1. Will the Minister make a statement on the decision to scrap the A55 roundabouts removal project? TQ598

Yes. The roads review panel recommended that, instead of progressing the project in its current form, there's a strong case for considering a review of the whole of the north Wales corridor, as recommended in the UK Government's union connectivity review's final report. I accepted those recommendations, and last week set up the north Wales transport commission, chaired by Lord Burns.

Thank you. Llywydd, can I just put on record my disappointment that the Deputy Minister isn't in the Chamber to answer a topical question?

No, you can't, I'm afraid. I say at the start of absolutely every meeting of this Senedd that all Members are able to participate virtually or in Plenary and they are to be treated equally and respected wherever they may be contributing from. Move on to your question.

Okay. Well, I look forward to the day when he's—

Move on to your question. If it's important to you, ask it.

Okay. It will come as no surprise, Deputy Minister, that I rise to challenge you on your decision to scrap the roundabout removal schemes on junctions 15 and 16 of the A55. These schemes have been on the table since 2017, involving many costly assessments. Indeed, to date, the project has cost our taxpayers approximately £9 million. There was even going to be a public inquiry last September until I actually raised your own review with you, because this engagement process was planned. And when I brought it to your attention, you actually scrapped that, then.

Now, the Welsh Government's own report highlights safety concerns as junctions are not compliant with current design standards; traffic delays as a result of poor network resilience; a lack of suitable diversion routes in case of tunnel maintenance, road repairs and accidents on the A55, all of which we know happen far too frequently; poor sustainable travel options; poor coastal access and safety—safety—for pedestrians and cyclists. As part of the schemes, some recently built new houses were actually considered for demolition, leaving many residents in limbo over all these years. Despite repeated claims by you on the cancellation of other schemes, you've been citing that this is all in the name of climate change objectives.

Well, let me tell you, this is not the case here. The queues on the roads joining the roundabouts will continue. Cars idling, emitting volumes of carbon monoxide, affecting the quality of the very air that we breathe—and when I say 'we', my constituents. Deputy Minister, perhaps you will explain to the Senedd and my constituents why you have wasted £9 million only then to do a u-turn. What solutions will you now be putting in place to alleviate all the current problems and issues that have actually been cited in your own scheme assessment reports? Diolch, Llywydd.

Well, Llywydd, it's not four months since I joined Janet Finch-Saunders on the steps of the Senedd to send a strong message to world leaders at the Conference of the Parties on the need to take dramatic action to tackle climate change. I've heard many times in the Chamber Janet Finch-Saunders lecture me how the Welsh Government wasn't going far enough, wasn't going fast enough to deal with the climate and nature emergencies. I would say to her, with the greatest of respect, that it's no good signing up to declarations then to run away from the actions that follow from that.

In order to meet our 2050 target, we need to cut carbon emissions in the next decade by 63 per cent. That includes achieving modal shift. We have a target set out in the Wales transport strategy of achieving 45 per cent of journeys by sustainable transport by 2045, up from 32 per cent now. That requires us to do things differently. That's why I set up the roads review panel, and they are patiently going through each of the 50 schemes currently in development, and agreed, because of the public inquiry—and I would note it didn't take her to tell me there was a public inquiry for me to spot that fact—but, because there was a public inquiry, we fast-tracked this scheme, and one other scheme, through the process so that an early decision could be made. The independent panel has now published its full report, and that is available for everyone to read, and they go through, in detail, their reasons. And they concluded, on the issue of safety, that the proposed grade-separated junctions replacing two roundabout junctions, would create little absolute improvement to the collision record. She rightly says that, in peak season, there are particular problems on the A55 around capacity, but they are limited to the high tourist season. The report also said, I'm quoting:

'The aim of the scheme is not in alignment with the sustainable transport hierarchy, the mode share targets, or increasing the proportion of freight moved by sustainable modes.'

Now, that's there in black and white, in the conclusion of the report, commissioned precisely because I was doing as she asked me to do, which is to respond to the climate emergency and to recognise the impact that transport plays in that—17 per cent of our emissions are from transport.

Now, I recognise there will be some people who are disappointed, and others locally who objected to the scheme who will be less disappointed. On the question of cost, indeed, there has been sunk costs into this. It will not be entirely wasted. The studies and the work underpinning them will be valuable for the Burns commission north in its work. And I see little logic in continuing spend on a project that was set to cost more than £75 million simply because we'd begun work looking at assessments—that makes no sense to me at all. And the purpose of our work is to shift funding away from schemes that add to our carbon emissions in order to fund schemes that help us to reduce our carbon emissions.

And if we want to create real alternatives for her constituents, we have to invest in them, and that's what the Burns commission will set out to do. It'll set up a practical pipeline of projects of all modes—road, rail, bus and active travel—to deal with the problems along the A55 and across the whole of north Wales of congestion and poor air quality, as well as looking at our carbon targets. And it will set out, just as it did in south Wales—. And, bear in mind, for all the comments on the Conservative benches criticising our decision on the M4, the union connectivity review, set up by the UK Government—against the backdrop of the Prime Minister saying it was going to back him in suggesting the M4 should go ahead and how he was going to override devolution; all the usual chest-beating statements we now expect from the Prime Minister—the union connectivity report looked at the options, it looked at the Burns recommendations for the south, it looked at the M4, and it concluded that the right way forward was the Burns recommendations for the south. I have every confidence that, over the next year, they will do similar work in the north to create a pipeline of schemes that'll make things better, which we can then all commit to work together to implement.

The question the Conservatives should be asking isn't how do we stop cars from idling, it's how do we stop cars getting on the road in the first place. And the Deputy Minister is right. It's the broader question here of: are we serious about climate change? And if we are, then are we serious about modal shift and reducing people's overdependence on cars? Are we serious that that is part of the answer? And if we are, then it does mean that things have to change, and there will be fewer big, expensive road schemes. But, just as important, of course, turning to the Deputy Minister, we also need to see investment happening into those alternatives. So, the question isn't what can we do to revive these proposed schemes, but what can we do to address the same issues in a different way. I welcome, therefore, the commission to be led by Lord Burns, and it's probably at the end of that process that we decide whether this is the right decision or not, because it's only at the end of the process will we see and understand what the alternatives are.

So, I'd like to ask: does the Deputy Minister agree with me that it's absolutely key, as part of this process and the wider, ongoing process of the reviewing roads project, that there's absolute transparency and clarity around how these decisions are being made and that there's absolute consistency as well, in terms of the criteria and the factors considered from project to project, albeit within their own individual contexts, because, otherwise, people will be right to be concerned and sceptical about what the real motives are? 

Well, I'd like to thank Llyr Gruffydd for his supportive comments and his endorsement of the broad approach that we are taking. And it will be right that there'll be a role for challenge and scrutiny of all of this, and it's important that the Burns commission operates in that way, as it did in the south, as, indeed, the roads review is. The roads review is putting all of this information in the public domain for people to see its reasoning, for us to scrutinise it. The Burns commission will be publishing an interim report, which will be available, to engage with stakeholders, just as they did in their work around Newport. I've already had conversations with the leaders of the three councils in the area affected in the north to get their views on this, to ask them for suggestions of who should serve on the commission and to talk to them about the way ahead. So, I agree with him that transparency and consistency are important, but just as the importance of being willing follow through our words with actions. 

I thank the Deputy Minister.