The following amendment has been selected: amendment 1 in the name of Siân Gwenllian.

Item 7 today is the Welsh Conservatives debate on the roads review, and I call on Natasha Asghar to move the motion.

Motion NDM8218 Darren Millar

To propose that the Senedd:

1. Notes the report of the Welsh Government's roads review panel, The Future of Road Investment in Wales.

2. Regrets the lack of engagement by the roads review panel with the public, elected representatives, local authorities, businesses and the third sector and others during the course of the review.

3. Believes that the roads review panel’s recommendations to scrap investment in critical road projects designed to improve road safety, address congestion, decrease air pollution and deliver economic benefits fails to deliver the transport infrastructure the people of Wales rightfully deserve.

Motion moved.

Thank you so much, Deputy Presiding Officer. I'm pleased to move this motion today so that all Members here can properly debate the Labour Government's roads review and its transport policies. The way the recent roads review announcement was made was nothing short of a shambles. The Deputy Minister's statement in this Chamber just before recess was, in my view, one of the worst statements that I have ever heard to date—a statement about the roads review conclusion that didn't actually outline what roads have been given the go-ahead and which have been the chop. Instead, the Deputy Minister chose to unveil which projects had been spared the axe while many of us were already in the Chamber, sitting around frantically going through the document that we'd only just received. Whether that was a deliberate attempt to avoid proper scrutiny or a genuine blunder on the Deputy Minister's part, I guess we will never know. But at least now we’ve had the time to digest the outcome of the review, and have had ample time today to give it the scrutiny that it rightfully deserves.

My view is that the roads review does not meet the economic, social and cultural needs of a modern and dynamic Wales. The Deputy Minister might believe that his move is groundbreaking, brave, and world leading, but those who will be directly affected by this most certainly do not share this view. Some have dubbed the Deputy Minister's announcement the 'Valentine's Day massacre of roads', with others staging large-scale protests. Take the community of Llanbedr, for example. Villagers thought their misery was coming to an end when plans for a Llanbedr bypass were given the go-ahead in 2020. Then, not long after road building projects in Wales were halted, we found out that the Llanbedr bypass was going to be shelved, despite the Welsh Government already spending some £14 million on the scheme. Residents in Llanbedr cannot move around their village safely due to the traffic problems, with the area often brought to a complete standstill. A bypass would have put an end to their nightmare, and restored the villagers' quality of life. They are so enraged that those affected by the Labour Government knee-jerk reaction are planning a major protest in the area later this month, and quite frankly I don't blame them.

It's clear from looking at the outcome of the roads review that north Wales is being well and truly hard done by, as is often the case with this Labour Government. I am sure my colleagues will go into this in more detail about specific roads in their patches that have been thrown onto the scrapheap, but let me just touch on a few. Both the third Menai bridge crossing and the Flintshire red route, two much-needed schemes, have been spiked. Only recently, we have just seen how vulnerable Ynys Môn is when the Menai suspension bridge was forced to close due to safety concerns. That resulted in major motoring mayhem in the area, including heavy congestion, not to mention the economic damage that was inflicted on the area as a result. A third Menai crossing would have helped improve journey times, road safety and resilience. I'm sure that many of the north Wales Members here, along with their constituents, will be bitterly disappointed by the decision as we all wait with bated breath to see what alternatives will be drawn up. The third Menai crossing joins a whole host of other projects being shelved, including the Flintshire red route, which some argue would drastically ease congestion and improve air quality. The Road Haulage Association, an organisation I have the upmost respect for and have worked closely with for quite some time, recently gave me their verdict on the roads review, and it's rather damning to say the least. Geraint Davies, RHA board member said:

'This is a body blow for supply chain businesses who need a modern, functioning road network to keep people and goods moving efficiently.'

Mr Davies went on to say that

'Roads are the only option for many businesses and communities in Wales. Bottlenecks on key routes makes transport costlier than it needs to be. Ministers must recognise these realities and commit to road improvements like the M4 Relief Road that we desperately desperately need.'

The RHA added, 'Road freight not only provides lifeline services to remote communities and the vulnerable, but it actually drives the UK economy. By not investing in roads and infrastructure, the Welsh Government is making Wales a more difficult place to do business.'

My inbox has been inundated with e-mails from constituents and those even further afield expressing their frustration over Labour's decision to stop road building projects. One constituent, who travels from Blackwood to Newport every day for work, a journey that used to take just a little over 30 minutes—. It now takes my constituent over an hour to get to work, because the Labour Government is grinding Wales to a halt by failing to address congestion. My constituent says that whilst he welcomes plans to achieve net zero, he believes the current approach to scrap road building will strangle Wales of future investment and take us all back to the dark ages. He says, 'We will always need roads and need a healthy economy to meet the needs of a growing population. I do not believe that anyone in the Welsh Assembly has any idea of what it's like to travel to work at peak times daily. They are making decisions by not living in the real world of the average human being.' This is from a constituent, I'll have you know.

Another constituent of mine has been forced to cancel his subscription to a popular indoor climbing centre in Cardiff because of the sheer amount of time it's taking him to get there from his home. What should be a 35-minute journey is now taking upwards of an hour, and he simply can't bring himself to sit in traffic all the time. After battling with traffic to get to the climbing centre for a considerable amount of time, he's now decided to cancel his membership completely as he just can't take it anymore. Because of this Government's failure to provide us with an adequate transport network, we have businesses losing money, and, in this case, residents' fitness, enjoyment and mental health is suffering.

The Llywydd took the Chair.

Well, there you have it. These aren't my views; these are the views of just some of the people on the ground, the people who use our transport network every single day. These are the people the Welsh Government should be listening to. Unfortunately, the constituents I've just recalled are not the only ones; in fact, drivers in Newport, Cardiff and Swansea lost a huge 107 hours due to congestion in 2022 alone.

In light of Labour's ban on road building, we have been told the Government will invest, and I quote, 'in real alternatives' instead, and put a bigger focus on the transport network. But as is often the case with this Government so far, I fear that this is just rhetoric rather than meaningful action. I say this because, to date, we haven't seen any real alternatives from the Welsh Government. Instead, Ministers are slashing vital funding for buses across the country, axing funding for active travel, and cutting funding for sustainable travel. Also, Wales has just 47 electric vehicle charging devices per 100,000 of population, which is extremely poor when compared to 699 in the Netherlands, 399 in Luxembourg and 112 in France. This needs to be addressed urgently, as we're going to see more electric vehicles on our roads going forward, especially following the UK Government's ban on the sale of new petrol and diesel cars by 2030. According to the Welsh Government's own predictions, Wales will need between 30,000 and 50,000 fast chargers by 2030. Needless to say, time is of the essence.

My Welsh Conservative colleagues and I absolutely support the innovation of sustainable and greener travel. We all need to play our part in making greener travel choices, but the Welsh Government must not seek change by punishing motorists. Punishing motorists is exactly what the Welsh Government is doing, with congestion charges coming down the road, blanket 20 mph speed limits being rolled out now, and road building being axed. The Welsh Government seriously needs to rethink its transport policy, because at the moment it's not fit for purpose.

