Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru

Good morning. Welcome to the Economy, Infrastructure and Skills Committee. I move to item 1. We have one apology this morning from Helen Mary Jones. So, I move to item 2. If there are any declarations of interest, please do say so now. 

I move to item 2, and we have a number of letters to note: 2.1 is a letter from myself to the Minister for the Economy and Transport regarding skills partnerships. And then 2.2 is a letter from the Minister regarding skills partnerships. It's dated the day after, although I should point out that it is not in direct response to our letter, so we're still awaiting a letter in reply to our initial letter. So, 2.3 is a letter from the chief executive of the Development Bank of Wales regarding annual scrutiny, and 2.4 is further information from the Minister for Economy and Transport following our session on the draft budget; he agreed to get back regarding a few points. And 2.5 is our letter to the Chair of the Committee on Assembly Electoral Reform. So, are Members happy to note those papers? Thank you. 

So, I move to item 3, and this is with regard to the South East Wales Transport Commission. This morning we have Lord Burns and Peter McDonald with us. Lord Burns is leading the commission, and Peter McDonald is the lead secretariat. So, I'd like to welcome you both warmly to committee this morning. I know Members have got a series of questions, but it's very much in your hands if you want to provide us with an initial opening briefing.

Thank you very much, Chairman. I'll keep it reasonably short. It was in June—shortly before, a few days before, the M4 announcement—that I was asked by the First Minister to undertake this task. Peter was appointed as the lead civil servant in September but because of the summer holidays and various other things, it wasn't really until October that the other seven members of the commission were appointed. Since then, we've had four meetings. Generally, we've had our meetings in Newport, although we had one on a roundabout on the M4 where they run the traffic for the area—junction 32 I think it was.

The remit, of course, is to research and recommend ways to tackle congestion on the M4 in south-east Wales. I think the most important thing, from my point of view, is to be clear that, in agreeing to chair the commission, the only requirement I had was that we should not re-examine the First Minister's decision to reject the black route. As far I was concerned, the Minister had made a clear decision, and I did not wish to reopen it, and therefore the purpose of the commission is to look at genuine alternatives to that, and to compare them with the status quo, rather than comparing them with what might have been the case with the black route. So, it is—

On that, what if, from your work, you considered that the black route was the ultimate option—as a result of your work? 

Well, we won't be going down that route—

Okay.

—because, any comparison—. And when we evaluate the measures that we are looking at, and the work that we do, we will be wanting to compare the effects of those measures with what would happen if nothing was done. It's up to other people if they then wish to compare that with what they believe to have been the effects of the black route. I felt that (a), within the time frame, it was not really possible to actually get into that, and furthermore, it would simply reopen a very difficult area, whereas what I'm concerned with is how we can look at—and this was the question I was asked and the remit that we were given—other measures that could help the situation, compared with what it would otherwise be with no interventions. 

Could I just ask as well, were you happy with the remit that was provided to you?

Yes, indeed. As I say, as far as I was concerned, it was actually critical to being able to do this job that it was sufficiently ring-fenced in that way. Because to simply go back through the debate about alternative measures versus the black route was going to go down a route that had been explored over a long period, and we've taken a rather different approach to that.

The idea, you know—. I was attracted to the idea of doing a study to see to what extent it was possible to look at other ways of improving the situation, recognising, of course, that there are problems. What we've done, I may say, is that we've approached this in a rather different way, which was to start by looking in detail at the whole traffic patterns on the M4: where it is that people are joining; where it is they're leaving; where their destination is; which segments of the road have got what amount of traffic on them; what the speed levels are; what the difference is between morning and—you know, between peak times, the commuter times, and other times of the day. And it turns out that there were differences in patterns, for example, between Monday to Thursday, compared to Friday, which is a special day, and Saturday and Sunday, which have a very different pattern to what happens on Monday to Thursday. 

So, we've spent a lot of time trying to find where the tension is—what is the cause of the congestion? It turns out to be really quite complicated, as I say. It's different whether you're going east or west. It's different if you're in the morning and in the evening. It's different from day to day, and particularly different during weekends and other times. 

