them with us. Even with tolls in place with the Severn crossing, for example, over several years traffic typically increased by about 4 per cent year on year. Often, what tolls would actually do is drive people to avoid the charges by taking an alternative route through communities, leading to more congestion and air pollution in small towns and villages.  

But the problem remains as well that the removal of tolls on the Severn crossing also increased traffic, and therefore increased carbon emissions and air pollution. Data from Highways England has illustrated that following the scrapping of those tolls, there was an 18 per cent increase in crossings over the Severn crossing itself, and a 34 per cent increase over the old Severn bridge. So, tolls or no tolls, emissions go up. Our habits, it seems, are hard-wired. 

Now, many people and businesses are still dependent on roads, and a dramatic shift is required to reach net zero by 2050. I would welcome comments from the Deputy Minister about plans to invest in electric vehicles, in charging infrastructure, R&D to improve existing technologies and to develop the technologies of tomorrow. The Welsh Government could explore ideas like electric-only highways and tunnels in areas of high air pollution and congestion. Crucially, Dirprwy Lywydd, we believe that Wales should be an interconnected community of communities, and people across Wales need to be connected to each other by a truly integrated public transport system with a greater reliance on environmentally friendly modes of travel. I recognise that this is an area where the Deputy Minister feels very passionately, but I'm sure that he will agree with me that it will require an even greater investment for the ambition to be met with action. Why not task Transport for Wales with creating an all-Wales rail network connecting the north and the south and enabling rail traffic between the major centres of population? Why not combine rail with a regulated bus service, and why not give local authorities the power to establish their own municipal bus companies? And, of course, we must see the full devolution, with adequate funding, of all rail services in Wales. The current situation for railways just has not worked. Can we really trust Westminster to deliver vital changes in Wales? I think we already know the answer to that.

So, in closing, Dirprwy Lywydd, let's ensure that we take people with us on this journey. Let's not penalise those who can't afford it. Let's instead offer them better transport opportunities. Let's improve public and greener transport infrastructure before thinking of tolls and road pricing on Welsh roads.

Peter Fox.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Sorry, I didn't hear you introduce me there.

I absolutely support the motion put forward by Joel James and I agree with a lot of what Delyth Jewell has just said, as well. When you have a bridge with a toll across it, it is a restriction on economic activity. That was a stark warning, not from a politician but from a respected lecturer at a business school in Wales—simple but wise and insightful words. Conservative-run UK Governments can see these things, and indeed have seized the hour in removing hindrances to the Welsh economy, because they understand what a thriving economy needs. One of those, as we've already heard from Joel James, was the abolition of those choking tolls on the Severn crossing. The lessons learned from this should not be forgotten. Removing the tolls unlocked the south of our country, where two thirds or more of the population resides. The UK Government invested in Wales that day by removing them. They wanted our economy to be set free and they did it. The axing of tolls saved the average commuter, as we've heard already, and businesses, an estimated £1,400 annually, as well as providing a huge boost to the Welsh economy.

We must be under no illusion, Members: road tolls would have a huge negative consequence on the economy here. They would only act as another tourniquet on our economy's windpipe. Investors and industry need a Government that pulls with them, helps to oil the wheels of success here, not the opposite. Whilst the Welsh Government proposals may be well meaning, they come at a time when every sinew in the Welsh Government's arm should be pulling to help our economy grow and thrive like never before. We have seen how fragile our supply chains can be at times, and that can only be made worse by poorly connected infrastructure and additional drag anchors such as tolls. There is no getting away from that.

And after more than two decades, it's scandalous that the Welsh economy is still the most underperforming in the whole of Britain. That is a terrible economic legacy that the consecutive Labour Governments here are leaving to our children and grandchildren. More tolls and the potential congestion charge would be the final straw that breaks the camel's back, which would undoubtedly cause an avalanche of potential investors in existing businesses to go elsewhere. We need to be tearing down barriers that are hindering economic growth, not putting them up. Eliminating barriers to inward investment and future economic growth whilst promoting green transport now needs to be the key priority. R&D in Wales has been pitifully low in comparison with our UK neighbours and this needs to be reversed, so the alternative fuels of the future, such as green hydrogen, to power our future freight movement, can be accelerated, meeting our carbon reduction targets as an additional result. Embracing and promoting green transport in the future needs to recognise all types of transport, including HGVs. Wales is lagging behind much of the United Kingdom in moving this all forward, especially when it comes to fast-charging points for electric vehicles. This needs to change, Ministers. Wales can be well and truly open for business if action is taken now to prevent disastrous decisions being imposed as well as the promotion of greener transport. Diolch yn fawr.

