National Assembly for Wales

I'll start, if I may, Cabinet Secretary, just with a question about the review of the roads policy statement, because back in 2024 you said that the roads policy statement is, and I quote, 'a helpful filter', but you also said that it needed to be an effective framework for investment. So, maybe you can tell us what your review of the statement and the road building tests conclude about how well those tests are actually working.

Diolch, Chair. I think the main change has been to provide clarity for stakeholders and to—[Inaudible.]—for road building. So, we've been very clear that roads are a vital component of the transport network, and so we can't allow a policy to be seen as banning new road building. We have to make sure that the policy rightly lifts the bar on new road building. So, the tests—or, as they are now, purposes—are included in the Welsh transport appraisal guidance, and that responds directly to stakeholder feedback. A lot of stakeholders wanted greater clarity and confidence in designing roads.

We're also, as part of raising the bar, making sure that alternatives are considered first and foremost. So, the starting point isn't necessarily a new road—the starting point is to look at the various challenges that are faced in and around a community, and then to design it in the most sustainable way, with the least embedded carbon. So, I think the work that's taken place and is taking place right now, actually—. We've got the likes of the Queensferry bridge that has been designed based on the review and the road—[Inaudible.]—and we've also got I think it's Llanharan in Rhondda Cynon Taf, which is, again, a really good example of how roads have been designed better as a result of the review and the policy itself. 

So, just for clarity, you're not saying that those would not have happened under the previous regime, are you? 

Not necessarily wouldn't have happened, but this has given greater confidence to those who are designing the roads, and ensured that they're not stopped after immense work has already been invested in them. I think it's about the standard of the design, and the standard of the work is far, far higher as a result of the purposes. 

Okay. Your line's just cutting off occasionally. It's okay, we're just about following what you're telling us, but maybe it's just something for us to be mindful of. Carolyn, you wanted to come in.

Cabinet Secretary, can I just ask you a question? The major asset renewal programme—was that impacted, though, by the fact we were short of funding coming to Welsh Government? 

Yes, both the maintenance of the strategic road network and also new road schemes were both impacted by austerity. 

Okay, thank you. That was it. Also, lately as well we've had funding for the local road network, which has been really welcome, as well as our trunk roads. So, what difference have you seen with that funding being put in place for the local road network, as well as the strategic road network? 

Yes, that's been hugely important, the local government borrowing initiative for local roads. We've seen councils the length and breadth of Wales utilise that particular fund, and it's going to be Welsh Government that pays for that loan. And that's made a difference to hundreds of kilometres of local roads as well as, of course, the strategic road network that we're investing in very heavily. And it's going to take time to deal with the backlog, but certainly with the heavy investment that's been made available in 2025-26, and continues to be available in 2026-27, it's going to make a major difference and get us back on track insofar as the road maintenance schedule is concerned.

Okay, thank you. I want to ask you some questions now about the 20 mph speed limits on restricted roads. Can you update us on your latest analysis of the impact of the 20 mph policy? Is it achieving its objectives based on evidence available to date? I've just seen some graphs in the pack that has been supplied, which are really useful.

Yes. This is still a contentious area, but I do think we've made great progress in detoxifying it, and that's in no small part as a result of the work of local authorities in making exemptions to 20 mph and returning certain routes back to 30 mph. In terms of the emerging data, I'm optimistic and I'm pleased that the indicators are heading in the right direction, showing that the downward trend has continued and is possibly accelerating as well. But we can't definitively state the beneficial impact and the measurements until we've got further data and an independent review, which is going to provide an initial assessment early in 2027, and then a final assessment that will include value for money in 2029.

But whilst we await that work, we can be clear about certain statistics. For example, in the summer of last year more than 50 per cent of vehicles recorded were traveling at or below 24 mph, which is a vital measure, and that compares to less than a quarter of vehicles before the change. So, there has been a significant drop in speed of vehicles in those built-up areas, and that's resulted in fewer collisions and fewer casualties so far. But as I say, we need to await the full independent review before we can make definitive statements about the beneficial impact of this particular—[Inaudible.]

Okay, thank you. And how is the local authority review of 20 mph progressing? Are you content with their approach now and interpretation of the updated guidance? I remember originally that there was a great variation across Wales within each local authority in how they applied the guidance, whether they applied it strictly or in a black-and-white way that highway officers feel they need to, or whether they allowed some flexibility based on what they thought, basically.

Yes, absolutely. The guidance now is far, far clearer. It's much, much better, and I'm pleased with the progress that councils have made. A good number of councils have now completed the process. There are a number that are still continuing with the statutory consultations for returning roads to 30 mph. [Inaudible.]—broadly content with the progress that's being made. There has been variation, you're absolutely right, Carolyn, across local authorities. I think perhaps a lesson that we've learnt from this, and which is worth bearing in mind, is that in those councils where collective decision making has taken place, we've seen a larger number of routes returned to 30 mph compared to those councils where individuals have had to sign off changes. It's an important lesson that I think we've learnt from this process. 

I think some are a little risk adverse, so if that risk is based on one person or collectively as a council, I guess, as you say, it makes a difference.

The DataMapWales is not fully updated to show roads returning to 30 mph, so given the importance of transparency and the Welsh Government funding provided for the review, will you ensure this is updated by local authorities? 

Yes, absolutely. Transparency is vitally important. We are encouraging local authorities, councils, to update DataMapWales. As soon as those processes have been completed and changes have been made, it's absolutely vital that they carry out this as speedily as possible. As I say, a number of councils are still going through statutory processes, but, by and large, I'm pleased with where we are. A lot of the data has been updated on DataMapWales, but we are working with councils to ensure that any changes are updated as soon as possible. 

When will the updated 'Setting Local Speed Limits in Wales' guidance be published, and why has it been delayed? I just think, for transparency for everyone, for residents, to understand why a road might be 20 mph, 30 mph or 40 mph, whatever, it's good to have that information there for them. 

It is. We've had a huge amount of activity in recent years around 20 mph, and it has stretched a good number of councils across Wales. It's required a lot of attention from Welsh Government officials, as you can imagine as well, and so there hasn't been the capacity to deal with another major change, and that's the reason for the delay. However, a draft has now been shared with councils, and I'm very pleased by the amount of feedback we've had, actually, and that feedback has then, in turn, enabled us to update the draft guidance. I think that we're looking at March as the month when we're going to be sharing that final version for final comments, and then the publication of the completed work, the completed guidance, will be will be taking place later this year.

Will having that published guidance make it easier for maybe residents and others to be able to challenge the council, and then, if any spine routes, the major routes, need to be increased back to 30 mph, and they felt that that was the case, do you think that would help? 

I'll bring in Peter or Alison on this point, but just to say that we've been very, very concerned that people have a key and central role in determining the right speeds on the right roads, and that was again a key lesson learnt from the implementation of 20 mph. People have to support changes when they are made, and people must be consulted. Whether it's Welsh Government or local authorities, whether it's the SRN or local roads, people have to have their voices heard. So, the guidance is vital in making sure that the voice of citizens is heard loud and clear. But I think I'll go to Alison for a bit more detail on this, if I may.

Yes, sure. So, on setting local speed limits, obviously the work that's been done by local authorities at the moment is really focusing on those changes and those exemptions from 20 mph to 30 mph. So, they've been doing that following the guidance that we issued in July 2024. The setting local speed limits guidance actually deals with wider changes on speed limits beyond those 20 mph to 30 mph changes. The guidance has been delayed, based on feedback from the highways authorities that they really wanted to focus on those 20 mph changes in the first instance.

Can I just finally, for clarity, have one last question?

Quickly, please, because we have a lot of areas to cover.

The graphs we've got in our pack show that, in Wales, accidents have reduced in areas where 20 mph has been introduced, compared to England and Scotland where they have introduced zonal areas rather than statutory change. Just for clarity, would we be publishing that information as well so people can actually see those results as well, for balance?  Also, I just wanted to ask you do you think it's because it's zonal areas rather than statutory change, or do you think it's the publicity around it as well that made people aware in Wales?