Out of this comes, to us, a very clear picture that one of the real difficulties—and the congestion is, to a significant degree, a symptom of a lack of alternative transport options and, for many people, not only the most common way of getting to work is travelling by road, but for many people, there is no alternative or convenient way of getting to and from work, other than by car. It also turns out—well, it's not entirely surprising—that Cardiff, Newport and Bristol are the three key destinations. If you look at the traffic in the morning going from east to west, between junctions 24 and 29, for example, some two thirds of that traffic are people who are travelling to Newport or Cardiff. Of the rest of it, about half of it is going to the eastern Valleys or the central Valleys, and another part of it is going to other parts of Wales. But the morning and evening pressure is very heavily a commuter problem; it is not an issue of people travelling long distances from east to west or west to east across the M4. During the mid morning, after the commuter problem, the road seems to, for most of the time, actually manage pretty well.

I think Oscar Asghar just wanted to ask a point.

[Inaudible.]—Lord Burns, what you're saying there, but do you travel on weekends on those roads and there are sporting events, especially football, rugby and all these national and international events? There's a heck of a chock-a-block. I live in Newport, and I know, for the last at least six or seven years, there were hopes built and hopes dashed and everything. What the preferred black route was—actually, Welsh Government bought the land and property on that route, so why was it just abandoned or why was there no alternative given, because traffic is not coming down, it's actually going up?

So, the question is about what you've looked at in terms of the weekend and congestion, especially as a result of sports events and larger events.

Well, I think we know that it's—on weekends, there's a very different pattern, first of all, to the weekdays, where the peak time for travelling on a normal weekend is midday, really, rather than peaking in the morning and in the afternoon. Of course, the sporting events are very difficult to cope with. We've still got more work to do on this, but we're spending a lot of time on this issue of trying to identify where the pressure points are, what the times are, and try from that to begin to ask, 'What are the ways of alleviating that pressure—alternative ways?'

The second thing I want to point out is, of course, we published a document in December when we suggested some fast-track measures. That was part of our remit, it wasn't something that we actually chose to do—

But you were happy with the remit.

Well—

Or would you have preferred something different?

No, what happened was—the only thing that was tough, actually, was that we didn't get the commission up and running until the October, and we were asked to get something done by December.

Just on that point, it does seem it took quite a bit of time to get that commission set up. What was the delay in getting that commission set up? I say that in the context, given that you had a very tight deadline to report by the end of the year.

If you recall, of course, there were a lot of other issues that were—. I suppose it was some time in June, wasn't it, that I was approached on this? Before we knew where we were, really, and when we'd only mapped out in outline the terms of reference, we were into the summer holidays, and we couldn't complete it until we had the secretariat set up, which took place when Peter joined us. It then was a process that we had to go through, because the appointments were the appointments of the Minister, but it was obviously done in consultation with me, and getting the people, getting them settled and making the choices once we'd got back after the summer holidays—I'm afraid it's just a normal thing that happens in Government.

And you were happy with the other commissioners that were appointed—the commission?

Yes, very. I was fully involved in the choice of them, although they are—the final decision was taken by the Minister.

Okay, both Vikki and Hefin have indicated to come in. Hefin, is yours on a specific point, or did you want to come in after Vikki?

It's just a very broad, strategic question. Is there anything really new to be said here that is going to deliver more than marginal gains? Are you going into this thinking, 'Ah, we are going to find a solution', or are you a bit more pessimistic?

I'm more optimistic than that, because I think that, by identifying in rather more detail where the pressure points are, it does begin to open up ideas for some things that might be done. I think the most overwhelming conclusion I've come to at this stage is that the whole area, which has been growing quite rapidly—and particularly in the cities; Newport and Cardiff are growing quite rapidly as places of employment—the public transport network is heavily underinvested in compared to what it is that is needed. The challenge really is—. And south Wales is not the only place; most of the cities in the UK are going through this at different stages. Probably London is at the forefront of this challenge. As more and more people want to work in cities, it's how you get them in and out during the working day, and I think there is a widespread emerging view that this requires quite substantial investment in public transport in order to achieve that.

And you've been promised a degree of money by the Government, have you?

What we have agreed is that they are certainly interested in knowing what kind of proposals will be necessary to achieve results in that form, and for us to evaluate whether they seem to make sense. It is then up to us to decide whether they are worth the money, and it would be ultimately for the Ministers to decide that. I haven't discussed anything about the scale of budget, but as we know, there are ministerial statements on this. I've gone no further with them than has been said on this.