I'm very pleased to speak in this debate today. Looking at the Welsh Government amendment pointing out the significance of transport in the challenges of climate change and reducing emissions, and the UK Climate Change Committee's advice on reducing car journeys and making sure that more people make that modal shift to public transport and active travel, I'm very much reminded that we face those challenges to a great extent here in south-east Wales. Of course, that's why there was the inquiry into a possible M4 relief road; the Welsh Government's decision not to proceed; the setting up of the Burns commission; and now, of course, we have the implementation group, tasked with taking the recommendations of the commission forward.

So, in south-east Wales, around Newport, the challenges are there. The decisions have been made and the structures set up to meet those challenges. What we now await very keenly, and what people in Newport East and around await very keenly, is that actual implementation of the Burns recommendations.

There is some frustration at the moment that we're not seeing implementation at the pace and on the scale that is necessary. I've met with the commission and had discussions with various bodies with responsibility, and we really do need to find ways forward. There are some obvious possible early wins, as it were. We've seen some developments around active travel and we need to see more, because I agree with what has already been said about the importance of active travel in getting more environmentally friendly, healthy and progressive ways of moving people around.

We need to see some early developments in terms of better bus routes and ways of getting more people onto buses. There's an interesting fflecsi bus service in Newport now, which I think is gaining more support from passengers as we come out of the worst, I hope, of the pandemic, as restrictions are eased and we're getting more close to life as it was before the pandemic. But, we need to do something on a much greater scale, really, in Newport to get people back onto our buses in far greater numbers.

Of course, train services and infrastructure for trains do take quite some time to build and to develop, and it's quite difficult, perhaps, to have those early wins as far as rail is concerned. But, we're fortunate, I think, in Newport East in having in Magor a very good example of where we could make early progress in getting more people onto our trains and off the roads, and that is because there's a very committed group there that has been working towards a Magor walkway station for several years. They've had countless meetings with the UK Government, the Welsh Government, local authorities, Network Rail and many others in putting forward their proposals and seeking support and partnership. So, there is there, in Magor, the possibility to use a lot of work that's already taken place and a lot of process that's already been undergone to, perhaps, take forward an early example of how we can really meet that challenge of getting people off the roads and onto public transport.

I would hope that the Welsh Government, following this debate today, and knowing the scale of the challenges in south-east Wales, the process that we've gone through, the position that we're now in and the delivery unit that now has a major task ahead of it—that the Welsh Government will need to make sure that we do have adequate focus and pressure to make progress to ensure that we don’t slip back at all in terms of the momentum that built from the M4 relief road decision, the Burns commission, and the setting up of the delivery unit. We really do need to get on and deliver, and I hope that Welsh Government, working in partnership with others, will make sure that that happens.

It’s a pleasure to take part in this debate this afternoon. Road-use charging schemes aren't the answer to congestion, nor the air pollution created as a result of stationary traffic. We have heard Members bemoaning the daily traffic chaos along stretches of the M4 in south Wales. For many of my constituents in the Vale of Clwyd, the misery of congestion on the A55 is equally frustrating and a barrier to growth.

The daily misery faced by commuters has grown as a direct result of a lack of investment by Welsh Government in our transport infrastructure. For 22 years, Welsh Labour have run our public service infrastructure into the ground. We have seen a massive decline in the number of local bus journeys. This is particularly bad news for my constituents, as 21 per cent of households in the north Denbighshire locality do not have access to a car or van.