It may be based—. I think all of these issues are for the independent review. I think it is important that we compare and contrast with other parts of the UK and, indeed, other parts of Europe, in terms of behavioural change and the reduction in collisions and casualties. It once was said that no publicity is bad publicity and any publicity is good publicity, so I think the public interest has promoted the need for adherence to 20 mph, and that may well have been a contributing factor to that pretty significant reduction in average speeds. It will be answered by that independent review.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you. Janet.

Morning, Cabinet Secretary. Can you update us on your review of the Active Travel (Wales) Act 2013 and outline how it will address concerns raised by Audit Wales and the Public Accounts and Public Administration Committee?

Yes, of course. Good morning, Janet. We've published this morning the review of the active travel Act. That builds on pretty extensive work already undertaken by the cross-party group, Audit Wales, as well as, of course, PAPAC. The review concludes that the law itself is sound. No change needs to be made to the law itself. We've already got the right powers, by and large. The focus is on delivery, it's on better data, it's about strengthening guidance and continued capacity building.

Okay. What's concerned me recently is, when I looked at the figures, with £216 million spent, when I asked what the percentage increase in cycling was, it was 0 per cent. Do you think there's going to be a better return when you get more information on this, and that there has been an increase?

Yes, the data is very patchy. We're going to have comprehensive data back as a result of commissioning a pretty hefty piece of assessment. The national travel data will provide us with a far clearer picture of how that money has resulted in an increase, or otherwise, of people using active travel.

I think one of the problems that we've had is that you don't get behaviour change unless you also get encouragement and information. I think some of the best examples of the encouragement and the change-of-behaviour support that has been offered has been within schools. Also, Newtown has been a pilot town for active travel. That's showing good progress. With school activities, we're seeing things like the the WOW tracker and active travel buses, effectively, being used by many schools, and that's making a big difference. It can take time to change behaviours, but, as we saw with recycling, actually, it's young people who drive the change. So, whilst it takes time, I am confident we will see more people switching to active travel.

Sorry, Janet—Julie, did you want to come in on that specifically?

Yes. Ken, I know I have mentioned this to you before, that I think that there has been quite a lot of progress made in Cardiff. I don't know whether the assessments that you're making will look definitively at different areas to see what progress is being made, but there are concerns about the feeling that the active travel that they've been able to pursue is going to be difficult in the future because of the budget, and also there were concerns that the school work that's been so great won't be able to continue. So, I don't know if you had any comments on that.

Yes, sure. I am very relaxed about the funding issue that you raised, because corporate joint committees will be determining how to spend regional transport funds and, based on regional transport plans, there are some outstanding project—active travel projects—that are contained within them. Giving that autonomy to the regions, to councils, reduces the bureaucracy and wasted time that often went into the competitive bidding process for regional transport grants before we devolved them. So, actually, it's going enhance the productivity of officials at council level.

Okay. Janet. 

What's undertaken with schools I think is phenomenal—

Sorry, Cabinet Secretary, your line's dropping off occasionally, and we're never sure whether you've finished your sentence or not. So, finish what you're saying, and then we'll move on to Janet. 

Okay, yes. The revenue for school activity, it is precious, but we are determined to maintain the support for active journeys, WOW trackers and the introduction of other innovative schemes. 

So going back, the Public Accounts and Public Administration Committee said more needs to be done on behaviour change. I've, in the past, criticised the fact that the active travel spend has been predominantly towards putting cyclists on those routes and things, and it's caused a lot of angst in Aberconwy, for instance, where we've seen on major routes, like the A470, large areas carved out for the cycle tracks that don't appear to be being used. And we've got to worry about children walking to school and back, sometimes from isolated areas, making sure those roads, lighting and everything is safe, so they feel confident in walking to and from school. How are you moving the indicator away from all that funding just being concentrated on cyclists?

Well, it's a really good question, Janet, and it was something that we reflected on very much ahead of the last financial year. As a result of that, we ensured that local transport grants for active travel were first and foremost focused on improvements in street safety—so, improving pavements, improving street lighting, introducing tactile paving to benefit those people who face the greatest challenges in life and those who are most vulnerable, and people who walk the final or first mile of a journey. 

I believe a key stick to change behaviours is you have to give people better options if you're going to have modal shift take place, and that means that you have to have solid investment in public transport. And I think franchising the bus services will make a big difference, in terms of being able to better link people's movements with the availability of buses. So, that will be part of a behavioural change acceleration that I'm hoping will take place in the coming years.

Okay. Pavement parking, so— 

Hang on, before you come on to that, Joyce, did you want to come in briefly? 

I just want to highlight an area of people feeling safe to travel independently or actively, whichever way you want to frame it, particularly through the darker times of the year, so where early morning and early evening become dark, yet people are still very much on the move. So, what conversations are you having, because it will be predominantly local authorities that look at where their lighting is and how it links up to routes, to bus routes or train routes, or places to and from work? It's about really joining it all up so that people feel safe and make the choice that you hope they will make.

Joyce, I think you're absolutely right. I think we've got a good example emerging in Flintshire, actually, of a local authority that's using the new regional transport fund to improve street lighting and also to have street lighting that costs less to the taxpayer through the use of LEDs. So, there are good examples there. We're working with councils in terms of the bus-related infrastructure. We're auditing all 23,000  bus stops and, of course, as part of the auditing of the bus stops, you also have to look at the lighting that comes with them and the movement of people to and from bus stops. So, it's very much integral to the network planning that's taken place for franchising to the work that's taken place in updating and modernising bus stops and bus shelters across Wales. And I think the degree of collaboration that's taken place between the Welsh Government, Transport for Wales and councils is pretty exceptional.

Thank you. Janet.

Pavement parking. Now, three years or so ago, I heard Mark Drakeford mention that there was a law coming through in the UK and we were going to follow it here. It's even increasingly getting worse now, because there's this big push now on housing, these small estates, and they're not facilitating or designing in their build that space is needed for the cars that are going to be used by people living in these homes. And wherever you go now, if you're partially sighted or you have hearing difficulties, it isn't safe walking in the road around cars and it's not good for mothers with pushchairs. I thought we were moving towards a model where we were going to say, 'No, it's illegal. There's no pavement parking'. We're not getting any further. When do you think you're going to bring legislation forward to completely prevent pavement parking?

Well, it's a sensitive issue because what's right in one area might not be right in every area—

Why?

Well, Janet, we've seen your party—

Carolyn is here saying, 'No, we can't'.

Let the Cabinet Secretary speak, please. We have an argument across the table here. 

No, she doesn't argue with me. Go on, Ken.

Cabinet Secretary.

We've heard people repeatedly say that we shouldn't have a blanket speed limit relating to 20 mph and 30 mph. I think we have to learn from that and recognise that a blanket ban on pavement parking would not benefit every single community, and communities are very different. Circumstances are very different from one community to the next, from one street to the next. I think the UK Government approach is absolutely right. Rather than having a blanket ban, instead the UK Government—how we can empower and enable greater enforcement to take place at a local level—are empowering local councils to enforce unnecessary obstruction of pavements. It is a huge issue in many communities, but the right solution isn't necessarily to have a blanket ban across every single community. In some areas, it would actually be quite damaging to have a pavement parking ban.

So, have you changed—? Have you done a u-turn on pavement parking? Are you looking to bring forward a model that is based on the community need, or have you done a u-turn?

Yes, it's based on UK legislation and it's based on a sensible approach that puts the communities first and ensures that decisions that are taken on a street have the input of people who live on that street.

So, when are we going to see a definitive shift, then, in that enforcement, because I haven't seen it happen yet?

Well, we need to make sure that we first of all adopt the legislative change that the UK Government are introducing. We're working with the Department for Transport to look at how we can be incorporated into that. I'll bring in Peter, perhaps, on this issue.

Yes. Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. The first thing to say is that it was a conscious choice by the Welsh Government not to prioritise this because of the capacity constraints of local authority highways officers. We have deliberately prioritised working on the 20 mph and 30 mph roads, because the corollary of not taking a blanket approach is that you need highways officers able to make judgments based upon what is right in their local areas, and so we need capacity there. That's the first point.