I'll bring in Vikki Howells, if I can, at this point. Vikki.

I just want to ask some questions around that, really, because the Minister has said that not all of the £1 billion that was set aside for the black route could be used by the commission, because part of the First Minister's reasons for turning down the proposals was financial. So, have you got to a stage yet where you're thinking about how much money might be needed in order to properly tackle the congestion issues?

No, we haven't. That will have to come later, because we've first of all got to identify where we think there are potential ways of tackling the problem. We will then evaluate those proposals looking at various criteria, including the cost, also the impact on congestion, the impact on air quality, environmental effects, and the commission will seek to come to a view as to whether any of these projects would be regarded as value for money, and then it would be a matter for the Government to decide whether they wish to go ahead with them.

I have been encouraged to think quite widely about this rather than to do what I'm afraid I spent most of my life when I was in the UK Treasury saying to people—'Yes, we'd like to do all these great things, but there isn't any money'. In a sense, we have been asked to explore this, I would say, without that constraint, but obviously, at the end of the day, it is a matter of (a) affordability and (b) value for money. That is the thing that matters. The idea of setting a budget has never appealed to me, but this partly reflects my Treasury background, because there's a tendency to think if you've got a budget, you've got to spend it all. Whereas, to me, the most important thing is whether any proposals are genuine value for money.

And when you're looking at value for money, how broadly will you consider things there? So, for example, would you look at the impact on the economy of the loss of time with people stuck in congestion?

Yes, and there are other things, as I've mentioned. There are thing like air quality and things like carbon emissions. And there are other things, too, which is the extent to which you ease the problem of people getting to and from work and about their normal business, both for those families who have cars and those families who don't have cars. 

Okay, thank you. With regard to the £114 million that the Welsh Government spent on developing the relief road proposals, to what extent do you feel that the commission is going to be able to use the outputs from that?  

We are already using the outputs. So, a significant amount of traffic monitoring and modelling was done for the relief road. That was there on a plate for us when we started; we would have had a slower start if that were not to have existed. Obviously, not the entirety of the work is relevant, but certainly a significant amount of the traffic modelling and the work done on the underlying analysis of what was happening on the existing road has been very relevant for us, and we have used—and there have been no barriers to us accessing that data.  

Joyce Watson. 

Good morning. Obviously, things have changed and the removal of the toll charges is one of those changes. So, in terms of destination tracking, I would be interested to know if you did that after those changes were implemented and whether you're keeping an eye on that flow, and if it has altered. But in terms of the alternative options that you've mentioned, which are if we're going to get people off the road, we have to get them on public transport. There are certain obstacles in that, not least the railway and the fact that Network Rail is not devolved to us, so that means conversations elsewhere. And clearly, those lines are mostly coming from England, over which franchise we don't have any control. So, how you're looking at that. 

And then, finally, if the options that are open to us are buses—if we're talking public transport—it means that we're putting things back on the road again in that regard. There might be fewer vehicles on the road but, nonetheless, that seems to be—unless I've missed something and you're going to tell me about it. So, those are the areas that I think I'm most interested in: the options, the genuine options. 

Much of the data that we have, of course, is a bit out of date, but we're doing our best to update that, and we're also keeping an eye on what it is that's happening to the road since the end of the charges. The view seems to be that it has increased quite markedly the flow, which is not surprising. 

In terms of rail transport and, indeed, bus transport, there are issues of governance about these. You know, who is the guiding mind on it, which applies both to buses and it applies to rail, which we are conscious of and which we will be looking at, because they are quite important features. We are exploring the extent to which the rail track between the bridge and Cardiff can be used both for express trains and for what you might describe as a local stopping service, in order to provide a much more effective commuter service between people living on the whole line, basically from Chepstow through to Cardiff. We're exploring that to see what the possibilities are, and we're taking advice from specialists who know about this. And if it turns out that there is some prospect there, then we will look at the best way of integrating that into the issue of new stations and how you get people to and from the stations in terms of the infrastructure that you need. 