The situation on the trains isn’t much better, unfortunately. The Welsh Government can’t blame private operators for the mess we face on our rail network—they’ve been running our trains since 2018. Yet, despite big promises, it has been an even bigger failure. The lack of services in north-east Wales is astounding. Many trains don’t run at peak times—which has led to many of my constituents wishing for the Arriva days back—even to the point where there is no service running west from Chester between 5 p.m. and 7 p.m. on a weekday, and that’s staggering, seeing as it’s rush hour. Things might have been bad then, but at least they were consistent. For those who do have access to a private vehicle, it’s little wonder that they would rather sit in a queue on the A55—at least they know they will get to their destination eventually.

We all accept the need to tackle air pollution as well as the need for action on climate change. However, punishing road users is not the way, nor will road-use charging force modal shift. People rely upon the car because there is no other choice, particularly in my part of the world. The way we will deliver clean air is by improving roads, not by restricting their use. Roads are the vital link between communities. We can tackle pollution and carbon dioxide emissions by improving the vehicles that use these vital links. Yet, once again, the Welsh Government is failing in this regard. Two London boroughs have more electric vehicle charging points than the whole of Wales. The A55 has a severe lack of charging points along its route, making it extremely difficult for individuals and businesses to abandon the internal combustion engine. Denbighshire council are piloting a green taxi scheme, but unless we see a massive increase in charging infrastructure, such schemes are doomed to remain as urban-only ventures. We need charging infrastructure, not charging schemes, if we are to truly decarbonise transport and deliver air quality improvement, and I urge Members to support our motion this afternoon. Thank you very much.

I've listened carefully to everyone's contributions this afternoon, and I hear many arguments that are contradictory. One challenge for the Tories is the lack of investment from the UK Government before this Senedd came into existence, because this has been a problem that's been with us over many decades, and although I do have some criticisms of the Welsh Government since the inception of the Assembly, there is a responsibility on the UK Government too, and I think we all have to recognise that.

It's a complex debate, isn't it, because it's about transport on the one hand, but also, as we see, the climate emergency is at the heart of all this, as is public health—they are all inter-related. And although I've expressed concerns earlier in terms of tolls on the A470, I'm not opposed to the concept of tolls or radical action if it is in a broader context. For me, when residents received surveys over the summer, they got in touch with me not to complain that they would have to pay to use the A470—they were concerned about the impact that that would have on communities and air pollution. And their question to me was: 'Well, we live in an area now where everyone says that air pollution is a problem and it's dangerous, so you're going to bring more traffic through our communities?'

The Deputy Minister will be aware that I've written to him recently, asking about the most recent evidence as to how effective 50 mph zones are in terms of that area between Pontypridd and Upper Boat. You brought forward a statement earlier this week, mentioning that there had been a reduction of 47 per cent in nitrogen dioxide levels in these areas, but I can't actually find that data anywhere at the moment, and I would be delighted if I could see that data. Because, for me, seeing the impact of 50 mph zones actually making a difference would actually ease the concerns of those communities currently suffering high levels of pollution. It would alleviate their fears. So, if this data is available, I would appreciate seeing it.

During an earlier debate, the possible link between dementia and air pollution was mentioned. But, in 2018, the World Health Organization published a report on air pollution and child health, and that showed clearly how air pollution can impact on neurodevelopment and cognitive abilities and lead to asthma and cancer in children. Also, children brought up in areas with high levels of air pollution can be at greater risk of chronic diseases, such as cardiovascular disease, later in life.

Therefore, for me, all of this issue around transport is about so much more than the issue of how we travel from one place to another. I would hope that we would all agree, although some arguments have been made today in terms of motorists' rights and the rights of people to use their cars. But shouldn't we all be working towards getting rid of as many cars as possible from our roads? After all, there is a climate emergency. We saw radical action in terms of the COVID crisis; we saw that it was possible to reduce traffic on our roads, that there are alternative ways of living.

I was saddened this morning, crawling from Pontypridd to Cardiff in my car, seeing that the traffic levels were just as bad as they were pre COVID; it was the worst I'd seen since pre-COVID times. And the reason I was in my car rather than on the train was because I had to be in Ynysybwl by 19:45 this evening, and that's the only way that I could ensure that I could get there to attend a meeting with the people I represent.

