Questions now from party spokespeople. The Conservative spokesperson, Natasha Asghar. 

Thanks so much, Presiding Officer. Deputy Minister, in 2019, the Welsh Government made a number of commitments regarding transparency, accountability and participation. One of these commitments was to raise awareness of the Welsh Government's finances, specifically about where money comes and how it is spent. You will be aware that I've tried on a number of occasions to discover the amount of money spent by you on road projects across Wales, before they were brought to a sudden halt by your roads review, only to be met by deliberate delay and obfuscation. It took a freedom of information request to discover that a total of £24 million was spent on road projects across Wales prior to this cancellation. This comes after your Government wasted £157 million on the M4 relief road project. Welsh businesses are crying out for better road infrastructure, and communities, such as Llanbedr, desperately need relief roads or bypasses to relieve pollution and congestion. So, Deputy Minister, will you now abandon this absurd policy of freezing road improvement projects in Wales and actually invest in the infrastructure we so desperately need? 

Well, I'm not sure why this is such a complicated policy to grasp, really. We have all committed to meeting our climate change targets. Seventeen per cent of the emissions come from transport. Now, that means we need to take a different approach to transport if we're going to meet those net-zero goals, because transport has been the slowest changing sector since the targets were first set in 1990. So, we need a different approach. There doesn't seem to be a basic understanding of that on the Conservative benches. They sign up to the high-level targets, but when you then have to translate what that means in practice they run away from it, and the politics of it are difficult, but we need leadership in these challenging times. I understand from the new Prime Minister that she's committed to achieving net zero: she's announced that she's going to increase drilling in the North sea; she's going to start fracking; and she's going to, quote, 'build roads faster'. Well, each of those will increase our emissions. They'll take us further away from achieving the net zero that we heard from Boris Johnson, just last November at COP, that they were committed to do. So, there's a complete cognitive dissonance on the Tory benches between what they say they want to do and what they're actually prepared to support.

Now, we've looked at an evidence-based approach through an expert panel on road building to look to schemes currently in development, not the ones being built, which will carry on, but those not yet commenced, to see whether those are consistent with achieving our Wales transport strategy objectives in order to achieve our carbon budgets. As I say, we've just received that report. We're going through that in detail, and we'll be making a statement to the Senedd in the autumn about it. But it's clear, from the tone again of her statements, that she's not prepared to face up to the consequences of her own promises. 

Deputy Minister, I know you love to bring in the UK Government, but let's focus on Wales, which is what you and I are responsible for here. So, you must agree that inadequate road infrastructure is actually damaging businesses and hindering job creation at a time when we are just recovering from the effects of the pandemic. Your failure to improve roads means increased congestion, higher carbon emissions, and makes the economy less productive and competitive. The Road Haulage Association has said that your approach is, and I quote, 

'incoherent, unsustainable and will damage business, jobs and mobility in Wales while failing to address climate change.' 

Logistics UK said the logistics industry relies on efficient roadworks to keep the nation stocked with all the goods our economy needs to function and that freezes on all new road building projects is, in fact, a step backwards. Even the Labour MP—not Conservative, the Labour MP—for Alyn and Deeside criticised the decision to cancel the road in Flintshire, which would reduce air pollution for his constituents living in Ashton and Shotton. So, Deputy Minister, do you accept that the efficient and cost-effective movement of goods is fundamental for the economy and that your anti-roads approach, which we've seen again and again, to addressing climate change is out of date as we move to a new, cleaner, greener vehicle spectrum?

I appreciate the Member will have written that down before she had a chance to listen to what I said and the challenge that I gave to her. I don't accept the premise of her point. The movement of goods and people is clearly critical. That is not currently possible because we have congestion. You don't solve congestion by building more roads. There's ample international evidence that if you build more road capacity, you encourage more traffic, which leads to greater congestion and then demands for more road building. And we've been doing that for over 50 years. They shake their heads, but I'd like to see the evidence they have to contradict what I've just said. The academic research on that is absolutely clear. And if we can remove traffic from the roads that doesn't need to be there, that, in fact, opens up space for the freight sector. 

We obviously want to see freight shifting from roads onto railways where that's possible, but failure to adequately invest in the railways by the Conservative Government in Wales, where we are £5 billion short of investment—which, again, if they were sincere in their views, they would acknowledge—has hampered our ability to achieve modal shift from road to rail for freight. But it's simply not the case that we have inadequate roads at the moment. What we have not been doing is sufficiently investing in maintaining existing roads. And one of the objectives of the roads review is to look at how we could move investment away from building new roads to look after the ones we have and, as we do it, encourage modal shift. 

I again say to the Member on the benches opposite, you've signed up to net zero by 2050, 17 per cent of emissions come from transport—how do you plan to cut those emissions so that we meet our targets? I wait to hear your answer.

Thank you so much for the answer. Firstly, I would actually improve things by giving us some electric vehicle charging points, which I've stood here countless times, again and again, requesting all across Wales, which is what we're responsible for here, Deputy Minister. The simple fact is that your Government has objectively failed to provide Wales with the road infrastructure it needs and deserves. We are not in a time when we are on horses and carts. This is not Little House on the Prairie; we are actually in Wales in 2022. Your imposition of a 20 mph speed limit is unpopular and proving counterproductive. More than 1,600 people have signed a petition calling for a public poll on this change—a demand that is currently being considered by the Petitions Committee. And Monmouthshire County Council has already confirmed that two areas in Caldicot will in fact revert to 30 mph after congestion was made worse. To add insult to injury, your transport strategy plans to introduce road tolls and congestion charges. So, Deputy Minister, cars in Wales are a necessity because public transport here is unreliable, inconvenient and, in many places, non-existent, thanks to 22 years of Welsh Labour Government. But my question is: when will you stop trying to force drivers off the road and stop punishing motorists for the dismal record of failure?