Buses can play a pivotal role in getting more people out of their cars, but now we're being told to expect drastic cuts to services as a result of the Welsh Government's decision to end the bus emergency scheme—a conversation that many of us had in a debate a few weeks ago. Coach and Bus Operators Cymru, which represents small firms in Wales, fear that between 65 and 100 per cent of services face being cut. The Deputy Minister for Climate Change said that he would desperately like to find the money to keep the funding scheme in place. Well, maybe if the Government didn't waste millions of pounds supporting a failing airport or buying Gilestone Farm, there might be some extra cash to spend on the important things out there. And don't even get me started on the problems with trains here in Wales—that's a completely separate debate for another day.

It's a fact that for many people in Wales, particularly in rural areas, cars are the only real option at the moment because of poor public transport. Roads are a must for people in those areas. The people of Wales need and deserve a transport network that is fit for the twenty-first century, and futureproofed, and it's vital the Welsh Government delivers just that, because anything less is just simply unacceptable. However, with road projects being binned and funding for sustainable travel and public transport reducing, along with all the other backward transport policies I've seen since I've been the shadow Minister for transport, I fail to see how we are going to achieve this here in Wales. 

I encourage all Members who truly care about the plight of their constituents, businesses and communities to vote in favour of our motion today. Thank you, Presiding Officer.

I have selected the amendment to the motion, and I call on Delyth Jewell to move amendment 1. 

Amendment 1—Siân Gwenllian

Delete point 3 and replace with:

Recognises the need for bold and radical action in the transport sector to help reach net-zero emissions before 2050.

Calls on the Welsh Government to commit to more urgent investment in public transport and electric vehicle infrastructure so that communities across Wales have greater access to low or zero-carbon transport options.

Amendment 1 moved.

Thank you, Llywydd. I’m pleased to move our amendment. 

We need to do things differently if we want to reach net zero by 2050, and certainly if we want to be more ambitious and reach it by 2035, as we in Plaid Cymru have declared. We must make difficult decisions. Before I elaborate on the emphasis that we want to see on improving people's choices in terms of public transport provision, I want to state clearly once again that the ambition and the impetus behind this decision by the Welsh Government is something that I welcome. This is not a decision that is going to be popular everywhere. But if we only make easy, popular decisions, there won't be a planet left for us. So, I want to just make that clear.

In saying that, we must also acknowledge the importance of taking the people of Wales on the journey to the new future ahead of us. The purpose of our amendment is to refocus the discussion on the need for more investment and for more security for our public transport providers. This is in order to further improve and strengthen people's choices, to offer them more agency. I think a lot of people feel scared or concerned about these changes. So, we need to find ways to allay people's concerns, to satisfy those who are concerned, and to give them confidence about what this will mean for them.

At the moment, there are a number of places in Wales where the option of taking a bus or train is just not available, or the option is not realistic in the context of people's lives. This is particularly true in the Valleys and in rural areas of Wales, and we need to ensure that the necessary new future here will not lead to isolation and loneliness. Again, we must take people on the journey with us. And we have to make the option of travelling on public transport an easier thing for people to do. Between 2019 and 2020, bus fares were raised by 3.5 per cent, and in the same period, around  690 bus stops were lost, making it even more difficult to catch a bus. A constituent contacted me this week, pointing out that it costs £2.20 to get on the bus on the outskirts of Caerphilly and travel into town. That's a journey of 1.5 miles. And they also said that, if they wanted to go to a concert in Cardiff in the evening, it would not be possible for them to get home by bus, because the last bus is at 9 o'clock at night, and the constituent does not feel safe walking home from the train station. I think we have to look at the reality of people's lives and make it possible for people change their ways of living, because, again, we can't just carry on having more and more roads. I want us to achieve a future where this is not only possible, but normal.

Before I finish, Llywydd, I will just say something about trains, because that's already been raised in this debate. A lack of investment in our railways is holding us back as a nation, and the Conservatives in Westminster are to blame for that. There is no justification for the decision to deny Wales the billions that we are owed for HS2. It represents an attack that is both constitutional, environmental and ethical, and there is no justification for that. We have to find new ways of living, but we have to find ways of reaching our greener future with everyone on the same journey as each other. We can't disregard or deprive communities that don't fit the model, but we must make the investment, demand additional powers from Westminster, and create a new reality. That's the way of creating any new pathway, and that's the way for us to ensure that this is a change for all of the people of Wales.

Can I thank my colleague, Darren Millar, for submitting today's debate on the roads review, and also Natasha Asghar for opening today's debate? It's clear, from our side of the benches here, we believe that the Welsh Government's roads review is very badly thought out, to say the least.

In my contribution today, I'd firstly like to highlight the sheer impact that this review will have on residents who I represent in north Wales. As we regretfully know, north Wales is set to miss out massively due to this review. We know that 16 projects were lined up for north Wales, 15 of these will now either be stopped or scrapped altogether. All major road building and upgrade projects across my region of north Wales have been stopped. This review, for my residents, is absolutely staggering. Amongst the scrapped projects are upgrades to the A483 Wrexham bypass, the A494 Lôn Fawr, Ruthin and Corwen roads, the A483 Halton roundabout, the A55 at junctions 15 to 16 and 32 to 33, as well as the third Menai crossing.

The Welsh Labour Government will again tell us today that this road building ban is vital to protect the environment and reduce carbon emissions, but what they again fail to understand is that, for many of my residents in north Wales, private road transport is the only practical transport option, with around 84 per cent of people in Wales relying on car or motorbike to go about their ordinary daily lives, and with these vehicles getting cleaner and greener with a rapid shift away from the internal combustion engine. As point 3 of today's motion states, this roads review does nothing to deliver the transport infrastructure that the people of Wales, and the residents I represent in north Wales, rightfully deserve.

Of course, this roads review outcome would've been received with much more warmth if we had sufficient and appropriate levels of public transport in my region of north Wales. But the people of north Wales know that this simply isn't the case, and as evidence of this, we know that 11,000 train services were cancelled by Transport for Wales over the last three years, and over £2 million was paid out in compensation to those passengers since 2018. And, as we know, the north Wales metro project was announced seven years ago now, yet, the prospect of an integrated north Wales-wide public transport network seems as distant as ever for the residents I represent. All whilst we continue to see significant amounts of investment channelled into the metro schemes in south Wales—that's so far away from what we're seeing in the north. 

As outlined by the Confederation of British Industry Wales, when looking at supporting our environment, we need to work on solutions that don't damage the Welsh economy at the same time. The two can work together. We need to see initiatives that support the environment also benefiting jobs, making sure that people have jobs that they can be proud to work in. 

Will you take an intervention? 

Llyr, yes. 

Thank you. I just struggle a little bit with your characterisation that no other roads will ever be built. The projects that have been scrapped may well happen in another way. They may well actually be developed under an alternative proposal. So, it's quite disingenuous to try and convey that this is the end of road building in Wales. And you referred to economic development; there's actually a piece of work now happening to look at creating exemptions of varied criteria for sites of economic development significance. So, don't spout this nonsense about no more roads ever being built, because that's totally misleading. 