So, it is a problem in terms of investment in public transport too. And I'm thinking about all of those people who can't afford public transport at the moment. It's a broader problem. We have, in previous debates since May, discussed investment in bus services and so on. I appreciate that the Deputy Minister has emphasised the importance of this, but I think we all have to be agreed, therefore, that we must think holistically. Putting all of these counter arguments as to everyone's rights—well, we will have to make some difficult decisions. Perhaps tolls will be one of those in future, but, for now, it's not an option. We need to look at alternatives, but we need them as a matter of urgency. We can't wait when we have a climate emergency. We need action.

A pleasure to be taking part in this debate. I just want to refute one or two of the things that the Conservatives have already said. I just want to question this holy grail of the positive impact of the removal of the Severn crossing tolls. Perhaps Peter Fox might remember how much it increased the pressure on housing in the areas around Monmouthshire, next to our border with England, because, obviously, it was more attractive for people who were living in the Bristol area to come and live in cheaper housing in Wales. So, obviously, that potentially increased a lot of the commuting traffic, which obviously increases our carbon emissions. Clearly, I respect the fact that it, obviously, had a reduction in the costs for people who had to go and work the other side of the border because they weren't able to get suitable work in Wales, but, nevertheless, there has been considerable cost to the removal of the tolls on the Severn bridge, which is fully recognised in the report of the West of England Combined Authority, of which Cardiff is a member. It talks about the major cost to the region of the increased congestion, which they regard as £300 million a year, and that removing the Severn bridge tolls is likely to have worsened the problem. So, they are now considering demand-management measures, such as charging on both sides of the Severn to raise revenue for sustainable transport alternatives. 

I'd also just like to correct Joel James on the idea that, somehow, Cardiff has become the biggest growing city in the UK as a result of the reduction in the tolls. It was already the fastest growing city in the UK before the tolls, and, hopefully, we will have a slightly reduced growth, because of the impact that all this traffic is having on illegal levels of air pollution. Why on earth would we want to rule out tolls as a policy lever if we discover that air pollution is a major cause of dementia? I'm referring back to the debate we had earlier. We have to have it in the armoury in case we need it, because we cannot go on submitting our population to illegal levels of air pollution. 

I'd just like to remind you of a quote from your very own leader. 'Humankind needs to grow up and come of age', said Boris Johnson. Well, I think the Welsh Conservatives need to grow up and come of age. We have a climate emergency, and that means we have to change our ways. Let me just spell out to you what that means. Evidence to the climate change and environment committee from Sustrans reminded us that the switch from diesel and petrol vehicles isn't going to be sufficient to meet our carbon emissions reduction targets, which you, the Tories, have voted for. So, even if all new cars are ultra-low emissions by 2035, we are still going to have to reduce our actual car mileage by 58 per cent between 2016 and 2035 if we are going to avoid the disaster of not meeting our carbon reduction targets. So, we are going to have to do things differently.

I'd just like to ask Joel James how he travelled to the Senedd today, because, if we don't change our ways, we can't expect other people to—

At least he travelled here.

Well, that's a good idea; that's why he's able to lead on the—. But the point is, if we want to extend free bus passes to 16 to 25-year-olds—which I don't discount as a great idea—we have to work out how we're going to pay for it. I just want to, equally—. I do question the idea from Gareth Davies that people would rather sit in a queue on the A55. Would they rather do that than pay for a toll to improve the public transport services—really? 

And I think, finally, I just want to—[Interruption.] I just want to remind us that one of the other people who's looking at tolls is your very own Chancellor of the Exchequer. And quite rightly too, because the fuel excise duty is currently worth £40 billion to the Treasury, and that pays for all the important services we all love—

Can the Member start concluding, please?

—and cherish. So, how are we going to replace that £40 billion when people no longer are buying petrol and diesel and are simply using cars that are charged up on renewable energy, otherwise it won't be worth a candle?

Will the Member conclude now, please?

So, if the UK Government is considering charging as a mechanism, which is widely used in places like France—and the world hasn't stopped going round in France—and is widely used on the Dartford tunnel east of London, why on earth could it not be a policy tool in this country, if we need it to be? Why is it that—

Can the Member conclude now, please?

—car drivers think that they have a God-given right to travel for free on our roads when we all have to pay when we go on the train or the buses?

