FMQs: Sport Wales, Gibraltar & Banks

This afternoon saw the final FMQs before an extended Easter recess, which will no doubt be taken up by local election campaigning.

Read More

FMQs : Curious Tales, Cwmbran Hospital & Ireland

There was a varied FMQs today, with questions ranging from the M4, average earnings, the planning system and also a polite warning from the Llywydd.

Read More

FMQs : Liz, Class Sizes & Court Closures

Time for another account of the weekly "theatre" of First Minister's Questions. This time the topics include : smaller class sizes, the EU referendum, court closures....and Wales at Euro 2016.

Read More

FMQs : Cancer, Steel & Newport M4

I'm trying something new for the Fifth Assembly in order to improve the depth of coverage and that's blogging First Minister's Questions (FMQs) for the first time.

Read More

Bridge Over Troubled Water

While the Welsh Government and CBI have said the Newport M4 "Hart Bypass" will boost the economy,
does the Port of Newport - which supports 3,000 jobs - stand to be one of the economic losers?
(Pic : South Wales Argus)

After Friends of the Earth Cymru's recent unsuccessful bid to stall the Newport M4 bypass, you would've thought that would be that. However, projects of this scale will always generate their fair share of problems, and I suspect the hurdles this particular project has to clear (political and physical) are beginning to become more obvious.

Read More

Hart Bypass returns to the Assembly

The issue of the Newport bypass has returned to the Senedd, and the
Environment Committee had a few choice words for Edwina Hart and the CBI.
(Pic : Wales Online)

• Welsh Government's reprioritised National Transport Plan (7.12.11)
• M4 Newport consultation and rail upgrades in Gwent (11.3.12)
• A Cunning Infrastructure Plan (26.5.12)
• Newport's M4 coronary bypass (5.10.13)
• Cold and drafty Wales Bill (7.1.14)
• Newport's M4 debate painted black and blue (10.7.14)
• Newport M4 - Smell the Glove (17.7.14)
• Newport M4 : The Committee Strikes Back (21.7.14)
• M4 Newport : Edwina's Response (25.9.14)

It's back again....

Yesterday, the National Assembly debated the Environment Committee report into the proposed M4 bypass of Newport (Newport M4 : The Committee Strikes Back [pdf]) and the Welsh Government's response (M4 Newport – Edwina's Response [pdf]).

The Senedd's Heart to Hart

Committee Chair, Alun Ffred Jones AM (Plaid, Arfon), started by saying this project was, "the biggest decision the Welsh Government will take". The Committee haven't drawn any conclusions on merits of particular options, but serious, unanswered questions remained on whether the consultation process met strategic EU directives.

Alun said one issue "not given due attention" was the impact of electrification of the south Wales mainline and the South Wales Metro. The Committee believe these proposals weren't taken into account adequately when considering future travel patterns. He said the total costs of the bypass remain unclear, and funding sources were, "shrouded in uncertainty". He concluded that on basis of current information, the long-term value for money case is yet to be made.

Mick Antoniw AM (Lab, Pontypridd) said the traffic figures from the UK Department of Transport (DfT)– which formed a foundation for the case for the bypass by projecting a 20% increase in traffic – was out of date, and that the latest figures have shown a plateau in general M4 traffic. He said the Committee couldn't get further details from DfT. Mick said it was "of some concern" that the CBI – one of the main private sector proponents of the bypass - failed to respond to six requests to give evidence when the Committee were trying to evaluate the business case.

Antoinette Sandbach AM (Con, North Wales) described this as an "extremely important inquiry", echoing concerns that the CBI didn't contribute to the inquiry in written or oral form. She also criticised the Minister, as she was asked several times to give evidence but turned it down. This is in light of previous criticism in chamber on the way this has been handled.

Antoinette said there were "grave concerns" over the consultation process, in particular the lack of distinction between the three options and the exclusion of the Blue Route. She said it was important that the Welsh Government were "above reproach" on this due to international significance of Gwent Levels, and there was a lack of public confidence in way the process was handled. Antoinette said the Minister hasn't been prepared to be "transparent and scrutinised properly" on this, and she doesn't believe the Minister, "has the support of the public for this project".

Llyr Gruffydd AM (Plaid, North Wales) was also disappointed the Minister didn't give evidence on the route options or financing. This meant the Committee was prevented from scrutinising a scheme that has major financial and environmental impacts. He suggested there were "serious problems with statutory decision-making process", which meant the Committee were unable to scrutinise acutal costs.