The second point to say is that the UK Government actually have made a move quite recently to look at this issue. The UK Government had paused the issue, similar to the Welsh Government, for a number of years. There was a consultation that was not responded to for a number of years, but, a few months ago, the DfT started to explore legislative options based upon what you might call this balanced community-led approach, and we are now talking to the DfT about whether we can work together on that, whether that is appropriate for Wales and whether the timing of that would dovetail quite neatly with the 20 mph and 30 mph changes that will have been made. I think that's the best summary, but I'm happy to go into any more detail if useful for the committee.

Peter, correct me if I'm wrong, but there's also the question about just how much of a burden would be placed on councils if a blanket ban were to be introduced in terms of then having to make exemptions, and every exemption, I think, would require a traffic regulation order, which would place a huge amount of administrative and financial burden on local authorities across Wales. I believe I'm right in that assessment.

That's correct, Cabinet Secretary.

Yeah, okay. That's—

So, what kind of—

Sorry, Peter, we're going to have to move on. I think that's a useful exchange. It's been very informative, and we appreciate that. [Interruption.] Very briefly then, because we're—

I work very closely with a group of disabled people in my constituency in Cardiff North, and one of their great concerns is pavement parking. So, I'm unsure what I say to them now. What are we going to do to—? I absolutely take the points that you make, that a blanket ban may not be the right way to go, but what am I to tell them that we're going to do, because it does cause huge problems for them?

We're going to be adopting a locally led model. So, rather than have a blanket ban imposed from Welsh Government, we're going to be enabling and empowering local authorities to introduce the measures, and we're going to be ensuring that the enforcement regime is toughened up, if you like, to guarantee that those who are causing an obstruction in areas where it shouldn't be taking place, that they are dealt with appropriately.

Yes, and when? I'm sorry.

That's the question, isn't it? Yes.

When?

And like you—

Sorry, Janet.

Well, as soon as possible.

There's emergency—

No, sorry, Janet. Sorry, everybody's had a chance. Let's hear from the Cabinet Secretary, and then we have to move on. I have to say, the quality of the lines on these calls just don't facilitate effective discussions. Cabinet Secretary.

It'll be as soon as possible, Chair, but it will be for the next Government, obviously.

There we are. Thank you. Okay, we'll move on to rail. Joyce.

We're going on the rail—

Yes, put us back on track.

—to the Railways Bill. In your legislative consent memorandum on the Railways Bill, you outline your position on a number of clauses and say,

'further engagement will be required before I am able to confirm to the Senedd the suitability of all provisions for Wales.' 

That's a quote. Can you elaborate and update us on your engagement with the UK Government?

Yes, absolutely. The engagement we've had with UK Government, with the Department for Transport, has been pretty exceptional. There has been a very significant change in terms of the tone, the responsiveness of DfT officials, and, obviously, there's been a major difference in terms of the approach taken by Ministers. Now, when the original LCM was laid, there were a number of—[Inaudible.]—needed further work before consent could be given, and we've been working really closely with DfT to amend them, and the position is being reflected in the supplementary LCM.

Particularly, you talked about three priorities in rail reform in May 2024 to the House of Commons Transport Committee on the last Government's draft railway reform, and they were full autonomy of Welsh franchise, a partnership role in managing non-devolved services, and Great British Railways accountability to Welsh Ministers. Those were your three priorities then. So, what progress has been made in developing the memorandum of understanding, and do you have any concerns about the statutory status and enforceability?

Well, I'll deal with the MOU—[Inaudible.]—to say that the MOU, supported by joint partnership agreements, is going to be vitally important, there's no doubt about it, and it's going to be required by law. Apologies if I sound like Sir Humphrey, but it would be a very, very, very brave Government to ignore something that is required by law, and the MOU and joint partnership agreements are going to be, therefore, a step change in the way that we have greater control over investment, maintenance and enhancements of the railway network. I do believe that the Bill delivers on most of what we've been asking for over many, many years. In the absence of full devolution, the importance of the MOU and joint partnership is considered to be the most effective way to get the best outcomes for passengers in Wales.

We all understand that, and you're content that progress is going in that right direction. As you say, it's understood to be legally binding. So, are you satisfied with the arrangements for working with GBR in Wales, and the accountability to Welsh institutions?

Yes. Yes, I am, and if we just take a step back, actually, I think that we've been on a journey towards—[Inaudible.]—Network Rail, TfW, for some time, and where we are today is better than we've ever had, joint working, I believe. And so, actually, having GBR established, with a business unit for Wales within GBR—an empowered business unit, empowered by the memorandum of understanding—is important and does answer a number of the asks that we've been making over many years.

Can I just come in on the memorandum of understanding specifically? Because we had evidence recently from Professor Mark Barry, and he questioned the status and the enforceability of the MOU, that that's pretty unclear, and James Price from Transport for Wales actually said that putting further detail in statute would be preferable. Do you agree?

Well, there's work still taking place; obviously, there's a huge, huge distance still to travel for the Bill—

So, are you pushing for that to be put in statute, then? Maybe I should reframe the question.

Well, obviously, we're in discussions about whether we could have it in statute, whether that would be beneficial over where we currently are, but I do think where we are right now with it—

Is that your preference? Is your preference to have it in statute rather than in the MOU?

I remain to be convinced that any Government would ignore something that is required by law, and it would be, as I say, a very, very brave Government to ignore something of this nature. However, I could be convinced that actually having it in statute, if there are key areas that would benefit the MOU, I stand to be convinced of that. But at the moment I would stress again that something that is required by law carries incredible weight, and we've just had the announcement of £14 billion of rail investment. That demonstrates, I believe, above all, how the UK Government is working in our best interests.

But Governments come and go, don't they? Putting something in statute would mean at least that you'd have an element of continuity.

Governments do come and go, and that's why having the MOU—[Inaudible.]—important, as an MOU that will outline how we are to work together, the powers that we are to have, having that be required by law puts us in a very, very strong position to have greater control.

And finally from me, are you satisfied that the Bill does provide enough safeguards for Transport for Wales rail and freight operators on access and capacity allocation by GBR?

Yes. Yes, we've always been clear that full devolution would be a very complicated process, involving a lot of major questions around finance, legacy maintenance, integration of any new arrangements into the overall structure of GB rail, but I do believe that the Railways Bill is a step in the right direction, in terms of giving us greater control and integrating track and train right across Wales.

And in terms of the provisions for freight, yes, I think we're in a really good place on this as well. I'll bring in Peter, though, just to provide a bit more on the discussions that have been taking place.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. So, TfW's access to track is going to be one of the critical parts of the MOU. I can confirm to the committee that we are hoping to publish a full draft of the MOU next month, such that it is available to both the UK Parliament and the Welsh Parliament as the Bill is going through its passage.

Chair, I'm happy to offer some reflections on the statutory status of the MOU if that's useful, but I'm conscious you may wish to move on as well.

The point for me is—. Yes, I think we would appreciate sort of digging deeper into this, because the question in my mind is: what does—? If the MOU were to be ignored, then what is there in the Bill to force a future Government to do something about it? Where's the recourse?

That's a very fair question, Chair. I think it's worth distinguishing between should the provisions of the MOU be in the Bill itself and should there be greater links between the Bill and the MOU. So, I would generally say, as a civil servant who has worked with rail for a number of years now, that I would err against putting all of the provisions of the MOU in the Bill itself. You would double, triple, quadruple the length of this legislation, and there are many things that you would want to have a bit more flexibility on than you could have if they were codified in primary legislation. So, this Bill will probably exist on the statute for decades, and if you think about the railway we have in Wales now, it was very different only five years ago. So, I would certainly advise Ministers that not—.

I think there is a separate, legitimate question about whether there should be greater statutory links between the Bill and the MOU, such as a duty to have regard to the MOU, a duty to lay it before both Parliaments, provisions such as that. And we have gone on the record to say that we welcome the views of both Welsh Parliament and UK Parliament on those links, and we will take the views of both Parliaments very seriously in that.

Okay, but maybe to the Cabinet Secretary, there's no duty to have regard to the MOU in the Bill, so, effectively, there's no duty to have regard to it, is there?