This is our next big area of study, and having looked at those fast-track measures that we announced in November, this is the next phase of our work to really see what the potential is there, because I agree with you that—. And the signs—you get this evidence from other big cities that you need some kind of mass transit system, really, to get people to and from work if you are going to have very large numbers of people working in city centres but who are living distributed around the area. And south-east Wales, it seems to me, not only has those characteristics, but it almost has them to a greater extent than many places have. Given the growth of the cities and given how far people are travelling to come to work in Cardiff and Newport and, indeed, people in Wales going to work in Bristol—

Absolutely.

We mentioned in our report in December—our road tracking does seem to imply that there are more people who live in Wales working on the other side of the bridge than come into Wales in the morning and go home at night. And that's one of the reasons why the road is so heavily congested going east to west in the evenings; it's much worse in the evenings than it is in the mornings.

And vice versa, yes. Hefin David.

Just with regard to regulatory and legislative options—have you had an input into the Public Transport (Wales) Bill that is being drafted at the moment?

We have been updated on the plans and we noted the White Paper, but we have not formally contributed to that process.

Okay. And, obviously, you'll be aware of the White Paper then. Does that sit beyond your remit, or would you suggest that there are things within your remit that should be considered as part of the development of the Bill?

I would say that anything involving the governance and institutional aspects of how regional transport is operated and governed in this area is very much within the remit of this commission, and we may well need to make recommendations on how best that that is done. From my understanding of the prospective Bill, this is potentially giving the Government a suite of tools to use, so I would expect us to offer a view to the Government on how best to use those.

But you haven't had any involvement so far—you're absolutely clear.

There is quite a lot of activity that's going on in Welsh Government anyway in this whole area. They have people who are looking at a number of these things on an ongoing basis, and we're really working in parallel with them. We try to keep each other aware of what the others are doing, so that people who are working in Welsh Government know what we're doing, and vice versa. But I think we have to conduct these things in parallel. My job is to bring together this team of commissioners who have to work on an independent basis during this period and come forward with our own proposals.

I appreciate that, and I know how difficult this is, particularly with regard to timescales, but the Bill, as I understand it, will be presented in draft form relatively soon. March is the brief that we've had for the beginning of Stage 1.

We don't have an official date.

We haven't got an official date, as is the nature of these things, especially as to when it may start. What would be a shame is if the Bill progresses and your commission comes up with a series of recommendations after the Bill has progressed, which would have been great if it had been considered in the Bill. Are you taking steps to mitigate that?

As Lord Burns says, whilst we are operationally independent of Welsh Government, we talk to them a great deal. I have a meeting on the public transport Bill to find out more about it and discuss it next week. We work very closely with the colleagues working on this legislation, but what hasn't happened is there is not a formal bit of our terms of reference where we have been formally asked to give a formal report on the Bill, but that doesn't mean that we are not involved. I would very much hope that, through the communication that we're currently undertaking, if there were any areas where we think it is very likely that we would make a recommendation, and if it was patently obvious that that was not being considered in the Bill, I think that we would know by now, and I'm not aware of any significant issues along those lines. 

Okay. I think it would be helpful to see more of an engagement between the commission and the Government on the Bill.

I'm very happy with where the arrangements are, in all honesty. I've done a lot of these exercises over the years on one topic or another and, when you bring together a group of people as a commission, you have to be able to get on and work as a group independently and not want to be constantly checking what it is that you are doing against the people who have given you the remit. We spent some time working out what the remit should be and the terms of reference, and our job is to do that. We're trying to act in an independent way. In parallel, we're trying to keep each other informed of it. I personally wouldn't want to go any further than that.

I tell you what, this question, then: would you consider that one of the options at your disposal might be legislative change in order to resolve some of these issues? The introduction of legislation may be one of the recommendations you might make.

Certainly, some of the Government's issues surrounding both rail and buses, for example, I regard as very much within our remit; we will take evidence on this and we will talk to people. But I think we have to come forward as a commission with our own ideas as to which of these makes sense and which don't.

I just feel there's an opportunity there, isn't there?

Yes, but I think much of this can be done by transparency, keeping each other informed about what it is that is going on. The whole point, I believe, of setting up this group, which the First Minister asked me to do, was to have an independent voice on this and an independent set of minds who would look at the problem as a whole. I don't want us to be working as a team within Government. We are a team that is outside of Government that is working to a remit that's been set by Government. 

Okay.