Just as a reply to Jenny Rathbone, the reason there are pressures on Monmouthshire is because your Government never built houses to start with, that was the problem.

Minister, as we all know, our roads throughout Wales and the United Kingdom are the vital arteries that connect us all. Mankind has skilfully created an intricate network of roads that connect communities right across Wales and have brought us all closer together. And it has made those local rugby and football derbies a lot easier for people to attend.

We must never forget the sacrifice, time and effort that went into connecting our country. We use our road network to transport goods and services across long and short distances to grow our economy here in the United Kingdom. The road network also, for the first time in human history, gave people who had a vehicle or other modes of transportation the opportunity to travel across our great country and visit places that only, at one time, were seen as a dream. The freedom we all enjoy today on our roads must never be underestimated.

However, times have changed. We understand the real pressures on our environment. We have moved to more sustainable methods of transport. The rise of the electric car has been a great invention of modern times, and now we're in a place to move to a greener source of transportation, using hydrogen power, and more must be done by this Government to invest in the green technologies and kick-start that green revolution. And I just want to pay a quick tribute to Riversimple, who are leading the way in Wales in terms of this technology.

In my constituency of Brecon and Radnor, the road network is vitally important for my constituents who travel mostly out of the county for work due to the poor public transport that serves our communities. The schemes that are dreamt up by Welsh Government around active travel are great if you live in a city, but if you live in rural Wales, your access to public transport is greatly diminished, and the Government forget this time and time again. This is why I am so concerned about the calls by Welsh Government to introduce a road tax and road tolls in Wales, under the guise of protecting the environment. If this Government wants to protect the environment, maybe you should stop taxpayer funding for an airport, or maybe you should move the fleet of ministerial cars away from diesel and all to green energy, but I can't see you doing that. You've got a few Nissan Leafs, so you're going some way to sort the problem out. And maybe you could also deliver the clean air Act that you like to talk an awful lot about.

We need to see this Government investing more money in electric charging points and providing more funding for the research and development of hydrogen power. The reality is that road taxes will prevent the poorest in our society from being able to travel and enjoy their lives in the way they currently do, and I am sure Labour Members do not want to do anything to harm the poorest in our society. I believe that the Welsh Government should be transparent and produce a paper showing us who those road tolls and taxes will hit the hardest. It'll be the poor working people of this country who you like to quote that you represent—[Interruption.] No, I'm not taking an intervention, you wouldn't take one earlier.

This seems to me like an ideological move that will cost businesses and hit our economy in a way you cannot predict. It will take the freedoms away from the citizens of Wales, and that is something I just simply cannot accept. It's a shame today that Labour did their standard delete-all to our motion, yet again dodging the topic. I hope that Members in this Chamber will support our motion. We are here to enhance the lives of the people of Wales, not to strip them of their freedoms under socialism and add extra burdens to their lives. So, I ask every Member in this Chamber to support this Conservative motion and support the hard-working people of Wales. Diolch.

I call on the Deputy Minister for Climate Change, Lee Waters.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Members are going to have to answer their grandchildren's questions one day as to what they did when the United Nations issued a red alert for the state of the planet, and based on their contributions this afternoon, all we've heard are attempts to look for wedge issues. That's what we've heard this afternoon. Time and again, trying to divide based on falsehoods. We heard Joel James open the debate saying there's considerable concern amongst motorists. That concern has come from Conservatives powering Facebook algorithms over the summer, getting themselves very excited based on false facts.

James Evans says there are calls from this Government to introduce road charging. He just said that. He produced no evidence for that at all. There are no calls from this Government to introduce road charging, as Joel James acknowledged in the First Minister's answer yesterday to Tom Giffard. He made it very clear what was behind the questionnaire that was circulated over the summer. It's the same evidence gathering the UK Government are doing that we're obliged to do by court order on looking at different options. This is an option we are obliged to look at as part of the evidence base we are gathering for the clean air Act. We made it very clear that this is not part of the policy toolkit we intend drawing upon. So, they know that and yet they persist in waving this flag to try and create divisions at a time when we are facing a climate and nature emergency.