As I've said on a number of occasions now, a legal requirement to have an MOU is a very, very powerful tool to ensure that a Government takes due regard of the objectives within the MOU, and it would be pretty unprecedented for Ministers to ignore an MOU—

Or not to have regard to it. And we've seen this before, haven't we, Cabinet Secretary, with an expectation to have regard to something—you have regard to it, you listen to the argument, and you decide to do whatever you wanted to do in the first place. It's not really a safeguard, is it?

Not necessarily. As I say, I think that a requirement to have an MOU in its own right is very, very powerful and that will ensure that there's further integration of track and train across Wales.

But to have regard to it is the point. You can have an MOU—

Having regard to it—. But equally having an MOU required by law means that that MOU becomes the guiding light when it comes to decision making over rail. And, as I say, and I have said repeatedly, it would be pretty unprecedented and it would be very brave of any Minister to ignore it.

So, if it's as robust as you're saying it is, why is it that Scotland aren't settling for an MOU and have a very different approach in terms of their duties to consider their needs in the Bill?

Well, I can't answer for the Scottish Government. I'm here answering for the Welsh Government, and I'm very confident that we are heading in the right direction with this Bill, that it takes us far, far further than where we are today, and that as a result of the integration of track and train, as a result of the MOU, as a result of the business unit in GBR for Wales specifically, I think we're going to see a step change in terms of how we control the network. And there's a big difference between controlling investment, controlling the network, and owning it. I've said on a number of occasions as well that you wouldn't want to own something that is pretty decrepit, and right now it is. What we want is for the network to be upgraded and for us to have the control that's necessary over investment decisions, which will come with the business unit and come with—[Inaudible.]—rail board, which is now chaired by the chair of Transport for Wales. 

Okay, thank you. We'll move on to Delyth.

Diolch, Cadeirydd. This is very timely, Cabinet Secretary, because TfW's rail vision was published last week. Now, on that, there wasn't any extra corresponding funding that seems to have accompanied it, other than what was already announced in the spending review. Could you talk us through, please, what discussions you've had with the UK Government on future funding for this and how that will be announced? 

Yes, absolutely. I mean, it's a hugely ambitious plan for Wales and borders rail—it is about the borders too. Many of the schemes that are within that document are already in an advanced stage of development—[Inaudible.]—years. On pages, I think, 18 to 19, the 43 most advanced projects are identified. Those projects are at a point where they could attract funding from the next spending review. That next spending review is going to be taking place next summer, and it's now for the Wales rail board to identify the priorities within that list and those projects that are most shovel-ready in order to get the funding from the next comprehensive spending review.

Thank you. I appreciate what you're saying about those projects that have been developed in a bit of detail, of course, but around £10 billion of the £14 billion that has been announced is for projects or schemes that haven't been developed in as much detail. Could you talk us through how likely they are to be funded and whether the UK Government has made a firm commitment where there isn't as much development? 

That's a really good question. The answer is 'yes'. The Government has made the commitment to deliver all of the projects within the prospectus, and the Treasury calculates that to be around £14 billion, but the Treasury has been very clear that costs can vary depending on the supply chain and depending on the availability of resources. But £14 billion is their estimate and they are committed to delivering it as fast as possible. You're absolutely right that many of the projects are not at an advanced stage of development. What's crucially important is the £95 million that was announced for Wales at the last spending review by the Chancellor. That £95 million will enable us to develop those schemes, and those schemes will then be funded for use post 2029.

But we've got basically the commitment to deliver the most advanced schemes, those 43, which add up to around £4 billion to £4.5 billion, and a commitment to provide us with the development funding to work up the rest of the projects, and we've got the commitment to deliver the full package of £14 billion of rail projects. That is something that is exceptional. We've never been in this position before. And it's on top of the circa £0.5 billion that's been allocated already for rail upgrades that are taking place now. We're seeing relief lines, we're seeing the Burns stations, Padeswood, we're seeing the north Wales main line—work is taking place right now as a result of that funding. So, this is a pipeline that has the UK Government commitment, support and the promise of funding from spending reviews in the next 15 years.

Thank you for that. The reason I'm asking some of these questions is that pipelines can sometimes be blocked—forgive the pun. And considering that some of these are not guaranteed, how confident are you, please, that the schemes that would be within this £10 billion would have a benefit-cost ratio that would allow them to be selected when they are going to be competing, presumably, against other projects on an England-and-Wales basis?

That’s another excellent question. First of all, when it comes to benefit-cost ratio, the Chancellor has been very clear that we have to move away from the traditional Treasury Green Book rules if we're going to truly level up Britain. And so, we can't just depend on traditional benefit-cost ratio as the key indicator of whether a scheme is worthy of investment. There are other factors in play. I'm confident, and there's been a huge amount of work looking at both the business case but also the social benefit of these projects. So, we've not included in the vision document projects that have very good people backing them across Wales but simply are not viable or financially viable. I could identify some demands for new lines, the reopening of old lines, but I'm afraid we have to develop a realistic package of upgrades and we've done that. It's worth £14 billion and it's based on social benefit, it's based on driving economic growth and it's based on, obviously, the BCR.

I think what's important as well is to just reflect and compare and contrast what we've secured and what has been guaranteed for other areas. If we take Northern Powerhouse Rail, for example, they've secured development funding and overall provision of delivery over several comprehensive spending review periods. What we've got already is work being undertaken right now, plus the commitment to the development funding, plus the commitment to delivery, and rather than have the cap, Treasury have estimated it at £14 billion and provided a very helpful caveat that costs can change. We know that with rail, it takes longer to deliver, often, than you'd want, and it costs more than you initially expect, but you never ever regret the work once it's been completed. So, having that guarantee of funding and that estimate of £14 billion with that key caveat, I think, is incredibly important.

Thank you. And just finally from me—

Sorry, Delyth, Joyce just wants to come in with a brief supplementary and then I'll come back to you.

Thank you. The importance isn't just about the money being available, but it's about the continuum and the commitment to those people who will be delivering it in terms of employment, but also those people seeking apprenticeships and futures. So, it does two things, in my view. The build for the here and now will allow young people particularly, or people who want to retrain, a future in an area that they would not have had without a long-term vision. So, my question is about the importance of whoever the next Government is committing to delivering this very locally, because it will be local, so that those areas can see all the advantages of that commitment.

Joyce, you're absolutely right. What was quite striking last week when we visited Taff's Well was the hope and opportunity that is there now for those apprentices to work in an area of industry that is on the up. The £14 billion will provide certainty for many, many apprentices, for the huge number employed in the rail sector in Wales, for the next decade and a half or more. So, it's hugely important in terms of providing opportunity and jobs.

Just to the point that Delyth raised about pipelines sometimes getting blocked, I think key now is that we have cross-party support for the delivery of the entire prospectus, the entire vision, not just in Westminster, but also in—[Inaudible.]—when you get buy-in from across parties that you ensure projects are completed. If you look at the Elizabeth line, for example, if you look at HS1, if you look at many, many other rail-related schemes across Britain, they span multiple electoral cycles, but the case for them is so compelling, so strong, that parties, whether they're on the left, the right, or at the centre, go on supporting them. That's what's going to be very important now with 'Today, Tomorrow, Together' and that package of £14 billion of enhancements. We need to ensure that we get that cross-party agreement at Westminster and within the Senedd.

Back to Delyth, and then we'll move on.

Diolch. Just one final question from me. Because the vision hasn't been prioritised, could you talk us through when you would hope that there would be publication of a prioritised delivery schedule?

There are some priorities; it just might not be very clear from the document. There are 43 priority schemes, amounting to around £4 billion to £4.5 billion. There are also the immediate schemes that are being taken forward, which are being guaranteed funding not just within this spending period, but beyond this spending period. That includes the stations on the south Wales relief lines, for example.