Well, I think the roads review for the region that we both represent in north Wales is massively detrimental. Fifteen of those programmes are being scrapped or paused—

In their current form.

In their current form—exactly. So, what is the plan? We need to see a plan for north Wales. Seven years ago, Llyr Gruffydd, you know that the north Wales metro project was announced. We haven't seen that take place there at the moment. It needs to be sorted out. 

The final point I'd like to raise today, outlined in point 2 of our motion, is the sheer lack of engagement by the roads review panel with the public, elected representatives, local authorities, businesses, the third sector and others during the course of the review. As expressed by the Federation of Small Businesses in Wales, Wales's small businesses play an essential role in supporting local communities, creating wealth and employment, driving innovation, and helping Wales adapt and respond to the challenges that are ahead of us. As we move towards net zero, it's crucially important to ensure that their voice is heard as well, which is not, in my view, being taken into account properly at the moment. 

And we heard yesterday a contribution from Alun Davies across the other side of the benches there, who highlighted that the investment that the road building taking place in his constituency has drawn in a number of businesses and created a number of jobs in his area. It's clear that road building can have a huge positive impact on driving investment, bringing those businesses, creating those jobs, and bringing people out of poverty. 

So, in closing, Llywydd, the scrapping of the road building projects that have been announced in the road review could have a dangerous impact on the people of Wales. It's a backward step in how we go about our daily lives. Instead of slowing Wales down, the Welsh Government should grip the wheel and get Wales moving again with a pro-growth, pro-business, pro-worker programme that works for drivers. I call on all Members to support our motion here today. Diolch yn fawr iawn. 

A small history lesson. Roads weren't invented to accommodate the combustion engine. Roads were invented to get people from A to B, long before the combustion engine was around, and what this is about is re-purposing our roads to have multiple ways of getting around, and to be aligned with our climate change obligations. We all voted to reduce our climate emissions in support of today's and future generations, but I'm afraid that all we've heard so far from the Conservatives is 'Do what I say, not what I do'. So, we absolutely have to align our roads policy with our 'Llwybr Newydd', our net-zero plans, and, indeed, our planning policies in 'Future Wales'. So, we simply can't go on like we've gone before, because that is the way in which we are going to completely destroy our world. 

So, there are lots of—

Will you take an intervention? 

All right. 

Is the 'Do what I say, not what I do' approach not epitomised by the Welsh Government owning an airport? 

This is not about the airport—[Interruption.] Well, we don't have aeroplanes running on roads, and this is about roads. This is about having more coherent criteria for why we are going to invest in the carbon emissions created by roads. So, the new criteria: shifting transport to sustainable transport. So, prioritising—the hierarchy of sustainable transport is prioritising active travel and cycling; reducing casualties on the roads, nobody's going to argue against that, and adapting roads to the impact of climate change. So, ensuring that, where we are having to change the road network, we are enhancing the hedges and edges strategy around wildlife and minimising any impact that they have on nature. And then supporting prosperity by making sure that developed sites achieve high sustainable transport mode share. And that is the rationale behind the decision to approve 17 of the projects that these experts looked at and to chuck out many others that are simply just replicating the old way of doing things. 

So, for example, there was a proposal to build a bypass, enhance a bypass around Wrexham just to accommodate a private development of new housing that had clearly been put in the wrong place, because there were no public transport links. Equally, I'm alarmed at the proposal by Cardiff Council to agree to building 2,500 homes in the north of Cardiff, north of my constituency, without, at the moment, any of the transport links that would be needed to ensure that people were able to get to work and to leisure either by active travel or by sustainable public transport. And the alternative is that they will do exactly what is happening on the Redrow site, which is close nearby, which is that people are getting into their cars and clogging up the roads with air pollution and making life hell for people who don't have a car, have no options, live where they live because they don't have choices, and certainly impacting on the health of our children. So, we have to ensure that local authorities are taking decisions aligned with the climate obligations that they too have made to ensure that we don't have a world that our future generations won't want to live in.

I just want to take issue with point 2 of the Tory motion, which is the idea that these experts should have been doing a public engagement exercise. No. That is the job of Welsh Government and the Welsh Parliament. That is the job of the Welsh Government and the Welsh Parliament, not transport experts. Obviously, we need to continue to consult people, but simply getting consultations to do everything infantilises Governments and makes them incapable of making the right decisions. So, we definitely need to change, and I think there's an absolute treasure trove in this roads review report, which, disappointingly, Natasha Asghar doesn't seem to have read. It's got some fantastic recommendations in it and I look forward to another debate where we will have a different focus other than the one of, 'Do nothing. Let's just go on as we did before'. 

I can say that I've read it—I'm not all the way through, I must admit, but I'm almost there.

Now then, I'd like to say, Minister—and I've raised it with the Deputy Minister—how disappointed I am to see much-needed projects not going ahead, and this was after £9 million on those roundabouts on the A55. For us in north Wales, once again, we just see ourselves being shortchanged. But I just want to ask you a question whilst I'm here, and try and get it onto the record. On the potential of the roundabout removal, in the report, page 22, it does mention that the aims of the Welsh Government are aligned with having those roundabouts there in terms of a sustainable transport hierarchy, and that they can be taken forward in fresh studies using the regional multimodal way of working. So perhaps you can just explain a little to me, because that particular project might not be dead and buried. 

Seven projects were marked as 'should not proceed', the most of any region in Wales. Four projects were marked as 'should not proceed bar some elements', and another four projects with 'insufficient information to review'. So, will you be coming back to those with 'insufficient information to review'? If they were there, they've obviously had some consideration prior to. Now, this is in addition to an enormous £21 million spent on roads under review in north Wales, which is by far the largest sum out of any Welsh region and, therefore, with the most to lose. That's an incredible amount money that, say, put into social care would bring dividends in better care for my elderly and vulnerable residents.

So, taking all of this together, it does appear that north Wales has got one of the worst deals. This is in a part of the country with a significant rural population who rely on good traffic links. Target conditions set out to seek 67 per cent of the Welsh road network to be in a good state of repair. And I've also noticed something else in the report. We talk about carbon emissions, and it quite clearly states that carbon emissions are higher under 35 mph, so I'm just a bit worried, really, as to how we're suddenly racing forward with this 20 mph to reduce carbon emissions. Someone, going forward on that, hasn't read their own report.

Wales has the lowest percentage of roads in a good state of repair; 57 per cent of the road network is described as 'good', compared with 63 per cent over the border, under a UK Conservative Government. The Welsh Labour Government, backed by Plaid Cymru, doesn't seem to have noticed that there's an electric vehicle revolution, and it's sweeping the world. Rather than try and embrace this technology, the Government makes empty promises about improving public transport. So, the Minister should explain ambitions to my constituents in Aberconwy—you know, you're talking about improving public transport and then take out a main arterial bus route, the T19, seeing students and pupils unable to actually attend their learning places.