Can I just ask how are you ensuring that you are working with the right group of people to gather your evidence for your report? How are you making sure you're speaking to all the relevant people to ensure that all your recommendations are evidence based? 

We're hoping to. To date, we've had some strategic stakeholder workshops and we will be having more of those where we've invited general people to come and give evidence. Next week, we're launching something on the internet to enable people to put forward their ideas as to what would make their travel easier.

Is that the general public, yes?

The general public. We're also doing some travel-to-work surveys with the large employment sites over the next two months—people like the Office for National Statistics and such like—where we're going to find out just what kind of journeys people are making and what their alternatives are and what would be helpful to them in terms of alternatives. We have some elected representative meetings planned across the four regions in south-east Wales, which we're now trying to programme and inviting people to those. I've had meetings already—two meetings, in fact—with the representatives of Newport, the two AMs and two MPs. We're going to do that more widely across the whole area and we have some other community engagement events planned for later in the year. So, without going through a formal—. Because I don't think we have time, we're not going through a formal, sort of, request for evidence and then getting in piles of written evidence and then deciding who to have witness sessions with. We're trying to fold a lot of these things in as effectively as we can with work, and try to identify the people who we think whose opinions we need to take into account. We have quite a lot of events planned.

You've got six phases in your approach, which stage are you at now, and when do you expect, if you can give us a time frame, to move through each phase, effectively?

I think we are basically up to phase 3. We are really getting now into phase 4. We are proposing the interim report—

So, just to check, you've completed phase 1, 2 and 3—is that right? That's the way I'm understanding it.

Yes. Well, we've still got some work to do on 3, but at the same time we're starting work on 4.

Okay. So, you've finished 1 and 2, you're in 3 at the moment, but you've also started 4.

That's correct. Many of these things are happening in parallel, given the shortness of time. A good way to think about the interim report is that it will summarise everything we've done over phases 1, 2 and 3 and explain what that may imply for the future recommendations.

Okay.

We're trying to do an interim report at Easter time.

Right, okay. So, is there a time frame for completing 3 and 4?

Well, we're hoping we're going to complete the whole thing by the end of the year. That's the objective, which effectively means that by the summer we're going to have to be—or certainly shortly after the summer, we need to be down somewhere like between phase 5 and 6.

Okay. So, effectively, by the end of the summer, you would have completed assessing the options.

Yes.

So, after the summer, in the autumn period, you'd then be on 6.

Making recommendations and writing it up.

That's it. Okay.

That's the plan. I mean, 4 and 5 take place in parallel, effectively—the long list and the options—because we will be assessing some of the options as we go along. But I find it's like most things in life, the final 10 per cent takes a good deal more than 10 per cent of the time. When it comes to the place of making the recommendations it's, as they say, when the rubber hits the road.

Okay. I might come back to this, but Oscar Asghar wanted to come in.

Thank you very much, Chair. I have a lot of questions to ask Lord Burns. We know the Severn bridge, the Prince Charles bridge, when it was built—in 1993 or 1994 they started, and they completed it for £300 million, and they walked away over a year ago with over £1 billion over the years to make on this. The economic impact of all this: have you thought of any alternative, like another bridge, rather than the M4? We are talking about the M4 relief road. A lot of inquiries, a lot of consultation happened in the last six years, and £114 million has been spent on it. So, have you ever thought to have another bridge that should be linked with the M5? A direct link with the M4. It would save everybody—every accident probably costs less now. Every day ticking, expenses are going down. You know that, economic wise, especially the south-east Wales economy is based on the M4. We need that road to be not only improved but to be built, one way or another. So, how quickly—? I know you're taking these six phases, but have you thought about economic impact and urgency of this whole case? Of course, with the environment—especially by 2035, it will be all electric cars anyway.

The impact on the economy is a very important aspect of our objectives. As I've mentioned, the task of getting people to and from work into major cities is a problem that all cities face, and it is a key part of economic development. More and more jobs are moving towards cities. People are travelling further to those jobs. The challenge is what is the most effective way of doing that? I live and work in London. I have watched the change take place there over the whole of my working life. When I was in my twenties, I drove to work in London. I haven't driven to work in London for as long as I can remember, myself. In fact, I don't know anybody who goes to work in a car in London, unless they have a chauffeur driven—

There are lots of buses and an underground there anyway.