These are serious times, they require serious politicians to give serious thought and serious responses, and the Conservative benches have shown yet again this afternoon they are not serious about this problem. And as Jenny Rathbone quoted, we've had Boris Johnson just this week saying that humanity needed to get serious about this situation, and the Welsh Conservatives have no interest in tackling the difficult choices ahead of us. And I think it is deeply disingenuous of them to come before this Chamber again and again, signing up to targets, urging us to go faster, urging us to be bolder, but when it comes down to the things you actually need to do to bring about change, they run for the hills every time, behind the same old cliches, and it is becoming tiresome, as Julie James and I are, every day, grappling with the complexities of the change we have to go through, listening to the advice of the Climate Change Committee the UK Government themselves have set up, which runs counter to what you have all been saying. So, the time is coming, I would suggest to Welsh Conservatives, when they've got to face up and grow up, otherwise they should shut up, because this is not constructive to the challenge we face as a Government in trying to address these difficult problems. [Interruption.] If Members think that's unparliamentary language, I could say a lot worse, frankly. [Laughter.]

The Member will not say worse. [Laughter.]

Now, there was a series of points made that I will try to address in turn. I was struck by Joel James's argument. He said he's in favour of a clean air Act but he's against disincentives, and his account of what cycling was like left me quite puzzled. We heard about people ending up in verges surrounded by dead animals and litter, which, I must say, has not been my experience of riding a bike, and that's fairly untypical, I would suggest. I did see that he was out with Sustrans over the summer, which I was encouraged to see, but I'm not sure if he actually got on the bike. But I would say in all seriousness, adult cycle training is a really important part of what we have to do, because lots of people have got perceptions of what it's like to ride short journeys that are not grounded in reality, and those false perceptions are real barriers to people taking up behaviour change. So, one of the things we are looking at through our record investment in active travel, the most per head in any part of the UK, is how we can enable adults to retrain, to ride a bike safely and comfortably, so that the myths that Joel James has been spouting can be put to bed. 

It also became clear from Gareth Davies's remarkable contribution that his conception of a clean air Act, which they keep telling us they want to introduce, is that we should build more roads as a result. So, that is a very interesting set of proposals, because more roads produce more carbon and produce more nitrogen dioxide from the induced traffic they unleash. I'd be delighted to hear more. 

The argument is about the vehicle itself. If we improve the quality of the vehicles from diesel and petrol to electric on an increased volume of roads, that's the point I'm getting at, rather than the existing roads with diesel cars.

I understand the argument, I also understand the evidence, and the evidence from the UK Climate Change Committee shows that is not the case, because if you are building more roads, you have embodied carbon in the roads themselves, which are considerable generators of emissions. The production of the extra cars that'll come from the extra road space in themselves generate carbon. And even if you had 100 per cent electric cars, which is many years off, you're still requiring extra energy to be generated to power them, on top of all the other negative benefits we have from car domination in our towns and cities, with the sprawl of out-of-town shopping threatening and throttling town centres being one, which I also hear them bemoaning. So, I'm afraid the argument just does not withstand the scrutiny of the facts.

But I don't think they're interested in the facts; they're interested in winding people up instead of confronting the hard choices that we, as a society, have to face to make progress against this societal existential challenge. And, again, I tell Members that in order to reach the climate change targets we've all signed up to, we need to make more cuts in the next 10 years to emissions than we managed over the whole of the last 30 years. I've not heard a single serious proposal from the Conservatives as to how they would do that, and I would ask them to go away and reflect, and make a constructive contribution to the challenges ahead of us.

Turning to some of the other contributions that deserve more serious responses, I couldn't have agreed more with Delyth Jewell that what we need to be doing is improving public transport before we start thinking about tolling. But as Jenny Rathbone rightly pointed out, it is the Conservative Government who have said that by the end of this decade, diesel and petrol cars will not be allowed by law to be sold, and that means the whole method of the tax base will need to be changed. If you do not have petrol cars, you cannot charge petrol tax; you therefore need to find another way of generating the £40 billion that Jenny Rathbone cited.