In terms of the prioritisation of those 43 schemes, it'll be for the Wales rail board to determine which of those schemes are best placed to go forward first, which of those schemes relate to activity that is going to be taking place in the coming years and requires that investment—and I'll provide an example in a moment of that—and then also which of the schemes—[Inaudible.]—in what is becoming a crowded space. There is investment in rail taking place right cross Britain, and the capacity for industry to be able to deliver these schemes has to be factored in. I spoke with a number of supply chain businesses last week. They are very confident. They're really up for delivery of the whole package, but it's going to be very important that we sequence things in a way that reflects the fact that there are finite human resources available to deliver these schemes. So, it will be for the Wales rail board, who are the experts, to determine the schemes that go ahead first. 

One thing that I have pointed to this week is that, as a result of the engagement across borders, across Governments, not just with UK Government, but also with metro mayors and regional government in England, we're looking at an Olympic bid for 2040. That will obviously require schemes, particularly in Network North Wales, to be completed well in time. So, the Wales rail board will be considering these sorts of investments, that are outside of transport, but are so heavily dependent on transport upgrades. 

We'll move on to Janet for further questions, and then we'll probably look to break and see if we can sort the technical issues out.

TfW rail performance has improved recently, but from a very low baseline. What targets have you set for TfW rail performance, and how do you performance manage TfW to actually achieve these?

Peter plays an important role in performance managing TfW, so I'll bring him in in a moment. But there's also a performance board within TfW. You're right Janet, the improvements—[Inaudible.]—and the improvements have been pretty astonishing. For me, a key measure is actually how people perceive and receive the services that they experience. Trustpilot has TfW rail services now as one of the best operators, one of the most trustworthy operators in Britain; it might even be the most trusted right now. So, clearly, people are feeling better about what they experience on TfW services. 

A sub-group is being established, which is going to be holding its first meeting in, I believe, April, and they're going to look—sorry, a sub-group of TfW's board—at the key performance indicators, and whether they are fit for purpose now, and whether they continue to align with Government priorities. Because there has been recognition—and I think this point has to be made—[Inaudible.]—it has been impacted, not so much now, but in past years, by the delivery work on the metro, which has been disruptive, and the introduction of new rolling stock, which comes with teething problems. As a result of that work largely being completed, I think it's right, at this point in time, to revisit the KPIs and ensure that they're fit for purpose. 

Thank you. TfW have told us there's no target for subsidy as a share of revenue for TfW rail, but suggested you could set one. Have you considered this, and, if not, how do you performance manage TfW on subsidy levels for rail and value for money?

As I say, I think it's going to be important for that sub-group to look at this. We could introduce—

Sorry, Ken, when were they set up? When was the sub-group set up?

The sub-group is meeting in April this year. 

Oh, it hasn't actually—. Right, okay. 

It's a new sub-group that's been established for this purpose, and it's going to be meeting in April. I would say, first and foremost, though, be careful what you wish for, because nearly every TfW service that currently operates requires a public subsidy. If targets are focused solely on financial efficiency, then what you would end up with is services on the Conwy valley line, the Heart of Wales line, the Cambrian line, being stripped out, because—

Oh, no; we can't have that. 

And that's why I say be careful what you wish for—

Exactly. 

—when you talk about the subsidy level. This isn't unique to Wales. If you look across Europe, public transport is subsidised, and that's because people see public transport as a public service. So, I think it's really important we don't just look at the subsidy in isolation. We need to also consider factors such as rurality, the risk of isolation, the lack of other means of getting from A to B. But, obviously, the subsidy is very important in terms of making sure that services are affordable, and so I think, again, now is the right time to look at it. But one thing I would urge any future Government not to do is to place too fine a focus on the subsidy alone.

That's a fair point, and I understand exactly what you're saying, Cabinet Secretary, but the fact remains that, under Arriva Trains Wales, subsidy was 39 per cent of turnover. Under TfW now, in the last couple of years, it was 60 per cent of total revenue. So, there's been a huge uplift in subsidy, hasn't there? I know there's a reason for that, but what we're looking for is signals that that is now going to decrease over time, isn't it?

Yes, but we've also seen during that time a vast increase in the number of services. So, if you're providing more services, which require more subsidy, you're obviously going to see the subsidy level increase as a whole. But, you're right, you need to reach the point then when you plateau. When you have a service provision that is stable then, at that point, you want to make sure that you at least plateau out on the subsidy, if not reduce it through increasing patronage. Now, we've seen patronage on TfW services increase considerably in recent times. I believe that the figure over the last year is something in the region of 10 per cent. That is a huge increase. But, as I say, we've increased services quite considerably since we took over the contract in 2018 and, as a result, subsidy has had to increase as well. You can't provide more services, by and large, if you're a train operator, unless you're providing more subsidy.

And my final one, and this is quite a worrying one: TfW expects a rolling stock shortfall within five years. What action—? How are you planning for that now?

Well, they've got a long-term rolling stock plan and, crucially as well, they've also got a plan for the depots. Because it's all very well and good talking about increasing the number of trains that you've got; you've got to have more depots as well if you're going to vastly increase your total number of trains. I think we've got a really good record in this space. When we took over in 2018, we only had 270 carriages, and we'll soon have 485. That's a massive increase.

What was that number again? Sorry, what was that number you've just said, the last number?

It was 270 trains in 2018, and we will soon have 485 as a result of the £800 million we've spent.

Thank you.

Okay, because TfW gave us a different—

And I've asked—

Sorry. TfW didn't give us that confidence that they were sighted on the plan, moving forward, in terms of increasing stock in order to meet the demand.

Well, I think, as a result of—. I've asked them to begin work on a procurement plan for additional trains to service Gobowen station and also additional trains as a result of network north Wales. I anticipate that, whilst it's at an early stage and they can't provide that much clarity about future need, they are at least in a position now where they are formulating the longer term plan for both trains and depots.

Okay. You responded, obviously, to our draft budget report recently and, in your response, you said that, in light of the UK Government decision to freeze rail fares—. Options to freeze some or all Transport for Wales rail fares are currently under consideration, I think you said in response to our report. So, what conclusions have you reached on that?

Okay, Chair, I can tell you that I've got a ministerial submission on my desk about this. So, I'll be announcing imminently what we're going to do with fares.

Okay. Soon, therefore, I presume.

Days—a matter of days. 

Days, okay. There we are. There we are. So, we're having that announcement after this scrutiny session, and we had the publication of the active travel review as we were sitting down for this meeting. At least things are happening, albeit not, maybe, in time for us to scrutinise you on them. But there we are, that's positive.

Okay, we'll take a short break now then. I think there are issues with the line, Cabinet Secretary, and I've been told it might take 15 minutes to try and sort those out. So, we will break for 15 minutes, on the basis that you are okay to stay with us for an extra 10 minutes or so. Yes.

Absolutely, Chair, yes.

There were are. Okay, we'll break for 15 minutes then, and we'll look to start again at 10:50. Diolch.

We'll move straight on to the next area of questioning, which is around bus reform. I'll invite Carolyn to lead us into this.

Thank you, Chair. What progress has the Welsh Government made on its own responsibilities, as distinct from those of Transport for Wales, in delivering the Bus Services (Wales) Act 2026, particularly in relation to developing the secondary legislation required to bring the Act fully into operation?

Thanks, Carolyn. It's exciting work that's taking place. I'll perhaps bring in Alex, who is superb, and has been leading on this particular area of activity. Alex and her team have been working on the secondary legislation, actually, for some time. Perhaps Alex can just talk us through some of the priority areas, including Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 contracts and information. Alex.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. Yes, we have been working on secondary legislation for some time. There are multiple sets of regulations being developed, and, as you'd expect, we're working very closely with Transport for Wales, as well as wider partners, to make sure that those are all fit for purpose. We're looking at the regulations in order of priority. And one of the ways we're prioritising those regulations is based on their importance for procurement activities to commence.

So, as the Cabinet Secretary has said, we'll be initially focusing on TUPE contracts and information, and, obviously, lots of proactive engagement with lots of stakeholders. Just yesterday, we had a workshop, hosted alongside Transport for Wales, on the TUPE regulations with trade union and operator representatives, which took us a good deal of steps forward. And we are developing a full timetable for the regulations, taking into account all of the different stages—so, development, consultation, Senedd procedures. There are lots of different bits to factor into this, but that is very much in development and should be concluded soon.