As is proven in Aberconwy, the Welsh Government is simply failing to deliver the sustainable public transport system that you need to get in place before you even talk about some of the woolly and silly things that are being cooked up here in Cardiff Bay. So severe is your anti-car agenda that the future arrival of autonomous cars seems to have been completely overlooked, and it's fair to say that the Deputy Minister did not answer in committee, when I asked him, and the Chairman reminded me that I'd asked him three times, 'Have you considered autonomous cars, or driverless cars, in your review?' There was no evidence to suggest that they've even thought about it.

So, even though the Minister tries to claim that this doesn't mean the end of road building in Wales, the decision-making process now by this Welsh Labour Government is going to be anti-car and anti-roads. Businesses are worried. The Federation of Small Businesses has pointed out the reality for most small businesses is still a necessary dependence on road-based transport. The way to tackle climate change is not to impose the heaviest burdens on the poor, the vulnerable and our small-business owners.

Now then, I did raise this with the Counsel General: as you know, the future generations Act requires each public body to carry out sustainable development aimed at achieving the well-being goals. I'll remind people what they are: a prosperous Wales, a healthier Wales and a Wales of cohesive communities. The decision that 19 schemes should not proceed, such as the Flintshire corridor, the A55 junctions 15 and 16 and the third Menai crossing, will harm the prosperity, health and connectivity of communities right across Wales. So, I would be pleased, Minister, whether you could explain to me, because the Counsel General mentioned that this was more of a question for yourself, whether you may have breached your own well-being goals. Thank you.

Thank you very much. As you can imagine, I want to focus on one project specifically, namely the Menai crossing. I say 'the Menai crossing', because do bear in mind that we're not asking for a third bridge over the Menai necessarily; we are talking about a resilient crossing. Do it in another way, without another bridge, if you like. And there have been a number of inquiries that have looked at alternative options—getting rid of the towers and widening the road, putting a three-lane system in place, providing new lanes on cantilevers on the Britannia bridge. But the conclusion is, every time, that some sort of new bridge is the solution.

But, as I say, I am looking for resilience. It is a vulnerable crossing, where high winds or accidents can close the bridge for extended periods, and the Menai bridge is inadequate as a fallback, and we saw that for a period for three months months recently. We were one storm, one accident, one event away from being totally isolated, and that isn't a situation that I'm willing to put up with.

There are two parts to what we are seeking: dualling the Britannia, the A55—ensuring proper flow of traffic, not more traffic. The rest of the road, of course, has been dualled for hundreds of miles, from Ireland to eastern Europe, in terms of that strategic artery. We're not talking about a special case across the Menai; we just want to be like the rest of the A55. And the other part is to allow active travel. Now, I don't know whether the Minister has cycled over the Britannia bridge—I have done so a few times, and it's not a pleasant experience. I'm quite sure that the Minister won't have walked over the bridge, because you're not allowed to, and the result of this is that a highly populated area like Llanfairpwll and the surrounding area don't have any links through active travel to sites of work at Ysbyty Gwynedd and Parc Menai. I've been seeing if there's a possibility for having a walkway or a cycle route on the lower deck on the Britannia bridge. It's possible, the space is there, but the roads review refers to the possibility that that lower deck will be needed for an additional railway line—

May I just intervene? There is an intervention. Are you willing to take an intervention from Jenny Rathbone?

Yes.

Diolch. I just wanted to ask you whether you'd given much consideration to using the older Menai bridge for active travel, for cycling and walking, because I accept that the Britannia bridge would be a terrifying cycling experience? And we know that there are some issues with its structure, and that might be a better way of separating these two sections of transport, conceivably with public transport involved as well?

I appreciate that Cardiff Central is the other end of the country. A comparison would be that it would be like asking somebody to cycle from Grangetown to Riverside via Llanrumney: yes, you can, but it's not practical. We need to make sure that those active travel links are practical and attractive to people. You will not walk or cycle from Llanfairpwll to Parc Menai, a couple of hundred yards away, by going a few miles in the other direction over the Menai bridge.

The roads review, as I said, does refer to the possibility of using the lower deck to expand rail provision for the future in order to enhance public transport, and that's an example there of the confusion in the report and in the Government's response. We hear that we don't need a bridge, we need to encourage the use of public transport and active travel. And I agree entirely, of course, but there is no suggestion there as to how we can expand public transport apart from perhaps stealing a possible active travel route.

It's striking, I think, that the roads review report on the third crossing reads like a case for that crossing. I'll quote here. The main cases for change are congestion—not top of my list, actually, but—

'congestion and lack of resilience of' the Britannia bridge and Menai bridge. The

'scheme would improve reliability for freight movement.'

'Access by active travel modes would also be improved.'

'The scheme includes improved routes for pedestrians and cyclists'.

Lack of resilience makes

'Anglesey a less attractive destination for investment'.

A third crossing would overcome...safety concerns.'

'Improving local access for active travel'— again—'would be beneficial.'

'The objective to improve accessibility for pedestrians and cyclists is aligned with current policy.'

'The objective to promote safety is aligned with current policy'.

It would improve 'reliability for buses'.

'Disruption caused by incidents, restrictions or closure of the existing bridges would be less frequent.'

I could go on. It tells us that the

'Cost-benefit analysis suggests that the scheme would provide medium or high value for money'.

But here's the rub: that benefit appears to be based on an economic calculation tied, it seems, to increasing traffic, which is not something that we're seeking, and which, surely, a link to an island with a limited population, and with the end of the road literally 20 miles that way, isn't comparable to the increase in traffic you could be encouraging by building a road between two large population centres.

This, I repeat again, is about resilience, basic resilience. How about measuring the project in terms of social value, safety value, health value as well, and in terms of, again, the basic economic well-being of an area? The suffering of businesses during the Menai suspension bridge closure was very, very real.

To conclude, Minister, I am preparing a submission to the Burns commission. I hope they too will see that this needs reviewing, and I appeal to you to remember why this strengthening of the Menai crossing was on the table in the first place. It’s because it is needed. The case is as strong as ever.

Thank you to Natasha Asghar for bringing this debate to the Senedd today in the name of Darren Millar. I’ve said it before—and many of my colleagues have, multiple times—that a decent road and transport infrastructure is the absolute key to a vibrant economy. And you’d think that was an obvious statement to make, yet we have a Government that is insistent on blocking Wales’s progress at every turn. We’ve come to expect nothing less, of course, from a failed socialist Government intent on banning things and taking us back to the dark ages. Where is the vision and want to open up Wales for business, for jobs, for tourism? We could and should have seen an M4 relief road by now and a multitude of other infrastructure projects, such as the A470 in Caerphilly, M4 junction in Merthyr. We should be seeing an ambitious Government opening up Wales, making it accessible and more economically open. Unfortunately, we have a Government intent on punishing people who drive cars, putting off inward investment and bringing Wales to a grinding halt. It just goes to show that this Government will spend millions on anything apart from improving our road infrastructure.