Llyr believes the financial detail of scheme should be more widely known to ensure scrutiny on the basis of value for money, with the quoted costs having a massive margin of error, standing between £600million and £1billion. He said adopting the black route, "gave the impression to the people of Wales that it was a done deal" when there's a long way to go.

William Powell AM (Lib Dem, Mid & West Wales) said the Assembly's committees perform a key role in scrutinising policy, which is made all the more difficult "when government doesn't participate on their (the Committee's) terms". William also criticised CBI, saying you can read their op-eds in the Western Mail but they were unwilling to give evidence to the Assembly itself.

He said it was "beyond question" that the M4 through Newport isn't fit for purpose, but all options need to be considered. He said it was a shame the answers came so belated from the Minister. However, he said the Blue Route is as open to debate as the Black Route and we should, "let the evidence speak for itself". Williams also stressed the need for other solutions, emphasising that people need to get people out of cars and onto integrated public transport.

Julie Morgan AM (Lab, Cardiff North) said it was an "annoying and frustrating experience" dealing with the report due to CBI's absence, which "showed disrespect to the Committee". She welcomed the future detailed environmental impact study and the fact no construction will take place until after the 2016 elections, which gives the Assembly "time to have debates on all the options".

She said every effort should be made to avoid the "disastrous impact" on the environment, but they also need clarification on how much of the borrowing will be spent on the bypass. She also said comments (from the First Minister - clip of the FMQs exchange on 30th September 2014) about traffic lights on the Blue Route were irrelevant as they would be replaced by grade separated junctions.

Russell George AM (Con, Montgomery) was....surprise,surprise....disappointed the CBI didn't give evidence. He added his view that the Welsh Government ignored the environmental concerns and that any Newport bypass would have a knock-on impact on infrastructure projects in the rest of Wales – picking out improvements to the A55 and A40 in particular. Russell accused the Welsh Government of failing to look at Welsh transport infrastructure "in the round".

Former Environment Minister, John Griffiths AM (Lab, Newport East), said the Gwent Levels are unique, and that their importance and historical significance are "beyond doubt". Although he's now one of the more high profile opponents to the bypass, he said he didn't support the Blue Route either due to the possible air pollution and noise problems an urban expressway would cause. John would prefer "carrot and stick" public transport solutions.

He also raised the valid point that there's a new environment since the Scottish referendum, offering veiled criticism of the UK Government's caveat that early access to borrowing be dependent on funding a bypass.

In her response, the Minister for Economy & Transport, Edwina Hart (Lab, Gower), said her letter addressed the Committee's concerns. She regretted not giving evidence in person, but the statutory decision-making process is "very strict" and she repeated her defence that she couldn't give evidence until after the consultation. She agreed with William Powell that this process may need "looking at".

She confirmed the Welsh Government have submitted their defence to Friends of the Earth Cymru's legal challenge and they're waiting for the court's decision. Edwina also confirmed that no detailed design work will be until after a full environmental impact assessment, and she expects more detailed financial information to be provided at any future public inquiry (which will take place in late 2016/early 2017).

Unsurprisingly, she said it would be inappropriate for her to comment further on other matters while these processes were ongoing.

Concluding the debate, Alun Ffred Jones said he was disappointed the government "always has a reason for not giving details or answering basic questions", and he was "none the wiser" after the Minister's response.

He said the Committee weren't opposed to finding a solution to the Newport problems; but it has to be the right decision after all reasonable options have been considered, and because it would have a knock-on impact to infrastructure spending. The Committee simply wanted to, "ask pertinent questions about the process and not discuss the merits of the routes".

He therefore upheld the Committee's recommendation that the Welsh Government should restart the consultation process with all of the route options included.

Total Eclipse of the Hart

The Black Route isn't quite a done deal yet.
(Pic : M4 Newport website/Me)

Some very large obstacles were placed in the way of the Environment Committee in the process of this inquiry.

Firstly, Edwina Hart and the CBI refusing to give evidence; secondly, Plaid Cymru's predetermined support for the Blue Route which threw everything off balance; and thirdly, the sudden/curt announcement from the Minister in July that the Black Route has been selected.

The Blue Route isn't quite dead yet, but you get the impression the Minister is doing her best to kill it off. It seems the only way you can get comprehensive responses from the Welsh Government nowadays is a Daily Mail headline.