And London has managed to do this transition because it has a combination of stick and carrot. It has made travelling—. Not only congestion in London, but also charging, but also the enormous increase in improved provision of public transport that has gone on. And I'm not sure there is any other way. Building a new motorway into the centre of London would not have made the job any easier. Indeed, we had one in Westway, which goes very near, actually, to where I live, and all that creates is a huge backlog as people try to do the last 10 per cent of the journey. So, I think the lessons are there, and we see them in other cities as well. People have to have choice about how to get to work, and that requires alternative forms of provision against which people can make a meaningful decision.

And I think one of the things that already is clear to me from this study and some of the calculations that we have done is that, for many of the journeys, people have no realistic alternative to the car if they wish to work where they're currently working and live where they're currently living. The costs would be much higher and the journey times much longer if they tried to go by some other means. Now, as Cardiff and Newport both prosper—and they are growing very rapidly—this is something that just has to be looked at. I see this as quite an important part of what we have to do to see if there are any feasible, workable, value-for-money options that would give people more choice and more—

I'm conscious that we're over time and we've still got three more areas that we want to cover. So, if those asking questions can bear that in mind and get to the point of the specific question. Hefin, you wanted to come in quickly with a quick one.

Just a very simple question: is congestion charging an option you're reserving?

I think road pricing is probably, in the longer term, an inevitable part of giving people these meaningful options. I think, however, Welsh Government has to be quite careful about the timing of it. My personal view, having watched it elsewhere, is that road pricing without giving people feasible alternatives is a difficult thing to impose. If you provide people with alternatives, then I think road pricing is not only possible, but I think it could well be a necessary part of the package.

Thank you, that's a clear answer. So, just be careful to get to the nub of the question and answer, if we can. Joyce Watson.

I want to come back to your progress report. You said that there were three easy—you didn't say they were easy, sorry—three areas that you felt could be moved perhaps more swiftly. One was to replace a variable speed limit from junction 24 to 28 with a 50 mph speed control. I think that's done. I think, I don't know. I travelled along there the other day; it seemed like I was doing 50 all the way along there—

I'm sorry, it seemed like—?

That it was in place—the 50 mph speed control.

No.

No—

No, it's not.

I just did 50 thinking it was, then. So, that was one of them. The other one was the additional lane guidance on the westbound approach to Brynglas tunnels, and, finally, there was enhanced traffic officer support with response-time targets and extending patrols to the A48 and the A4810 in Newport. So, how are those progressing?

Briefly if you can, sorry.

First of all, the first of those was a proposal that is quite different to what is in place at the moment, which is average speed control over the whole distance. At the moment, the speed limit varies from place to place and also it changes, of course. The outcomes are set out in the paper largely because we believe that average speed control is the method of control that gives you the highest compliance rate and that actually smoothes the flow of the traffic most effectively.

Ministers are now looking at all three of the proposals that we made. They welcomed the paper, but they haven't yet decided precisely how to respond to them, so none of them are in place yet. They're not going to solve the problem, but we believe that they would ease the problem.

Okay, that's fine.

Vikki Howells.

Thank you. Just about future trends and behaviour, to what extent is the commission able to take into account future trends and the impact of alternative fuels and autonomous vehicles?

This is work that we are doing, on the whole question of what is in these alternatives to what we call the baseline, because, obviously, it's a moving baseline. We've first of all been working on what the baseline is today, but we've got more work to do on beginning to make assessments of what the growth of traffic might be over the next 10 or more years, including issues like autonomous vehicles, electric cars, which, of course, do effect emissions. Autonomous vehicles may well make speed control and smoother travelling more effective, although roads do have a capacity. It's not infinitely malleable. So, we are considering those things.

Oscar Asghar.

Thank you very much, Chair. The thing is I travel every day from Newport to Cardiff, and that traffic from junction 27 to this place—the mileage is 12 miles. It takes me a minimum of 45 minutes, especially if I leave at 7 in the morning, and I think that junction—. From Newport to Cardiff itself, variable cameras are there, they're making more money on flashing lights on speeding, and my concern is when people are, in the middle of the night, travelling, the variable speed cameras are still there with speed limits, so is there any way that speed can be—people should go faster, rather than at 50 mph, in the middle of the night.