Thank you. You told us in November that significant investment in the bus fleet is needed—that would be capital required. So, you're assuming additional capital funding of around £60 million a year. Do you agree with this figure and is it affordable, do you think?

Yes, and yes. I would urge any future Government to prioritise capital investment in bus-related services. Not just the buses, but also the depot—[Inaudible.] We have at the moment, I believe, around about 1,300 buses operating across Wales, and it's the oldest fleet of buses in Britain. So, we need to do with buses what we did with rail: take one of the oldest fleets and make it one of the newest. And that is going to require heavy investment—£60 million sounds around about right. And the budget for 2026-2027 demonstrates that we are heading in the direction. There's been an increase in budget for bus of around 60 per cent. So, it's now reached just short of £50 million, so £60 million, I think, sounds reasonable.

And, as I say, it's not just about the buses and modernising the fleet, it's also about making sure that we've got the right depots and the right standard of depots—depots that work for the workforce. It was quite striking, when I went to Transport for Greater Manchester, that the quality of a depot is very significant indeed in terms of staff well-being. So, investment needs to go into the depots and into electrifying them as well so that we can operate more electric buses.

Just regarding depots, I know, when we visited Manchester, they took over the depots, but, in Wales, I know some of the operators are hoping that it might be different in Wales and not all depots need to be taken over. Could you confirm that that is the case?

Yes. That's absolutely the case, Carolyn. Yes. That is the case.

Okay. Thank you. At Stage 3, you supported an amendment adding an objective to remove barriers that disincentivise bus use and said you would look to align the regional transport plan delivery and funding with the bus network plan and support delivery of bus priority measures. So, what steps have you taken to do this?

So, as a result of that pledge, corporate joint committees were explicitly directed that their regional transport plans be improved and strengthened in regards to the bus network. I'm really pleased to say that they responded. All of them responded very well indeed. They've all identified projects that directly support better bus services, projects such as new transport interchanges, bus priority measures, improved passenger facilities, better bus stops, and, of course, the introduction of new and enhanced services. We can provide you, if you wish, with a briefing note on some specific examples. There's one in Swansea that I think you'd be very interested in that is technology-driven, but I can provide a further note on the measures that have been, or the projects that have been, included.

It's been raised with me about real-time data being available. So, I heard earlier that all the bus stops are being assessed at the moment. When are you hoping to have that real-time data available for people hoping to use a bus service? That would be really useful if you do have that.

It is. It is, and we're looking at—. Well, the work has already commenced, actually, on a 'single point of truth', an app, a TfW app, that will cover rail and bus services, and that will provide exactly, as you say, that real-time data.

Thank you. That'd be really useful. How will community transport services operate outside the Act's framework and be supported once franchising has been implemented?

Okay. Well, I've been very clear, I think: the Government will maintain its support for community transport services—vitally important, particularly in rural Wales. We've established a task and finish group, and that is examining the most effective and appropriate mechanism for funding community transport. On that task and finish group, we've got the CTA, the Community Transport Association, Transport for Wales obviously were on it, and some councils. It's going to be a decision, I guess, for the next Government as to the quantum, the amount, of money that is provided to community transport. But I did feel it was vitally important that we co-produce the mechanism for supporting community transport, and that's exactly what the task and finish group is doing.

Okay, thank you. 

Thank you very much. Janet.

Thank you. Can you update the committee on progress in delivering the 15 recommendations of the Wales-Ireland sea connectivity taskforce, particularly those relating to crisis response arrangements, contingency planning and highways resilience measures?

Well, I think, as a result of the taskforce, we've not only been able to improve the response to events, but we've also been able to examine in great detail the resilience of the transport network, the key corridors, particularly the A55, the Menai crossing. That in turn is being considered in the resilience work that's taking place right now on the A55, Menai crossing, Conwy tunnels, roundabouts, all of the pinch-points, all of the barriers along the A55. So, that's been really valuable for informing broader work.

In terms of the recommendations, obviously, we've published those, and there are different, if you like, owners for the recommendations. What we've now asked is that each of those owners report back to us on a six-monthly basis.

Okay. You mentioned the A55 and gridlock and everything. As you know, junctions 16, 17—or it could be 15, 16; those two junctions, anyway, that have been problematic—£9 million was in the scoping study, which recommended, unless they were removed, it would remain dangerous on there. People are raising this with me all the time. Outside this meeting, can we discuss that at some stage, Cabinet Secretary?

I'm very happy to discuss that. And also, if it helps, I'm very happy to put yourself and any Members in touch with the experts that are carrying out that resilience work. 

Okay, thanks. So, now, twice, very recently, we've seen disruption to the ports, and damage and everything. Now, we know that the climatic conditions are changing all the time, but what do you believe—? On the 2026 Holyhead port closure, how different was that to the 2024-25 disruption? Did this change as a result of the work of the taskforce?

Yes, I—[Inaudible.]—principally, in terms of communication. The communication in this latter event was far, far better than it was in Christmas of the year before last. The method by which we communicated, the speed of communication, the clarity of detail was exceptional. It felt like groundhog day when I first heard about the incident, but, actually, within hours, it was very clear that it was a very different incident, that it would not be severe in terms of its impact. I think all of the stakeholders, all of the partners that have been on the taskforce, and continue to contribute, were very satisfied with the way that the work, the communication, the response was undertaken.

My final point: is there work going on to try and prevent rather than react—a proactive approach to try and prevent these situations arising in the first place?

Yes. Actually, it's very difficult in some regards, because, if there's human error involved, then that relates to training, and it relates to those who are actually on the ships, on the vessels, or it might relate to people who are at the port, but it largely relates to the training of individuals. But, all the time, I know that the port operator is looking at how to futureproof the port in terms of climatic change. So, it is happening, yes.

Thank you.

Okay. Julie, on to you for one question.

When will the joint maritime, ports and freight strategy be published, what will be in it, and how will it align with the conclusions of the taskforce?

Well, the taskforce recommendations have been integral to the work in developing the plan. I'm pleased to say that it's going to be published before the end of this term so that it's there ready for consideration by future Governments.

Thank you.

Before we come on to another section, can I just pick up on another issue as well? There were plans for a taxi and private hire vehicle reform Bill. That was removed from the legislative programme in 2024, but there were promises on more than one occasion that a draft Bill would be published. Why has that not been brought forward?

I'll bring in, I think it may be, Peter on this. But, in terms of the delay, I just think that the amount of work that was taking place across Government in terms of legislation was so, so considerable that there wasn't space, unfortunately, and we had to make some difficult decisions about what to take forward. My preference was the bus Bill, because of the scale of change that it would deliver and the benefits.

So, was it an—

But we are—. Sorry.

Sorry, Cabinet Secretary. So, was it an oversight when the original legislative programme was published, then, because, obviously, it was intended, as was the bus Bill. Should it not have been realised at that point, maybe, that capacity would have been stretched?

I think it was overly optimistic to believe that we could take forward the taxi and private hire Bill as well as the bus Bill. These pieces of legislation are so, so significant in terms of the requirement on officials that I do believe that it was overly optimistic to think that we could take both through.

Okay. Peter, did you want to add to that?

I think the Cabinet Secretary has summarised. The bus Bill was a landmark Bill. It took more of our capacity, time, care and attention than we initially envisaged, as you say—perhaps ambitious a couple of years ago. We've therefore prioritised that Bill, but also the secondary legislation that we've just discussed, and we are working on non-legislative taxi measures until we're able to have the capacity to bring primary legislation to the Senedd on taxis specifically.

Fine. So, is it fair to say that there's no work happening in that space at the minute, then, is there?

There is work happening at the moment on non-legislative taxi measures, which would support a Bill when the capacity arises to bring one to the Senedd.

Okay. Diolch yn fawr iawn. Thank you so much.

Can I just ask on that?

Yes, please, Julie.

I've had quite a few difficult situations where disabled people have had problems with taxis. Is this something that you're looking at in the non-legislative stuff you're doing?