I really like to hear the ideas from the Conservative benches, because they really are an engine of innovative ideas this afternoon so far of how to generate that revenue. But charging people for the amount they drive is probably a sensible idea; it's certainly one their own Government's Treasury is looking at as we speak. But again, this isn't about a serious debate with a serious engagement of ideas; this is about clickbait and trying to put leaflets out amongst people who are concerned about the choices that we all have to face as a society. We do have serious plans for modal shift, for improving public transport, for giving people real and realistic alternatives along with a campaign of behaviour change, to give people the incentives and the information to try and encourage them into different behaviours.

I apologise to Members for not being able to cover all of the valid points that they made, but I thought it was deserved time, trying to unpick the nonsense we've heard from the Conservative Party, so that we can start as a Senedd to focus on real solutions to real problems rather than the piffle of the opposition.

The Llywydd took the Chair.

I call on Russell George to reply to the debate.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. Can I thank Members who took part in this debate today? My colleague Joel James opened the debate today, calling on the Government in a number of areas, but first of all, Joel set out the positive impact of the removal of the Severn crossing tolls. I genuinely thought that this might be something that all Members would be agreed on, but that's not the case. I appreciate Jenny Rathbone's comments in her contribution today; I don't agree with much of what was said, but I appreciate the points that were made. I genuinely think that there is a positive impact from those Severn crossing tolls being removed.

Also, Joel James set out our concern as well about the proposals from Government in terms of the potential tolls on the M40, the A470, the A55, and other trunk roads. The Deputy Minister said that they're not proposals; it's a survey suggesting that this could take place. So, I think there is some difference of opinion on what is 'a proposal'.

Also, my colleague Joel James set out positive suggestions from us as Welsh Conservatives in terms of promoting greener transport, in terms of supporting the provision of electric charging points, which is something I'm passionate about myself. I think there is a role for Government here in terms of support for electric charging points across Wales, because we've got to break that chicken-and-egg cycle. Electric charging points aren't going to be built until we've got electric cars, and electric cars are not going to move forward at the pace we want to see unless we have those charging points in place. So, there's a role for Government to step in here until the commercial sector can take its part in that provision.

Also, the further promotion of active travel; I appreciate other Members who spoke well in this debate today, John Griffiths and others, talking about initiatives in their own areas, as they have before, previously. And the extension of free bus passes to those aged between 16 and 25, as well; I think there was some mention about the cost of that. I think it could have been Jenny that mentioned that. Well, it is costed, because that was a proposal in the Welsh Conservatives manifesto; that was something that was costed within that manifesto as well. 

I thank Delyth Jewell for moving Plaid's amendment today, and also Heledd Fychan for talking to those points as well. I think, in terms of Plaid's amendment, there's general agreement from us on the points made in those contributions and in the amendment put forward. I think the only question we would have is there are some possible high potential costs in some of the areas that Plaid outlined in their amendment, so I think we as Conservatives want to know more about those costings before we could support. But there's a general principle of support, I think, for Plaid's amendments today.

My other colleagues spoke this afternoon—Peter Fox, Gareth Davies—and, I thought, brought forward positive suggestions to the Government. I can see the Deputy Minister laughing. But there were positive comments, and the Deputy Minister didn't pick up on any of them at all—he just dismissed them, telling us to shut up, which I don't think was appropriate at all. But what my colleagues are pointing out particularly is that there's particularly a difference in rural areas where, if you want to get people moving from the car to public transport, we've got to have that public transport in place. There are still huge gaps in rural Wales in terms of that provision, and sadly I think those that live in my constituency, and in areas like Brecon and Radnor—there's no option but to have a car, unfortunately, for the vast majority of people. So, that's where we've really got to make an effort in terms of improving our infrastructure and improving provision on public transport. 

I have to say I really would have appreciated a more comprehensive response to our positive suggestions put forward today from the Deputy Minister. I think that we've put forward suggestions in the spirit of co-operation. There's a lot, I think, that we could have agreed on today, like the clean air Act. There's lots we can agree on, but that was dismissed rather than being talked about in any positive way today. But I thank Members for their contributions to our debate this afternoon.

The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. Therefore, I defer voting on the motion till voting time.

Voting deferred until voting time.

That brings us to voting time. We'll take a short break to make the preparations for voting. So, we'll take a break now. 

Plenary was suspended at 17:48.

The Senedd reconvened at 17:52, with the Llywydd in the Chair.