Having said that, the media – maybe myself included – might have given the impression that the Black Route is (as Llyr Gruffydd pointed out) "a done deal". That's wrong. All that's happened is the principle of a complete M4 bypass of Newport that follows the black route has been agreed, but the design could change significantly between now and the start of construction, depending on the outcome of the further environmental reports and any future public inquiry.

The problems facing the Black Route continue to mount. I wouldn't at all be surprised if the environmental impact report will make grim reading and lead to serious questioning of the Welsh Government's supposed commitment to *groan* "sustainable development".

Secondly, there seems to be growing opposition amongst Labour backbenchers to the project – notably from John Griffiths and Alun Davies AM (Lab, Blaenau Gwent), who are two former ministers with responsibility for the environment. You can probably include Julie Morgan and Jenny Rathbone AM (Lab, Cardiff Central) in there too, while Mick Antoniw has reservations by the sound of it.

Thirdly, as the South Wales Argus have covered, Newport Docks is going to have a whacking great big bridge built over it. I'd like to think that someone would've considered whether that proposal might have an impact on port operations. Newport Docks is Wales' most important cargo port and according to ITV Wales supports some 3,000 jobs.

Last but not least, as you might've noticed, the CBI were rightfully given a kicking from all quarters. When you consider they're often mouthing off to the press about the state of Wales, the fact they couldn't be bothered to give evidence on something they consider so vital - so important that it stands to become the single largest capital investment a Welsh Government will ever make - was nothing less than an insult to all of us. Up yours, Digby.

I certainly respect the work the Assembly's committees do, and it's not as if the CBI would ever consider snubbing a Westminster equivalent.

Read More

Welsh Budget 2015-16

Yesterday, Finance Minister, Jane Hutt (Lab, Vale of Glamorgan), introduced the draft budget for 2015-16 to the National Assembly.

The details are available here, and – as usual – I'm comparing the overall changes to the supplementary budget passed in June 2014 (pdf), which I believe is a more accurate reflection of what's actually being spent and where. Other commentators and mainstream media outlets have other methods. The really important document is the budget spending tables (pdf) – which detail the line-by-line spending plans.

Department	Draft Budget 2015-16	Change from 2014-15 Supplementary Budget plans (total spending)
Health & Social Services	£6,818million	+£241million
Local Government	£4,428million	-£194million
Education & Skills	£2,054.3million	+£18.9million
Economy, Science & Transport	£1,157.3million	+£30.5million*
Communities & Tackling Poverty	£737.5million	+£69.7million**
Natural Resources	£407.3million	-£32.8million
Central Administration	£328.4million	-£19.7million

* Sport, Culture and Heritage budgets now fall under Economy, Science & Transport.
**Housing and Regeneration budgets have been attached to the Communities & Tackling Poverty portfolio.

All in all, everything's similar to last year.

The Winners

Are Welsh Labour chucking money at NHS problems again
when policy might be the bigger issue?
(Pic : Yahoo Money)

In short, the NHS....again. They were one of the big winners last year too and it hasn't really made much of a difference. That's telling me problems in the NHS are coming down to government and local health board policy as much as the money.

Health services will be getting a boost totalling £425million over the next two years, with the vast bulk of that this year – some £235million – coming in to deliver core NHS services. The Food Standards Agency also gets a moderate £490,000 boost.

The budgets for the major public inspectorates in Wales – Estyn, Healthcare Inspectorate Wales, Care & Social Service Inspectorate – have been frozen, while there's a £100,000 boost to domestic violence programmes – which will receive at least £4.1million in total this year.

There's been a capital boost to housing programmes, with an extra £30million available to improve the supply and quality of affordable housing, £10million of that going towards bringing empty properties back into use.

In one of the few economic development areas to remain unscathed, science programmes have received an extra £2.4million. Also, a new discount travel scheme for 16-18 year olds is being launched with an initial budget of £5million, perhaps to offset cuts to school transport for sixth formers  and HE students by local authorities (as proposed in Bridgend and elsewhere). There's also an extra £30.4million in capital funding for new road and rail schemes.

Historic monuments get an extra £2.6million in day-to-day funding, offset by a £725,000 cut in capital funding.

There's been a significant boost to funding for education standards - £110million (though I'm not sure if it's a churning of current spending or not). Welsh language education has seen a £4.1million boost (though funding for the Welsh language itself has been cut by £400,000). The capital funding for schools has been frozen.