People don’t just drive for the fun of it. I can see you shaking your head. They need to get work, they need to get to hospital appointments, school—a multitude of reasons. If you live and work in rural area like I do, and many people across Wales, without significant public transport routes in place, you simply have to drive. Maybe that’s why the Deputy Minister over the last four years has claimed for nearly 12,000 miles of car journeys, and only three train trips. This says to me that the Minister knows deep down that cars and roads are needed and it just goes to show how he’s failed abysmally—and this Government, your Government—at improving public transport in the last two decades.

The Welsh Government once again has chosen to put ideology over people’s priorities. The UK Labour Party don’t even want to put their names to this road review. They see it’s ridiculous and toxic. Most of Deputy Minister’s Members of his own party are outraged by this, as we see by an empty Chamber here today. It is high time the Minister finally gets on with doing something positive in his role, like building the roads that Wales needs. After two decades, we have a transport infrastructure that is not fit for purpose and I urge everybody to support our motion today.

The original Llanharan bypass proposal was a road, or actually a series of roads connected by roundabouts, enabling the phased opening up of a strategic site, connecting new homes and medical facilities and a new school with the existing community of old Llanharan along the main spinal route from the western point of the A473 beyond Llanharan, and allowing access and egress in the direction of Talbot Green, Llantrisant. However, during the many long years—I’ve been involved in all of them—of developing this proposal, changes in policy here in Wales and internationally have reflected major changes in our knowledge and evidence of the effects of road building. People may have different views of this, of course, but the evidence—regardless of views or opinions—is very clear and is rightly changing the way that farsighted Governments respond in policy terms.

Here are some of those major changes. The climate crisis: we either believe there is a climate crisis or we do not. I do. All political parties in this Senedd have signed up to this on paper; indeed, the Welsh Government was the first Government in the United Kingdom to declare a climate crisis—rightly—and was followed in very short order by Scotland and then England. This means that for the sake of our children and our grandchildren—even if not for ourselves—we need to think radically differently about the way we live and we work and we travel and much more.

We are also unique amongst the countries of the United Kingdom in having a statutory responsibility to consider not just this generation but future generations. The dead end of relentless road building that we’ve just heard about. For many generations, we’ve accepted the conventional 'wisdom’ that we can build our way out of traffic congestion. When roads fill, we build another lane, two lanes, a bypass, a relief road, and another and another, and yet the evidence against this is now compelling and unarguable. On the principle and practice of induced demand, we see that, when another lane or another bypass is built, the traffic relentlessly expands to fill it. New roads designed primarily for individual vehicle transport, as opposed to public transport, do not reduce congestion and air pollution, they increase it. Eventually, communities find themselves surrounded by ever-expanding tarmac.

Air pollution, the silent killer. Air pollution from increased traffic comes not only from exhaust emissions; the combination of exhaust emissions from combustion engines and particulates impairs respiratory health and shortens average lifespans. In short, for the climate, but also for health and longer lives, we need to rethink the relentless growth in individual vehicles and the roads to accommodate this growth. It is killing people and shortening their lives. 

A better transport policy has many advantages. The evidence has grown internationally that when transport policy is focused on high investment in better public transport—road, rail and tram—and also where short journeys are done by active travel—cycling, walking, et cetera—then quality of life is improved, health outcomes and mortality are enhanced, communities feel safer, quality of life for people in those communities is better, and there are added but very logical bonuses, such as the development of local shops and services, the so-called 15-minute neighbourhoods. And there are many more arguments, based on clear and compelling arguments, that back the Welsh Government's radical—for the UK, but not worldwide—changes in policy on transport and travel. 

But the roads review is only one part of this. The comprehensive transport policy is set out in 'Llwybr Newydd: the Wales transport strategy 2021'; there are transformative bus transport proposals in 'One network, one timetable, one ticket'; there's ongoing work in the metro proposals for the Cardiff city region, south-west Wales and for north Wales; and there's record investment, despite what we just heard, in active travel in Wales, too. But, Minister, it is the timing and the funding gap between the realisation of these ambitions for public transport and active travel and modal shift and the announcement of the roads review that is our greatest danger. 'Mind the gap' is something we should be aware of in policy, delivery and funding terms, not only when we board the train.

I've written to you, Minister, already, asking for an urgent meeting, along with RCT leader, Andrew Morgan, and Chris Elmore MP and local Members. I believe that we can develop a new proposal for the Llanilid site that takes unnecessary traffic and journeys off the local road network, joins up the missing sections, including for active travel and bus routes to Talbot Green and Llantrisant, and creates more liveable communities and a better quality of life for local people. But, Minister, this will require your direct help—on buses and trains, on demand management, on active travel, on behavioural change, and delivering real improvements right now on the overly congested A473 through the old town. Llanharan and Llanilid could be an exemplar town in Wales for better communities and modal shift if you are willing to work with us and directly help us. We cannot do this on our own, so I invite you, Minister, to come out and meet with us in Llanharan, see the challenges we face first hand, and then help us make the changes we need to make Llanharan better for local residents and businesses and a model community for modal shift and better ways to create well-rounded, healthy and sustainable communities. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

The climate emergency is the most important challenge we face. That's why I support the conclusions of the road review. I also support the Conservatives' position, if indeed it is your position, to close Cardiff Airport. My challenge to you is: if, indeed, that is your position, bring forward a debate to close Cardiff Airport. I look forward to contributing to that, because that is consistent with the view about the climate emergency. [Interruption.] Of course I will. 

Just for clarity, we do not propose shutting Cardiff Airport. In fact, we've brought two strategies out that have highlighted what the Welsh Conservatives would like to see of Cardiff Airport, which is a profitable airport, internationally connected but run in the independent sector. 

Thank you so much for that clarity. Therefore, there is a little bit of disingenuous positioning there, isn't there, when you're saying to Labour, 'Close Cardiff Airport'. My challenge to the Labour Party is: if you really do believe in reducing carbon emissions, then ditch Cardiff Airport. 

We have to reduce our carbon emissions, enable modal shift and enhance road safety, which will be hardwired into our road schemes. The aim of the review, as I understand it, is to base decisions about roads on a wider range of criteria. It is nonsense to say that the roads review means Wales is closed for business. The choice between the economy and the environment is a false binary. We know that the economic effects of climate change will be catastrophic. You cannot plan an economy in the long term without understanding that things need to change, and most innovative businesses actually know that. We know that, in many parts of Wales, especially in rural areas like those in Mid and West Wales where I represent, the lack of public transport is a huge problem. But even in our cities, I know that the cost of public transport is also prohibitive. I do look forward to the outcome from the pilot of the Fflecsi bus. I'm hoping that most people here have seen the Fflecsi buses. I know they've been piloted in many parts of Wales, and I know in Pembrokeshire they are being well used.

I want to see free public transport for the under-25s. That's where we need the shift. It's a radical proposal that would help get people out of their cars and switch to more sustainable modes of transport. It would help meet climate change targets, boost services, and would in particular give our young people a leg-up. We are all facing rising costs of living, but they hit our young people the most. We also need to think about what sort of economic future we want. I would argue that we need one focused on prosperity and well-being in their broadest sense, not just on the single metric of growth, and as part of that, we need to think about connectivity rather than travel.