Indeed it is, yes. This is one of the key concerns that's been raised with us as well. So, we are looking at how we can improve the training of taxi and private hire vehicle operators to ensure that disabled people don't face the sort of challenges that are well recorded in the media.

And do taxis come under Transport for Wales now in any way?

They're not the responsibility of Transport for Wales. This remains a Welsh Government policy area.

Right.

Okay. Thank you. Right, we'll move on now to the wider transport decarbonisation agenda, and Julie has questions first.

Thanks. Yes, I was going to ask about transport decarbonisation. So, could you tell us what progress has been made against the decarbonisation targets, particularly zero-emission buses and taxis, reducing private car mileage and increases in travel by sustainable modes?

There's quite a bit to unpack there. So, I'll begin by saying, perhaps, that progress has been patchy in some areas. We've made, I think, very good progress, particularly on zero-emission buses now operating in a lot of areas. Less progress has been made in relation to taxis and private hire vehicles, and also less progress has been made in terms of modal shift. We've already discussed the challenge with behavioural change.

In terms of taxis and private hire vehicles, and indeed heavy vehicles, what has become apparent is that Wales, because we're less affluent than many parts of the UK, has vehicles cascading down. This applies to heavy vehicles, it applies to taxis, it applies to private hire vehicles, it also applies to private motoring as well—that we effectively buy more used cars, used vans, used lorries than many other parts of the UK. So, a key component of the drive towards net zero will be the cascading of electric vehicles, and that will be determined by factors beyond our control. But I am confident that with the rapid pace of development of EV technology, we will see a larger uptake of EVs, and therefore we will see a greater cascading down of EVs as well, which will be more affordable to people in Wales, so we'll see more people opting for those, rather than cars with an internal combustion engine. And then the mandate that is UK wide is a key factor as well. The targets on new electric vehicles by 2030 are crucially important, and then, in turn, that cascading, as I've already mentioned, of existing EVs.

Thank you. The Climate Change Committee's advice for carbon budget 4 modelled a 48 per cent reduction in surface transport emissions by 2033. How can that be achieved? 

Well, it's a very ambitious target. It's a hugely ambitious target, and I think already, in terms of legislation, the target for 70 per cent of all vans to be zero emission by 2030 and 80 per cent of all new cars to be zero emission by 2030 will play an enormous role in attempting to reach this target. And as I've already said, it's not just about the new cars that are coming in; it's about the cascading of recent electric vehicles across the entire spectrum of purchasers.

So, that will make a very significant difference and very quickly as well, because when you have an enormous switch to EV in a very short space of time, you have an enormous market for sales and you also have the demand for it as well. So, I think that will make a very big difference, but it's going to be towards 2033 where I think we see the most dramatic reduction in carbon.

Thank you.

There we are. Okay. Janet. 

Thank you. The 2021 electric vehicle charging strategy for Wales set a vision that, by 2025, all users of electric cars and vans in Wales are confident that they can access electric vehicle charging infrastructure when and where they need it. Now, my question is has this been achieved, but whenever I've put an FOI in, I'm not getting very positive results back for how many chargers the Welsh Government have put in. Your paper says it is highly unlikely that the 30,000 fast charge points by 2030 will be met. The strategy said we need 30,000 to 55,000 fast chargers to be available in Wales by 2030. How many do you now believe Wales will have by 2030 and what impact will the shortfall have?

Well, Janet, I think that strategy is now redundant for a number of reasons: advances in technology, one; the advent of super-fast charging, two; and the likelihood that cars, electric vehicles, are going to go on having an increased range as well. So, when that strategy was penned, we really didn't have many ultra-fast charging points. I'm not sure we had any. But now we're seeing quite a considerable increase in the installation of ultra-fast charging points.

Are they private ones, like by petrol companies or businesses, or are they Welsh Government-funded ones? 

No, this is the private sector that's intervening. One thing that I find quite fascinating is the demand for public funding to be used for electric charging points, and yet nobody would ever think about Governments building petrol stations.

Exactly. I've thought about that, yes.

So, the key thing really, Janet, is that we don't need to have 30,000 of these charging points now, because ultra-fast charging enables EVs to be charged in 15, 20 minutes. It means that, actually, you can get a far higher throughput of vehicles through them, so you don't have to have as many. Gone are the days where you'd have to wait for an hour or two at a charging point for somebody to get charged and move on. The latest Jaguar that's going to be, I think, sold from the end of this year, the 00 one—

Yes, I bet you're having one of those.

I'd love to, thank you. But, in all seriousness, that's likely to have a real-world range of 450 miles and you'll be able to charge 200 miles in just 15 minutes. So, the need for more charging points is going to be reduced. Also, because the range of vehicles is increasing all the time, it's more likely that people will just charge at home, and they'll do that for an obvious reason: that it's cheaper—it's a lot cheaper. So, the key thing for us is ensuring that those properties that have traditionally not been suitable for charging points can have charging points installed. And the big, big challenge is with terraced streets. So, that's why it's so important that we support those councils that are investigating what's called cross-pavement charging solutions. That's happening right now and we're supporting them in the delivery of them.

Can I just ask, then—? If, as you said, the 2021 strategy is redundant, what's the new strategy? What's driving Welsh Government thinking in this space?

It's largely about a new vision, looking at the future rather than trying to base the future on a plan—

Sure. So, where's that captured?

—that's no longer fit for purpose. So, we're working with industry, with councils, largely on interventions that relate to stuff like cross-pavement charging, rather than basing our work on a vision or a strategy from 2021, which is just not fit for 2026.

Sure, but how is that action co-ordinated, then? Is it a bit sporadic and, where there's a positive response, you will go there? Or is there some sort of collated approach that you're driving forward as a Government? 

Shall I bring in Alison on this, who is in charge of strategy? 

Sure. Alison.

We will be looking at co-ordinated measures through the next carbon budget 4 plan. Also, we've been working with the corporate joint committees in the development of their regional transport plans. So, the local authorities can put forward suggestions for funding for where they think that charging infrastructure is needed, and they have submitted their draft funding programmes to us. That was in January, so we're looking at those. That's one way that funding for charging is targeted through the Welsh Government, but we are also eagerly waiting our national travel survey results as well, which will give us a much richer picture of where people are able to access electric vehicles, and will give us a greater position to set out a new strategy for electric vehicle charging infrastructure.

It used to be that, back when I was last in this job, I'd get huge amounts of correspondence about EV charging points, and I don't think I've had one in the last six months. It'd be really interesting just to know whether you as Members have had constituents raise range anxiety and a perceived lack of EV charging points.

No, there doesn't seem to be much here. 

That's reassuring. Thank you.

Janet.

Thanks. The CCC's carbon budget 4 advice recommended planning policies and funding models that better support EV charging infrastructure in Wales. Is Wales falling behind on this in comparison to England? 

I would acknowledge that with England having already introduced regulation around EV charging points, they have made further progress than us. But we recently completed our own consultation on similar regulatory changes. Obviously, we're reviewing the responses at the moment, but once they've been introduced, I would hope that we would catch up. But I do acknowledge that with England introducing new regulations first, they have made progress faster. 

Thank you. 

Carolyn.

Thank you. I've already asked you questions about the major asset renewal programme and the strategic road network, because it highlights a maintenance backlog of £1.4 billion, but you are trying to address that now going forward, which is good. But can I just touch on the nature recovery action plan for the strategic road network? One was published in October 2023 with priorities described as ongoing or scheduled for completion by 2025. Can you update us on delivery of the plan, how it's evaluated and what will come next? I did see that our trunk road agencies do try and plan for nature at the same time when they're doing restoration works, making sure that those verges incorporate biodiversity elements, which is really good to see. That's what I'm touching on. So, when we're doing those structural highway works, that we incorporate tree planting and biodiversity at the same time. So, just touching on that, please.

Yes, absolutely. I'll bring in, perhaps, Peter in a moment, but just to say that in this financial year, we've allocated £3.5 million to deliver projects on the ground relating to biodiversity and restoring nature along the SRN and the wider road network. So, the investment is taking place, and we also work with colleagues—[Inaudible.]—department and also with NRW to ensure that where we're carrying out work, we're maximising opportunities to enhance the natural environment and promote biodiversity. But, Peter, can I just bring you in for a moment regarding evaluation? 