There's a £6.2million boost to the planning system, probably a result of the forthcoming Planning Bill (more on that from me next week, hopefully). There's also a £7million boost to climate change capital budgets.

The Losers

Local Government has been hit by sharp cuts yet again, though
perhaps not as badly as last year.
(Pic : Wales Online)

Local Government gets battered....again. There's an £82.8million cut to the core funding to local authorities, but it's less than the £128million cuts last year. There's also a £1.8million cut to collaboration budgets, which is a real surprise considering the Welsh Government are pushing for voluntary mergers.

The WLGA have issued another gloomy prediction that cuts could lead to "comprehensive service failures". The threat posed to services like libraries, the arts and community facilites is stark.

Fire and rescue services see a £1.75million cut to revenue and capital budgets, possibly due to the reorganisation of services that's currently taking place.

Despite the headlines, there are significant cuts to the health and social service budget too – most notably a £6.4million cut to targeted NHS services, a £5million cut to hospice support, a £2.9million cut to immunisation programmes (which seems incredibly stupid) and a £5.5million cut to children and adult social services.

Programmes aimed at tackling poverty have also been hit to the tune of £3.3million, offset by a £2million boost to capital programmes. Supported housing sees a £6.4million cut (these cuts were partially suspended in the Plaid-Lib Dem deal last year). Housing regeneration schemes have also been cut by £1.5million.

There are a raft of cuts across economic development and transport, mostly offset with capital funding boosts – a £4.7million cut to entrepreneurship, £5.3million cut to innovation, £1.7million cuts to IT infrastructure (but £10million extra capital funding), a £2.5million cut to trunk roads (and a £30million capital funding cut).

One of the biggest losers here was sustainable travel – getting it to the tune of £23.3million in its revenue budget (but receiving an extra £29.6million in capital funds for new projects). Libraries and museums get a modest £525,000 cut to budgets (offset by an extra £500,000 in new capital funding).

Funding for the school curriculum has been hit to the tune of £88million, and there's another cut to post-16 education (£24.1million). Funding for skilled workforce programmes has been cut by £11.2million. There've also been sizable cuts to education participation programmes amounting to £13.3million (offset by a boost to post-16 learner support).

Natural resources has been hit fairly hard too. There's a £7.4million cut to Bovine TB programmes, a £4.6million cut to the climate change budget and a £4.5million cut to the environment budget generally (mostly falling on Natural Resources Wales presumably).

As you might expect, the Welsh Government is trimming its own hair too, with cuts to the central administration budget, which include a £2million to its own running costs, and a £1.8million cut to central programmes like invest to save.

Kirsty Williams 233,000,000 Plaid Cymru 0

Plaid Cymru's budget pull-out could also turn out to be as significant as the announcement itself - but only if Leanne Wood can convince the Lib Dems to follow suit. Although the Lib Dems aren't happy either, it looks like they're going to continue negotiations. So it's nothing more than a statement of principle for now.
- See more at: http://oggybloggyogwr.blogspot.co.uk/2014/07/newport-m4-smell-glove.html#sthash.06akrz7m.dpuf

Has Plaid Cymru's "principled stand" on the Newport bypass been a
strategic mistake the Welsh Lib Dems have taken advantage of?
(Pic : BBC Wales)

Labour don't have a majority in the National Assembly – something they always seem to forget – so to pass the budget they need to agree a deal with at least one member of the opposition.

A Labour agreement with the Tories was always a non-starter, but – for giggles – I'd imagine their price for supporting the budget would've been a Keogh-style investigation into the Welsh NHS. The extra cash for the NHS was welcomed, but Shadow Health Minister, Darren Millar (Con, Clwyd West) said, "it's all too little, too late".

July 17th : "Plaid Cymru's budget pullout could also turn out to be as significant as the announcement itself, but only if Leanne Wood can convince the Lib Dems to follow suit."

As you might remember, Plaid Cymru withdrew from budget negotiations after the Welsh Government approved the M4 Newport bypass. Petulant or principled? A little of both. Last time around they managed to get extra funding for intermediate care and supported housing. This time they got bugger all because they're trying to....what exactly?

The funding for the Newport bypass won't come for a while yet, so I'm not sure what point they're trying to prove now other than that they really, really don't like the idea (they debated it again today - you can watch it here). We get it. At least they can't be accused of hypocrisy.

