That's right, and, of course, you could reduce the speed limit to 15 mph or 10 mph and even have a shorter stopping limit. I don't think it's necessarily the fact that this is a 20 mph proposal that is the issue, because, as I say, I've supported 20 mph in certain places. It's about whether this is the right use of resources in order to improve safety on our roads and in order to get people to be more active.

Now, we know that we need more investment in cycle routes, for example, and shared active travel routes in our communities. We know also that there is a place for smart speed limits, where they change at certain points of the day, whether that's pick-up and drop-off time outside schools, which we have in some parts of Wales, with a 20 mph zone that kicks in for a short time and then it zips back up to 30 mph, or even seasonal speed limits. You know, in busy places where you have lots of tourists in the summer, it's sometimes more appropriate to reduce the speed limit for the whole of the tourist season—Easter and summer and whatnot.

But I'm not sure that this is the right approach. I'm going to be voting against it. As I say, I've supported these things where appropriate in places in my constituency, and I still have some battles on my hands. But what I would plead with you to do, Minister, and it would cost you a fraction of the £30 million-odd that you want to throw at this particular scheme, is use some of that money instead to simply change the guidance to remove those barriers so that when an issue is identified—. And you don't have to have, actually, a fatality in order to reduce the speed limit to 20 mph; we didn't have fatalities in my own constituency and we managed to do it, so I'm not sure why you're being given that advice, Heledd Fychan, by the local authorities in your region. But if you remove those barriers, if you make it a shorter timescale process, where everybody agrees that a 20 mph limit is appropriate, then we can get on and we can introduce these things.

I think what you're going to have is lots of people wanting to make lots of exceptions to this new 20 mph default, and that's going to gum everything up so that we're not getting the proper strategic approach to our roads and highways. It's going to take those people away from doing the active travel stuff that we also want them to be working on—developing the new cycle routes, putting in the pedestrian crossings where we need them putting in, addressing the other problems in our road and transport systems—taking them away from encouraging people to make that modal shift to other forms of transport rather than the car, and I think it will have many unintended consequences.

Learn from these pilots. People have raised concerns in the pilot areas. I appreciate that some people will just never want to see a 20 mph zone—that's their issue. I'm not in that camp, okay? But you have to listen to people when they raise concerns, and in these pilot areas there have been many concerns that have been raised. So, we shouldn't just launch into this. We should go in with our eyes fully open. There will be unintended consequences if we take this decision today, so I would urge everybody just to think carefully. I agree we need to kill speeds. We need to enforce better against current speed limits, but this isn't the right approach, Minister.