Just a brief comment on that, and then—.

Well, first of all, our proposal is not about variable speed limits, our proposal was that there is an average speed control that is fixed and would be in place throughout. I see the attraction of saying that at night-time maybe it shouldn't be in place, but, at the moment, there are no legislative powers to be able to have average speed control that can be changed at different times of day, but—

My point is: are you dealing with the police or the traffic police or local authorities on that issue, rather than just that the cameras are there, so people, those who travel, are not feeding in?

We were asked to produce fast-tracked recommendations, and so we didn't feel it was appropriate to be recommending something that required a change in legislation to make it effective. We did discuss these recommendations with the police before they were put out; we continue to have those discussions. The police have a huge—especially Gwent Police have a huge and good knowledge of how people are using this road. We agree enforcement is important, and I would just say that the case for a 50 mph speed control in any form is not just based around congestion. Safety, air quality and carbon emissions are also important factors, and they apply at any time of the day.

And how long will it take for you to publish your outcome?

By the end of the year, is it?

End of the year is our ambition.

Do you have any rounding-off questions, Oscar? Do you have any finishing questions? No. Thank you. 

I wonder, just to finish off, really, whether the commission's recommendations could achieve an equivalent or better impact on congestion and value for money to that which the Welsh Government had estimated for the M4 relief project?

I don't know the answer to that, and indeed I don't propose that we seek to do that, because I don't wish to go back through, and we certainly don't have the time to go back to do the work in terms of what the relief road might have done. 

We know what that would have achieved, so I suppose the question is—

Do we?

Well, the Government had estimates in terms of that project, so the question I ask, I suppose, is: can you achieve equivalent or better impact on congestion in terms of value for money than was projected in the inquiry?

This is the point I made right at the outset—the only way that I deemed that we could do this in the time that was asked for it to be done was to be able to make recommendations that would be looking for improvement over what otherwise would have been the case. We would not be going into evaluating the costs and benefits compared to the black route. That would be for others to do. Others will have to make that comparison. What we are doing is looking at proposals compared to a baseline of what would take place without anything having been done.

Okay. So, that assessment will be for, effectively, the Government to make.

That is for the Government to make, and for others to make. It's not for us. 

Are you planning to provide any assessment of value for money and benefit cost per ratio at a programme level rather than an individual project level? 

I've tried to explain already that we are very conscious of the need to evaluate the measures on a value for money basis, and evaluate in other ways as well. We haven't yet decided whether we do this on the basis of individual parts of what we might do, or whether we look at it as a package, as a whole. My inclination is to look at it as a package, as a whole, because I think in situations like this the key in terms of groups of measures is that they should be viewed as a package. As I said earlier, the issue about, for example, road pricing, seems to me has to go in parallel with people having alternatives. That is my present inclination, but I would want to wait and see what we come up with before making that decision. We've got a lot more work to do. 

And how likely is it that a road scheme is likely to feature in the final recommendations? Will an assessment of the carbon and environmental impact of the final recommendations be prepared and published?

So, the last part of that: yes. As far as road is concerned, we have made some suggestions for the M4. I think it is within our remit to look at other pressure points on the road elsewhere, or other roads. What is not within our remit is looking at a new motorway-style road. We've also been trying to take into account what the impact might be if eventually the Heads of the Valleys road is completed all the way from Raglan through to Neath, because that becomes quite an important major alternative way for people who are travelling from certainly the midlands to west Wales. But we certainly will be looking at things like carbon emissions, air quality et cetera. But the bulk of our work, I should be clear, is going to be in relation to alternative modes of transport—getting people to and from work and to other important aspects of their lives.

Thank you, Lord Burns and Peter McDonald. Thank you for your time this morning. Are you happy if we follow up with any follow-up questions?

Yes, absolutely. Chairman, I'm very happy to come back at any stage if you feel that you want to. I've spent a lot of my time on the other side of the table over the last 20 years, and I know how this sort of process works, and other issues can come up and you want to revisit some of them. So, I will always be at your service. 

I appreciate that, and what we will do—you'll be familiar with the process—is we will send you a transcript of proceedings, and if you want to have a look through that and amend anything or add anything further, then please do so as well. So, thank you very much.

Thank you.

That brings us to the conclusion of our meeting today.