Unfortunately, this hasn't been handled well from the start - by both sides - but it's as though Plaid are turning into the Green Party on steroids.

Unless something dramatic happens on the M4 front - or they get into government themselves - Plaid are (effectively) locked in to opposing every budget for the next decade because the bypass will probably show up in every budget for that long a period of time.

So the Welsh Government were left with only one option, and before the draft budget was published, they'd reached an agreement reportedly worth £233million with the Welsh Lib Dems to commit extra funding to the Pupil Deprivation Grant (which will rise from £918 to £1,050 per pupil), and complete the £60million Eastern Bay Link Road (which will link Cardiff Bay to eastern Cardiff and the M4).

The Lib Dems (supposedly) oppose the M4 bypass too, managing to get a caveat not to commence construction before the 2016 Assembly elections. Construction was very unlikely (if not impossible) to start before then anyway, so the Welsh Lib Dems can support the budget and get some goodies without supporting the bypass. That's how you do this the smart way.

In addition, they've also secured £10million towards an unspecified transport project in north Wales (which seemed a bit odd to me) and £5.3million for Llandrindod Wells Hospital.

Although the party's prospects might not be looking good overall, they've chalked up quite a bit over the last few years in terms of funding commitments, while the Eastern Bay Link road is arguably as important as sorting out the Newport problems. Well played, Kirsty.

Read More

M4 Newport : Edwina's Response

With Edwina Hart responding to Assembly committee concerns and a legal
challenge imminent, it's worth drawing a picture of where the battle lines are.
(Pic : South Wales Argus)

• Welsh Government's reprioritised National Transport Plan (7.12.11)
• M4 Newport consultation and rail upgrades in Gwent (11.3.12)
• A Cunning Infrastructure Plan (26.5.12)
• Newport's M4 coronary bypass (5.10.13)
• Cold and drafty Wales Bill (7.1.14)
• Newport's M4 debate painted black and blue (10.7.14)
• Newport M4 - Smell the Glove (17.7.14)
• Newport M4 : The Committee Strikes Back (21.7.14)

There's been a bit more news on the £1billion Newport bypass front. As some of you will remember, the National Assembly's Environment & Sustainability Committee wrote to the minister in charge, Edwina Hart (Lab, Gower), back in July setting out a number of concerns.

In the last week or so, Edwina has responded to the Committee (pdf).

In the interests of balance - and to ensure that everyone can go into this fully informed - it's worth taking a look at what the Minister said in response to the Committee's letter, and how she came to justify the decision on the Welsh Government's behalf.

Additionally, Friends of the Earth Cymru officially launched their legal challenge – via a judicial review – on Tuesday (23rd September).

The route selection process

Committee : In the first consultation (2011-12 M4CEM), a completely new motorway wasn't included as an option. The change in heart since suggests the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) process hasn't been followed correctly.

Edwina Hart : The Welsh Government used their "appropriate and recognised" WelTAG guidance process (pdf - large file). What's considered a reasonable alternative route under the SEA process is down to the decision-maker, but the SEA also allows a choice based on the objectives the decision-maker wants to meet. The Minister admits that the new fiscal powers offered by Westminster prompted a revisit to a full M4 bypass of Newport as an option.

The choice of route

Committee : The route choices for an M4 bypass were too similar to each other to "allow a meaningful comparison as required by the SEA directive". It also hasn't been made clear whether the Blue Route has been fully assessed by the Welsh Government to SEA standards.

Edwina Hart : None of the alternatives were considered "reasonable alternatives" in line with SEA regulations. She says the Blue Route wouldn't have been "sufficiently attractive to relieve M4 traffic", would cost £600million (rather than the £380million estimate) and would cause problems at connecting roads. It would also require significant land acquisition, and wouldn't meet the strategic objectives.

The environmental report

Committee : Natural Resources Wales (NRW) say some of the concerns they raised weren't included in the final environment report. NRW flatly disagree with many of the conclusions in said report, which underplayed the impact on biodiversity, and provided incomplete assessments of greenhouse gas emissions, water quality, landscape and town scape impacts.

Edwina Hart : Environmental concerns and possible mitigation measures have been taken into account during the Environmental Impact Assessment process. NRW's comments were taken into consideration during the drafting of the environmental report.

Consideration of public transport

Committee : Possible public transport options and the South Wales Metro scheme haven't been given full consideration. They should've been weighted directly alongside the M4 proposals as they could have a big impact on the underlying case for a bypass.