In conclusion, I stand here with my tin hat on. I do welcome the conclusion of the roads review, not as the end of the debate, but as the start of a much wider one. That must include far better provision for public transport, especially in our rural areas. But, in the end, it is all about how we can shape a system in Wales that connects us, that supports prosperity, encourages well-being, and, most importantly, tackles the climate emergency. Thank you. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

In my contribution, I'm going to respond to the speech given by Huw. Huw, of course, mentioned the need for change, and I agree entirely with what he said, but what Huw said came from an urban perspective. The world is very different in rural areas.

As everyone knows, the Llanbedr bypass was the first to hear of its fate. The news came as a huge shock to local people, and those people were very angry. Indeed, the suggestions before the announcement had said that the proposal would proceed. The residents and the community and communities nearby had been waiting for over 50 years for a resolution to their problems, just to be disappointed at the very last moment. And indeed, the Government had invested millions of pounds in preparations for economic development in Mochras.

So, why were the people of Llanbedr so keen to have a bypass? Well, for those of you who are unfamiliar with that community, I will paint you a picture. Llanbedr, without doubt, is one of the most beautiful villages in Wales, and it's split by the river Artro. There's only one road through the village, which is the A496, the highway connecting Barmouth and Harlech, and to cross the river one must go over a narrow little bridge that dates back to the time of Cromwell. When a lorry, a tractor or even a van crosses that bridge, the whole village comes to a stop, and this happens regularly. The result of this is long traffic jams of vehicles waiting patiently to cross the bridge, letting out their poisonous emissions. 

A number of ambulances have failed to reach patients in time because of this issue, and have had to ask for the air ambulance. There are local businesses that have left or are considering leaving because of the valuable time wasted unloading stock because of queuing. The parents of young children or people with mobility issues choose to drive hundreds of yards only in order to go to the nursery school or the shop, because the bridge is too dangerous to cross on foot. And needless to say, the bridge is grade II listed and nothing can be done to it.

I understand the rationale that the Deputy Minister has provided for not building more roads—and Huw mentioned it earlier—namely the fact that it will mean more vehicles on more roads, and more roads, and more vehicles, and that vicious cycle. The rationale is entirely valid, but not in all cases, and certainly not in the case of Llanbedr. Indeed, in Llanbedr, everyone has a car because of these difficulties. Indeed, one could make the case that, in having the bypass, that would take vehicles off the highway, enabling those parents to walk to the local nursery school and to allow people to go to events in the village hall or to go to the shop near the bridge.

The Deputy Minister said that we need modal shift, using more public transport. Well, the Minister won't find a more enthusiastic supporter of that than me in that regard, but there has been no investment in public transport. And indeed, as things stand, it's likely that the bus routes currently in existence will be cut because of that lack of investment. I acknowledge that the original plans had looked at preparing a bypass that would allow carrying vehicles up to 60 mph, but those communities and the local authority, Gwynedd Council, have looked and mitigating this and changed the proposals in order to change that speed limit to 40 mph in order to reduce emissions.

In a previous response, the Deputy Minister said disparagingly to me that nobody has said that elderly people are expected to cycle everywhere, but the truth is, if you read the report on Llanbedr, which was published back in 2021, it demonstrates that the priority for Llanbedr is active travel. In an isolated community such as Llanbedr, it's nearly impossible to implement active travel to go to the surgery or to go to the shops. But, in having a bypass, that would allow people to walk and to go to the community events that I mentioned earlier. And indeed, in his evidence to the environment committee last week, the Deputy Minister said:

'there will always be journeys by car, as the only practical way to get around....particularly in deep rural areas, the car is always going to be the main mode of transport.'

That is entirely true of Llanbedr. So, I once again urge the Government to work with Gwynedd Council in order to develop a proposal to make a slower bypass in Llanbedr and to invest comprehensively in our public transport in rural Wales.

As the Minister I'm sure will say in her response, not all road construction is being ended. But again, we look at the issue in isolation. A road review needs to be part of a transport review. A bus plan is especially important because a lack of a bus plan and adequate bus services means there is often no alternative to driving except moving from the area in which you currently live. Also bear in mind that buses drive on roads, and outside major urban areas, bus lanes are rare. Buses are also caught up in traffic jams and their timetables affected. I remember when the Labour Party policy was support for an integrated transport strategy. I'm not sure when that ended.

The weather and topography of Wales makes cycling and walking unviable for many journeys. A transport review only makes sense when combined with a local development plan and an economic development strategy. They all fit together. They cannot be treated in isolation. Get transportation wrong, make it difficult to live in an area, then you will suffer demographic depopulation. The elderly and poor left behind, the younger and more affluent leaving—this is a post-war reality for some of our Valleys communities and some of our rural communities. I do not want to make it worse.

Building a road is not a solution. Look at the M25. The M25 was very expensive—a major road encircling most of greater London, 117 miles of motorway. Although the M25 was popular during construction, it quickly became apparent there was insufficient traffic capacity. Because of the public inquiry, several junctions merely served local roads where office and retail developments were built, attracting even more traffic onto the M25 than it was designed for. The congestion has led to traffic management schemes and, since opening, the M25 has been widened progressively, particularly near Heathrow airport. Still, the problem persists. It has been described as Europe’s largest car park. The M25 problem is the M4 in south Wales—too many junctions too close together, local traffic uses it as a local relief road. The danger of building relief road bypasses is that developments cluster around them and junctions, and traffic substantially increases. You end up back where you were.

Of course, for some places, one bypass is not enough. As many Members note, the A40 passes to the north of Llandeilo, passing the north side of the National Trust-owned Dinefwr Park estate before continuing to Carmarthen. This is not just any road, it's the A40, one of the major roads in Wales. But we're going to have a second Llandeilo bypass now, or there are plans for a second Llandeilo bypass. So, Llandeilo gets a southern bypass to go with its northern bypass. Whilst many parts of Wales that need new roads get left behind, Llandeilo gets two. It also has a regular bus service and is on the Heart of Wales line, and it's got access to both Swansea and Glangwili hospital in Carmarthen.

Of course, as Mabon ap Gwynfor just said, there's a village on Meirionnydd's coast called Llanbedr. The Welsh Government has pulled the plug, following advice from a committee it chose of transport and climate experts. Calls for the one-mile Llanbedr access road date back decades. It was hoped that the road would cut traffic through the Snowdonia village by 90 per cent. It has been directly contributing to increased traffic. Llanbedr has a train every four hours; not certainly a Heart of Wales line amount. For Ysbyty Gwynedd, there is no bus route, and that is the local hospital.

I hope—although I don't expect—the Minister can explain why building a road in northern Meirionnydd causes an increase in traffic and pollution, while the second Llandeilo bypass does not.

Will you take an intervention, Mike?

Please.

Would you agree with me that the second Llandeilo bypass is pork-barrel politics, and nothing else?

I cannot say that because, as you pointed out, or Darren Millar pointed out earlier, I have not been involved in any of this; the whole discussion takes place between the Welsh Government and Plaid Cymru, from which many of us on our benches are left out.