I'm not sure how you put a sigh on the Record, Llywydd, but perhaps that—

I think you just have. [Laughter.]

Excellent. Mission accomplished, in that case.

I don't know where to begin, really. First of all, there has been no imposition of 20 mph speed limits. The Senedd agreed by overwhelming majority at the beginning of the summer to change the default speed limit. It's entirely within the power of local highways authorities to make exceptions to that. And by the way, that process only happened with the support of Conservative Members in the Senedd. It was Conservative Members who voted to set up the process of a taskforce for 20 mph; it was Conservative Members in the last Senedd who voted to bring this policy forward. There's a picture circulating of Andrew R.T. Davies with Rod King on—[Interruption.] Natasha Asghar is now distancing herself from the leader of the Welsh Conservative group, but very clearly, this would not have happened had it not been for the support of Conservative Members. We are now following through on that and this Senedd has democratically voted to take it forward, giving the full power to local authorities to set their own speed limits under the exceptions criteria. So, that's simply false and erroneous and misleading and disingenuous.

In terms of electric vehicles, of course, we want people to switch to electric vehicles. I've switched to an electric car and I must say, it's a pleasant experience. But the UK Climate Change Committee are very clear: we're not going to achieve net zero by switching to electric vehicles. Again, that is another false point not based on fact or evidence. And I know that the Member's speeches are often fact-free zones, but they need to have some tethering to reality. We clearly need to reduce the amount of journeys we make, and we have a target of a 10 per cent reduction in car journeys. Of those journeys we do make, we need to make more of them by public transport, and of the journeys that can only be made by car—and there are a minority of journeys that can only be made by car—we want them to be done as quickly as possible by electric vehicles. I pay credit to the UK Government for setting an ambitious target for stopping sales of petrol vehicles by the end of the decade. It was a bold and innovative move of theirs, which I support wholly. But I'm afraid yet again the Conservative benches are not willing to follow the evidence on following through their commitment to achieving net zero. I ask again: if every single thing we announce you're opposed to, what's your alternative?

Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Delyth Jewell. 

Diolch, Llywydd. I would also like to extend my best wishes to the Minister for Climate Change and hope for her speedy recovery.

Minister, the Welsh Government has set a target of net zero emissions by 2050 and is, through our co-operation agreement, examining advice that could potentially bring this forward to 2050. The climate and nature crises, interwoven as they are, are the greatest threats facing our country, our world. So, achieving net zero as quickly as possible is vital. On Thursday 8 September, Liz Truss set out the UK Government's response to high energy prices, including accelerating new oil and gas licensing and lifting the ban on fracking. The newly appointed Secretary of State for business, Jacob Rees-Mogg, has made his scepticism about tackling climate change clear. He is an investor in oil and coal mining through Somerset Capital Management and has recently stated, and I quote,

'We need to be thinking about exploiting every last cubic inch of gas from the North Sea'.

This would spell disaster for the climate and would severely undermine efforts to reach net zero. So, what I'd like to know, Minister, is what discussions the Welsh Government has had, or plans to have, with the UK Government about how the implications of their new energy policies will impact on our net zero plans in Wales. 

I share the disbelief I think you're expressing, and frustration, in the announcements that came from UK Government, and, clearly, their obsession with fossil fuels. It is deeply depressing, I think, to see how far back they want to go. As you heard the First Minister say very clearly yesterday, there will be no fracking here in Wales, and I think that will be shared by the Plaid Cymru bench, the pleasure in that. I think it's so disappointing and so frustrating that the UK Government don't share our ambition. Like you said, we're looking to be net zero by 2050, and with the co-operation agreement—. I think you meant 2035, but yes, as you say, we are currently exploring that. The thing is, and this is a real reality, the UK cannot reach its targets without our support, but we in Wales can't reach our target either without the UK Government helping us and playing its part—its fair part, I think it's fair to say—here in Wales. 

Thank you for that, Minister. The second and final question I'd like to ask is on another issue—community empowerment. It cuts across portfolios, including climate change and also rural affairs. But focusing on this portfolio, there was community anger in Llanbradach recently after a private company destroyed a beautiful bluebell woodland that was important to many people. The company had failed to seek planning permission and had pledged to restore the site after hundreds protested, and thank goodness that they did. While the destruction contravened existing regulations, it could have been prevented had the site been in public ownership. The Institute of Welsh Affairs recently has published a report advocating passing a community empowerment Bill, which would enable communities to take ownership of local assets that are deemed significant. The report states that Wales has the fewest statutory rights in Britain in relation to land. Obviously, community voices could be and, I would argue, should be a lot stronger as well. Could you tell me what the Welsh Government's position is in terms of introducing legislation to empower communities so that places like Llanbradach and all over Wales can ensure that these treasured community assets are protected, please?

Thank you. I'm not aware that the Minister is looking at anything. I would suggest that you write to her. But I think the point you raise is really important. If you look at the local development plan process, for instance, it's very transparent, and it needs to have that community involvement. I would think that the Minister would be very keen to increase community involvement. Going back to your first question about the nature emergency, the last thing we would want to see is the destruction of an area such as the one you describe. 

Question 3 [OQ58406] has been withdrawn.