Edwina Hart : The M4 bypass will complement the South Wales Metro scheme, but increased public transport use won't solve the problems on the M4. Studies undertaken during the planning process showed that even if public transport use increased by 100%, it would only reduce Newport M4 traffic by 5% (Owen : I'm presuming this is because of the number of lorries using the M4).

Validity of traffic forecasts

Committee : Traffic forecasts on the M4 are produced using the UK's Department for Transport (DfT) forecasting methodology, but this methodology has – according to leading academics – predicted big growths in traffic volumes and car ownership when levels have actually remained flat. If traffic growth doesn't match the DfT's unreliable forecasts then the M4 bypass will be a waste of money. So the case for a bypass is partly reliant on traffic increasing.

Edwina Hart : Traffic volumes have returned to pre-recession levels after levelling off during the recesson itself. A new report on the traffic projection figures has been included on the Newport M4 website (pdf). She believes claims that current traffic projections mean a bypass won't improve traffic flows are "incorrect", and the plans are a "sustainable, long-term solution to the problems."

Costs

Committee : The proposed capital borrowing limit as set out in the Wales Bill (£500million) is only half the estimated total cost of the scheme. Therefore, there's a lack of clarity on how future borrowing powers would be used, and the impact the bypass would have on finances available for transport projects like the Metro. The Committee say it's "difficult to conclude....that a convincing case for the long-term value for money of this investment has been made".

Edwina Hart : The £1billion price tag includes the costs of environmental mitigation measures. Before the Welsh Government commits to construction, the cost estimates will be carefully managed, and the aim will be to reduce costs wherever possible. It's claimed every £1 spent will result in a £2.29 economic return. The Welsh Government won't be committing all of their borrowing powers to the scheme, as they'll use block grant/capital funding too; though it's too early to say precisely how the scheme would be financed, as it depends on the final cost.

I think it's safe to say that we now have a more complete picture of both sides of the argument.

The minister has given some concise and assured answers to the Committee's questions, with the exception of her response to the traffic projection figures.

Those figures are the statistical case for the bypass, and although Edwina linked to the figures themselves, the fact she brushed the issue off with a political back swing (talk of "long term solutions" and "sustainability") tells me that's where the big weakness is in the case, and will probably be one part of Friends of the Earth Cymru's legal line of attack.

I'll let you make your own mind up.

Read More

M4 Newport - The Committee Strikes Back

It's the committee report AMs couldn't wait to read, containing heavy
criticism of the Welsh Government's decision on the M4 around Newport.
(Pic : transportxtra.com)

The saga from the start :

• Welsh Government's reprioritised National Transport Plan (7.12.11)
• M4 Newport consultation and rail upgrades in Gwent (11.3.12)
• A Cunning Infrastructure Plan (26.5.12)
• Newport's M4 coronary bypass (5.10.13)
• Cold and drafty Wales Bill (7.1.14)
• Newport's M4 debate painted black and blue (10.7.14)
• Newport M4 - Smell the Glove (17.7.14)

It's led to rows, hypocrisy, (minor) backbench rebellions, and has turned out to be one of the more controversial committee inquiries in the Assembly's short history.

Towards the end of last week, the National Assembly's Environment and Sustainability Committee published their eagerly-anticipated report into the decision-making process which led to the announcement, on July 16^th , that the £1billion M4 "Black Route" around Newport will be given the go-ahead.

The report itself (pdf) is short and to the point compared to other Assembly committee reports, and well worth a look regardless of your opinion on the M4 bypass scheme itself.

From the outset, the Committee say they were disappointed that neither the minister in charge, Edwina Hart (Lab, Gower), or the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) – one of the biggest cheerleaders for the bypass – appeared before them to give oral evidence.

The Committee have "grave concerns" about the consultation process which led to the Black Route being selected, but they stress that they make no observations on the "merits of any particular route". They believe that had the minister properly engaged with them, many of those concerns would've been addressed.

The Committee subsequently made a single recommendation; that Edwina Hart answers all of the questions and concerns raised in their letter to her on June 5^th (pdf).

They go on to say that if the minister can't answer their questions to their satisfaction, then consideration should be given to restarting the public consultation process to ensure that all concerns (below) are taken into account and that all alternatives to the Black Route are considered.