I think that's a good question, Cabinet Secretary. I'm very happy to take that away. We certainly see nature recovery as one of the successes of the strategic road network. What I think I would say is we've had some success changing the culture of the engineering sector in terms of appreciating that you can do some quite low-cost interventions on the soft estate whilst you are doing the more traditional road maintenance and asset renewal. So, I wouldn't want to underplay that culture change angle, as well as the scheme delivery angle. But that's something we'll happily go away and reflect on.

I think also the guidance to councils in relation to, I think, the environment Act is important. I believe that there's a duty that requires councils to maintain and promote biodiversity as far as possible when it comes to developing schemes and working on roads. So, they do actually have that duty under the Act, and that is driving change.

I was going to touch on the local road network and the local transport grants, such as when we've done safer routes in the community or highway safety schemes, improving junctions, active travel—ensuring that those local authorities incorporate planting for nature. Because, very often, like you say, it's that behaviour change. So, you'll get highway department contractors coming in and doing that hard work and then landscaping just with grass seed and not talking to the biodiversity officers. So, it would be really good to hear from you that an element of those grants would be to ensure that they are mindful of the environment Act and talk to the ecologists and biodiversity officers to make sure that those schemes are incorporated. Please, if we can seek that reassurance from you. Thank you.

Absolutely. We've got that £3.5 million that's being allocated this financial year. How about we go away and then report back on options for spending that in terms of the potential inclusion of enhancing biodiversity along local roads? I can't give you a detailed answer today, but I think it's a really good question that we need to respond to. Collaboration is the key, I think. Collaboration across councils, Welsh Government, TfW and NRW is vitally important in making sure that best practice is promoted. But in terms that financial allocation, we'll look at that £3.5 million and determine whether at least part of that should be used to promote biodiversity on local roads.

Thank you. On the strategic road network, just leaving it and not putting good soil down is enough to improve biodiversity, believe it or not, because they like bad soil. That's just my knowledge of it. Thank you.

Diolch yn fawr. Thank you. Julie.

Thank you. The Climate Change Committee identified data gaps on non-devolved rail infrastructure and said a notable bit is the flood risk. Are you satisfied that these issues are being addressed effectively by Network Rail and the UK Government?

Yes, I am. This is one of the most important areas of work at the moment for Network Rail and for TfW as well. We've got the core Valleys lines. It's a major concern of ours, climatic change and the impact that it has on services, on infrastructure. Network Rail, likewise—millions upon millions of pounds of money has been spent over numerous years on the Conwy valley line because of flooding. We've also seen challenges at Welshpool as well, embankment washouts due to flooding.

Network Rail have established now a dedicated and really well resourced weather resilience and climate adaptation team. That team is, as I said, very well resourced, very well experienced as well in this area, and we're working with them through TfW to assess the most vulnerable parts of the network and what has to be done in the near term to secure it.

The key thing here as well is that we collaborate with local authorities and with other stakeholders, because there are going to be sections of the rail network where, if you can futureproof it against flooding, you're also going to be benefiting housing estates, roads, and so forth. So, working with councils, and with Network Rail and TfW, to ensure that those projects require combined input and get the buy-in from all of the delivery partners.

I can give you an example, if you want, on the Cambrian line, the section between Machynlleth and Porthmadog, there's clearly a need for improved sea defences to protect the rail line, but also improved sea defences there would protect homes as well, and roads. So, a joined-up approach makes sense, and that's why working together collaboratively is so important.

Thank you very much.

Joyce.

There are, Cabinet Secretary, lots of players in this field: the Crown Estate, the landholders, the local authorities; the ones I can think of off the top of my head, and others that I don't know about, probably. But the point here is that the solutions aren't singular.

I asked this question about 15 years ago, about looking at surface water flooding that is affecting railways. You weren't the Minister then, but the point is a real point. You have got many solutions, and they are not all hard solutions. You can utilise the land to divert some of the water if you have an agreement along those marshes lines.

We know the problems. What we need to do now is look at the solutions. We can hardly do anything—or very little—about those on the coast, and we've seen what happened in Dawlish this last month. Despite all the hard infrastructure that went in there quite recently, it breached it again. So, it's the comprehensive work that I'd be interested in.

Yes, you are absolutely right, Joyce. I should have mentioned this, sorry. A route-wide review has been completed by Network Rail covering all embankments exposed to flood risk. That has then led to a pipeline of interventions being developed. That's there now; it's ready to be worked on.

Also, I think that it has to be said that we've got incredible collaboration across different routes. We have route teams that act as one team now—TfW and Network Rail. They work hand in hand, as with one of the teams recently on the Heart of Wales line, and you wouldn't know the difference between TfW and Network Rail.

That's something that is relatively new, because in the past, they would work in isolation. Not now; they work together. Both TfW and Network Rail are absolutely conscious—they are very, very conscious—of the need to make sure that investment is channelled into those areas where there is a proven need to protect the rail lines.

Can I ask a final question? I'm going back to roads now. We can all see that the weather has changed, and it's causing huge problems with potholes. I'm just interested to know—well, quite a few things. Basically, the material that's being used is clearly not fit for purpose, because it is being breached repeatedly. Also, when we are looking at any significant improvement, are we looking at permeable surfaces, so that the water won't be returning quite so quickly?

This is really interesting, Joyce, because my second oldest brother is a road engineer and recently gave me a really, really interesting—I won't say lecture—download of intelligence on road surfaces. I also recently attended the Road Surface Treatments Association's conference in Wrexham. It's unbelievable, the science that goes into road surfaces and maintaining roads.

I think that it would be better if I was to follow this up with a note about what we use as a material. We call it 'dragon mix', and it's far more durable over time. But I think that it would be very helpful if I was to just provide a briefing for the committee on the impact of climate change on the road network and what we're doing to protect it longer term. 

Thank you.

Yes, that would be very useful. Okay, and there we are, I think. That brings us to the conclusion of this scrutiny session. Can I thank you, Cabinet Secretary, and your officials, for being with us today? But also, given that this is the last time that you're appearing before this committee in this Senedd, can I also thank you for your engagement with the committee and, more generally, for the work that you've done as Cabinet Secretary? On behalf of committee members, I'm sure that we'd all wish to wish you well with whatever comes in future.

We will as a committee correspond with you, picking up on some of the issues that have been raised today, and you just mentioned that in concluding there. We'd obviously welcome notes and briefings that you've offered to provide us from this morning. You'll be sent a draft transcript of this meeting to check for accuracy. But with that, we sincerely thank you for the work that you've done. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Diolch yn fawr iawn. Diolch.

Thank you.

The committee will continue with our meeting, then, as the Cabinet Secretary and his officials leave us.

You will see that item 3 is papers to note; there are a number of papers to note. I would just draw your attention to the first one in particular, which is correspondence around the deposit-return scheme. Clearly, there is no time left in this Senedd for us to do a particular piece of work on this, which I'm sure we would have preferred to have been able to do, but maybe we can correspond with the Cabinet Secretary, asking a few questions and making a few points along the lines of previous points that we've made as a committee. I'm sure Members will understand that, with just two meetings left, which are already accounted for in terms of business, it is difficult for us to do any additional work on that front. Delyth, you want to come in. Thank you.

I just want to support what you're saying there, Chair. I agree that, obviously, the time is against us, but if we could write to raise this with the Government and to raise the concerns that we've raised in the past as well, and our aspirations for it, that would be useful, please.

Yes. Carolyn.

I'm a member of the cross-party group on fly-tipping and littering, and we met last night. They said that timing is really important to make sure that this is all part of the legislation that gets through in time, otherwise it could cause great disruption.

Okay. Well, what we'll do is we'll make sure that our correspondence reflects our previous view on this, to make sure that there is consistency, rather than open it all up again to a wider discussion, because obviously time pressures mean that that's not really practical at this point.

Okay.

Diolch yn fawr. So, we'll note all the papers then, if Members are happy, and we'll also then move into private session.