If, however, the Government believe that additional roads create more traffic and pollution, why couldn't they close the Cardiff eastern bay link road to cars, lorries and motorbikes, and only allow buses and cyclists to use it, if that is the solution? We need an integrated transport strategy linked to housing, commercial and industrial development. New roads are not the solution everywhere, but are needed in some places. What works is what matters.

The Minister for Climate Change, Julie James.

I'm waiting for Julie James's microphone to be unmuted. Yes, there you go. Thank you.

Diolch, Llywydd.

Llywydd, there are some basic economic realities that are quite clearly unknown to the Tory benches. Economic growth and action on climate are not opposing objectives; the greatest economic harm would result from a failure to prevent runaway climate change. The balance we must seek to strike is one that avoids policies that, by not considering economic and environmental factors, are self-defeating.

This is the first root-and-branch review of road building in Wales for generations, and it comes amidst a nature and climate emergency, a cost-of-living crisis, and at a time when the Welsh Government is facing unprecedented financial pressures. So, however much the Tories might want to turn the clock back, we simply cannot just carry on as we have done for the last 60 or 70 years, not when we know that we must make deeper carbon cuts in the next 10 years than we've managed to deliver in the last 30; not when we know that transport has, to date, been the laggard on the path to decarbonisation; and not when so many species in Wales—one in six species according to the latest state of nature report—are at serious risk of extinction.

We are taking action here in Wales to actually try to deliver on our net-zero commitments and our wider environmental responsibilities. How often have I heard warm words from the Tories in this Chamber on tackling climate change and protecting biodiversity? But, despite those warm words, I cannot recall a single serious or constructive suggestion from the Welsh Conservatives in response to these great challenges of our age. So, perhaps they could start setting out their alternative path to net zero with something they're actually genuinely committed to. And it would be good, while they're at it, to know whether they agree with the Climate Change Committee, who also advise the Westminster Government, of course, and put the future cost of inaction on climate change at around 4 per cent to 6 per cent of gross domestic product every single year. The fact is that even if we'd wanted to keep progressing all 55 schemes looked at as part of the roads review, we simply do not have the money to do so.

Can I just intervene on the Minister and ask if she's taking an intervention from Mark Isherwood?

Llywydd, if I could just develop my argument a little more, then perhaps if Mark wants to intervene a bit later, then I'd be very happy to.

Okay. Carry on.

I just wanted to point out that the roads review was looking at pipeline development schemes without an approval for construction final cost or capital funding allocated for delivery. And that's the whole point of an investment pipeline: something the Tories simply seem to not understand. Schemes are developed, some go ahead, some don't, and with our capital budget now 8 per cent lower in real terms due to the economic illiteracy of the current UK Government, and of the ones preceding this particular Tory Government, we lack the capital investment necessary to make all the economic interventions that all Governments need to make, and because of those reckless decisions taken in Westminster, we absolutely now have to prioritise.

So, let's just take the example of the Flintshire red route. The development work that consultants have carried out in support of the project showed local congestion returning to current levels within 15 years of construction, much like the M25 example quoted by Mike Hedges.

Are you taking an intervention now, Minister? I've been asked again.

Go on then—go on then, Mark.

Thank you.

Why have you not acknowledged that the 'current Tory Government' has banned the sale of new petrol and diesel cars and vans from 2030, and that with effect from 2035 all new cars and vans will be fully zero emission at the tailpipe, which means that we need a road network for the future, planning now and delivering for that network, given the volume of new-technology cars that will definitely be on the roads then?

Well, I fundamentally disagree with that, Mark. If you're replacing all of the current cars on the road with electric or low-emission vehicles, you simply have a different climate crisis to look at. What we need here is a different solution to transport that does not rely on individual car transport.

Anyway, let me go back to my Flintshire red route example. Three hundred million pounds would have been spent—money that's not available then to spend on alternatives—to build a dual carriageway through an ancient woodland during a nature emergency; £300 million on a project that would have increased carbon emissions by 423,000 tonnes during a climate emergency, yet within a decade and a half of its construction levels of congestion would be back to where they are today. I really fail to understand how anyone can think that that is a sensible way to invest money. While I'm at it, the Tories who are going on about the amount of money that's not invested in north Wales really do need to do their sums; I think you need to have a look at what was proposed for the M4 in south Wales, if you want to really make the comparison.

Instead, we will invest sustainably in north Wales. The investment proposed there was not consistent with our commitments under the future generations Act, nor did it fit with what we said we'd do in the Wales transport strategy and it's not consistent with our statutory climate change targets. The reason we established the independent roads review panel was to test schemes like the red route, which were set in train before we agreed these policies, against our commitments and the organising principles of the Welsh Government. It is not a ban on road building, quite clearly, and we will work with the Burns commission to implement a sustainable scheme alternative, and that is quite clearly the right thing to do.

So, just to be clear, Llywydd, this is a technical policy exercise, and not something that any Government would consult on directly. The time to engage with the public and stakeholders is at the strategy stage and at the scheme stage, and, of course, we have done and will do as much of that as we possibly can. Indeed, the Burns commission in north Wales is now consulting as part of its work, and once local authorities have produced their new regional transport plans they too will consult on them, and rightly so.

The Conservative motion says that we need to,

'deliver the transport infrastructure the people of Wales rightfully deserve.'

We absolutely agree. We need to futureproof our infrastructure to deal with the challenges we know are coming our way. We will continue to invest in our road infrastructure. We'll do more to maintain the roads that we have and we will build new roads that meet our four policy tests. We will work with our local authorities to develop schemes that can address our transport problems without adding to the other challenges, and we have great confidence that that is all very doable.

Let us put this all into proportion. To get onto a pathway that we need to get onto to get us to net zero by 2050, we need to cut car use by 10 per cent, so all we are really— 

I'm being asked again, Minister, for an intervention, this time by Huw Irranca-Davies.

Certainly. [Laughter.]

Minister, thank you very much for taking the intervention. Could I just clarify that if you are approached by local authority leaders in those areas where schemes have been told to go back and think again about bringing it forward, where you need to show that a scheme also leads to a reduction in individual vehicle transport, you will, indeed, be sitting down with them and talking through proposals to make this work, and you'll be seeing how the Welsh Government can help them to do that as well?

Yes, Huw, of course we will, and we will be proactively doing that; we work very closely with our local authorities, and of course we'll be working with them on their local transport plans as they bring them forward.

We need to get this into proportion. To get us to net zero by 2050, we need to cut car use by 10 per cent. So, all we are talking about is shifting one journey in 10 from a private car journey to a sustainable form of travel. I know that upsets Natasha Asghar's ambitions, but, really, it is not a road ban. We really do need to get this in proportion. As well as reducing emissions, that cut will give us a cut in congestion, reduce air pollution, lower noise pollution and give greater choice to people of how they travel. At the moment, far too many people are denied that choice; people who rely on buses are denied better services because our investment has been slammed into an endless pipeline of new roads. Meanwhile, others feel forced into multiple car ownership because they just don't have an alternative. If we want to enhance choice, and if you want to increase freedom, if we want to strengthen communities, then we need to shift investment into a modern public integrated transport system.

