Part of the debate – in the Senedd at 2:42 pm on 14 February 2023.
Well, I do know how to read a budget, and I'm afraid she's got the complete wrong end of the stick while reading ours. There was no cut from £220 million to £180 million on active travel. I don't know where she gets these figures from; that's a complete fantasy, and, as for handing £155 million back to the Treasury, I think that's an act of fantasy too.
I appreciate we might have wrong-footed Natasha Asghar with today's announcement, because I've been reading increasingly alarmist pieces from her on how I was going to bring about the end of humanity as we know it, and clearly we've come up with a sensible set of recommendations based on independent experts, agreed as a consensus for them, agreed as a consensus within Government, greeted warmly by local government, that makes us meet the challenges ahead of us.
As I say to her and her colleagues, with the greatest of respect, if we sign up to targets of net zero by 2050, we have to be prepared to do things differently. Let me quote this to them:
'the longer we fail to act, the worse it gets and the higher the price when we are eventually forced, by catastrophe, to act.... It’s one minute to midnight on that doomsday clock, and we need to act now. If we don’t get serious about climate change today, it will be too late for our children to do so tomorrow.'
That was said by a Conservative Prime Minister less than a year ago. So, the words on net zero are there, certainly amongst her party in London—less so here. But it's no good saying words unless you're prepared to do things differently.
All I've heard from her is a set of slogans that she wants to create wedge issues to wind people up over. I haven't heard a single constructive suggestion of how, if we accept we need to achieve net zero, we do it in transport. That's what we've done here; we've taken that exam question: 'How do we achieve net zero in our roads programme? Let's go away and examine that.' That's what's happened, and that's what we've come up with: a credible, practical, pragmatic way forward that keeps building roads, but builds roads that don't keep adding to our problems. And that's the difference, I'm afraid, between opposition and Government: we can't speak in slogans; we have to look at practical projects to take forward, and that's what we've done. I'm sure, when she has a chance to read the report in more detail, she will realise that we have set out a pragmatic way forward. And if she has other suggestions of ways we can bring emissions down, I'm all ears.