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?