We know we do not have the funding to make all the public transport investments we need now, but as our £1.6 billion metro programme and our record investment in active travel show, we are making process. So, Llywydd, we fund mandatory concessionary fares by £60 million a year. This gives free travel to those who need it the most. We fund the mytravelpass scheme by £2 million a year, offering a third off the cost of bus tickets for 16 to 21-year-olds. Through the bus services support grant, we provide local authorities with £25 million of grant funding, consistent with the cost of tendered bus services, along with support for community transport, and, in addition, we spent £3.2 million a year—

You'll need to bring your contribution to an end now, Minister. I've extended it by the interventions, so if you can draw your contribution to a close.

Thank you, Llywydd. It's very difficult, isn't it, to answer all of the points raised in a debate of this sort in the very short time we have available to us. So, we will be bringing forward a debate in Government time to discuss this in slower time.

But, Llywydd, just to sum up, a change in approach is undoubtedly the right thing to do, but to be effective we need to make the right thing to do the easiest thing to do, as the Deputy Minister has said many times, because human nature is to do what is easy. But, in short, Llywydd, we are moving forward into a bright, economically and environmentally sustainable future, whereas, as this debate shows, the Tories are locked in a false, overly nostalgic vision of the past, and they want a dystopian future where more and more of our countryside is devastated by traffic, and our climate and the essential natural world that sustains it are driven to their knees. I know which of those futures I support, and I know which of those futures the people of Wales, as all the opinion polls show, support as well. Diolch.

Tom Giffard to reply to the debate.

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Llywydd. Can I thank all Members that contributed in our debate today? There were a number of Members, actually, that contributed, so I won't pick up everybody, you'll be pleased to know, that contributed and respond to their points accordingly. But I did want to single out Natasha Asghar's opening statement and her passion for transport in Wales. Her ambitious vision for transport in Wales, I think, really shone through in her contribution.

We've heard from across the Chamber today how reliant every area of Wales is on good road infrastructure. Many of these road building schemes are vital to help both local economies and communities thrive, and perhaps we heard in the debate that nowhere is that more clear than in north Wales, as Sam Rowlands and Janet Finch-Saunders highlighted the major projects that had been shelved there. I did feel a degree of sympathy, actually, for Rhun ap Iorwerth, who had to balance his party's full support for Labour's latest schemes, as they often do, with his constituents' clear desire for a third crossing into Anglesey.

Will you take an intervention?

He will, of course, know that his constituents do support that third crossing and their MP, Virginia Crosbie, does not have to walk the tightrope.

Well, it works both ways, because you need to remember as well that Members of your benches opposed the red route.

I think we heard from Sam Rowlands as a Member for North Wales that he very much supports the red route going through Flintshire.

As we've also heard, the Deputy Minister and the panel he created have abjectly failed to listen to any of the concerns of the communities and dismissed all of their concerns, instead pressing forward with their own narrow-minded agenda without any suitable alternatives. We heard from Delyth Jewell and others that we're facing a pivotal moment where, on top of cancelling vital road projects, Wales is facing a crisis in its transport system. These include concerns about the 65 per cent to 100 per cent of bus services facing being cut by small firms, because of a lack of funding, falling bus journeys, a staggering 11,000 train journeys cancelled over the last three years, and one in six rail passengers being dissatisfied with Transport for Wales services.

If this is, as we heard from the likes of Jenny Rathbone, Huw Irranca-Davies and Jane Dodds, Wales's reaction to climate change, isn't it bizarre that there has been absolutely no impetus to increase electric vehicle use, which will be a major factor in reducing emissions? Why do we have just over 1,400 public charging points here in Wales, well below the 50,000 fast-charging points that the Welsh Government itself has predicted will be needed by 2030? And why are there only 94 zero-emission buses in service in four authorities?

The authorities that have got electric buses are those that have applied successfully for UK Government funding, and we should be very grateful for that. But, on the electric charging points, I have to remind you that just as governments are not responsible for petrol stations, nor are they responsible for electric charging points. There is a responsibility, I agree, for us to ensure that communities are taking opportunities to install electric charging points in their villages and towns so that they can make some money out of that, using renewable energy in their area, but, really, it is not the job of Government to be transferring to electric charging points.

The Government has a role in encouraging the installation of charging points. It's no coincidence, Jenny, that, in Wales, there are 39 charging points per 100,000 of population. In England, that's 52. There's a clear difference along our border here in Wales as well, and that is through the proactive nature from the UK Government that we're not seeing here in Wales. And if it's about saving money, it's odd that the road building freeze in this review was started before any inflationary pressures were evident. If it's because of balancing the books, it is astounding that it's £180 million the Welsh Government has spent on road building projects that were never started—quite literally roads to nowhere, which can be written off so easily. If budgets are so hard to find, then surely a good saving would be the £30 million the Welsh Government's proposing to spend on a 20 mph road limit. It's been 10 years since the Active Travel (Wales) Act, Llywydd, but it looks like we've gone backwards: bus journeys down, at least 30 per cent of the population in every one of Wales's regions in transport poverty, and sustainable transport pilot schemes, including e-bikes and e-cargo bikes, stagnating, all because of a lack of investment and continually changing policy. However, the panel and the Deputy Minister are wholly relying on active travel and a public transport system in need of dire reform.

Welsh commuters and businesses are continually being pushed towards driving as a reliable form of transport because the Welsh public transport system is failing to deliver. However, instead of having a sustainable and well-used public transport system before banning road building projects, we're now left in this ridiculous situation where road users will be causing more emissions because of a 20 mph speed limit, will be paying even more should a road charging network be introduced in Wales—as the Deputy Minister's indicated he's interested in—and will be unable to efficiently use the electric cars they're being asked to convert to by 2030 because of a lack of charging points. [Interruption.] I've taken enough interventions.

It's quite ironic that the final budget was passed yesterday, as it showed some significant cuts in transport, even in areas where the Deputy Minister wants to focus his attention. Not only has there been a 17 per cent drop in capital funding for sustainable travel compared with the indicative budget, there's been a cut of £10 million to active travel and a cut of £22 million to bus support. That can't be a tenable position to continue alongside a cut to road projects.

So, the thrust of the motion is simple, Llywydd: the roads review has neglected to deliver the transport infrastructure that Wales needs. Instead, the Welsh Government has to ensure the transport network in Wales is able to supply its demand. By failing to do so, perhaps the Deputy Minister's famous words, 'We don't really know what we're doing on the Welsh economy' should now be updated to, 'We don't know what we're doing on the Welsh transport system, either.' Because unless he figures it out, it won't be roads he has to worry about, it'll be unhappy Labour backbenchers telling him to get on his bike.

The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? Does any Member object?

Look, I don't want to do your job for you, so please concentrate.

I believe there was an objection from Plaid Cymru. Therefore, I will defer voting on that item until voting time.

Voting deferred until voting time.