The Committee's Concerns

                          

The route selection process – It's questioned whether the process of choosing a route met the EU's Strategic Environment Assessment (SEA) directive. In the first consultation (2011-12 M4CEM), a completely new motorway wasn't included as an option. Then, it was included as an option in the second consultation carried out in 2013-14. This suggests the SEA process hasn't been followed correctly, as the sudden change in heart on the need for a bypass would contradict the environmental reports issued alongside each consultation.

The choice between purple, red and black routes (2013 consultation) – The choices on offer with regard a route for an M4 bypass were too similar to each other to "allow a meaningful comparison as required by the SEA directive". It also hasn't been made clear whether the Blue Route has been fully assessed by the Welsh Government to SEA standards.

The environmental report – Natural Resources Wales (NRW) say some of the concerns they raised weren't included in the final environment report. NRW flatly disagree with many of the conclusions in said report, which underplayed the impact on biodiversity, and provided incomplete assessments of  greenhouse gas emissions, water quality, landscape and townscape impacts.

Consideration of public transport (or lack of) – Possible public transport options and the South Wales Metro scheme haven't been given full consideration. They should've been weighted directly alongside the M4 proposals as they could have a big impact on the underlying case for a bypass.

Validity of traffic forecasts – Traffic forecasts on the M4 are produced using the UK's Department for Transport (DfT) forecasting methodology. However, in the past this methodology has – according to leading academics – predicted big growths in traffic volumes and car ownership when levels have actually remained flat. There should've been a more flexible traffic prediction methodology based around varying scenarios, but it's not something the Welsh Government can do themselves as DfT are very protective of their forecasting models. If traffic growth doesn't match the DfT's unreliable forecasts then the M4 bypass will be a waste of money. So the case for a bypass is partly reliant on traffic increasing. That's very "unsustainable".

Costs – It's unclear if environmental mitigation measures, or the future of the A4810 Steelworks Road, have been factored in to the estimated costs of the Black Route. Also, the proposed capital borrowing limit as set out in the Wales Bill (£500million) is only half the estimated total cost of the scheme. Therefore, there's a lack of clarity on how future borrowing powers would be used, and the impact the bypass would have on finances available for transport projects like the Metro. The Committee say it's "difficult to conclude....that a convincing case for the long-term value for money of this investment has been made".

Executive Decisions demand Executive Answers

There's no obligation on ministers to follow through on any recommendations made by an Assembly committee - it's just a good idea to do so. If Edwina Hart wants to ignore this she can, though it would probably make it more difficult for the Welsh Government to win any legal challenge (if it goes that far), as it looks like the Welsh Government haven't gone about this in a professional way and are washing their hands with democratic scrutiny.

Without question, something has to be done to the roads in and around Newport. I'm not blinkered enough to think the solution lies in public transport and "active travel" alone.
 
But you get the impression the Welsh Government wanted a new M4 from the start, they just realised they couldn't afford it. As soon as borrowing powers came into the picture – fuelled by the enthusiasm from Whitehall to give Wales "fiscal responsibility" – the Welsh Government decided to press forward with this while they still had a window of opportunity.

So we ended up with a public consultation that was effectively based around three minor variations of a single option and what appear to be "sexed-up dossiers".

Edwina Hart has done the position of economy minister proud so far, so it would be a real shame if she ends up pushing through something she may later come to regret. Maybe a bypass really is the right option, but it has to be handled conscientiously. That clearly hasn't happened.

This is one of the single largest capital investments in Welsh history, standing at the equivalent of about 65% of the Welsh Government's total annual capital budget. It's serious stuff that deserves proper answers from the minister before anyone can think of getting the project underway.

Read More

Newport's M4 debate painted black and blue

Black bypass or Blue upgrade?
There's been more debate recently over the "Newport Question".
(Pic : BBC Wales)

In recent weeks, the debate over possible solutions to the "Newport Question" – What measures need to be taken to relieve pressure on the M4? - briefly heated up.

As you'll know, the current proposals (Newport's M4 coronary bypass) include building a brand new M4 bypass ("Black Route") using the borrowing powers outlined in the Wales Bill. The consultation has closed as far as I can tell, but the bypass is the preferred option of both Welsh and UK Governments.

However, a rival option has emerged courtesy of transport expert Prof. Stuart Cole called the "Blue Route" (pdf). This wouldn't involve the construction of a new M4 bypass, but would instead upgrade the existing steelworks road and A48 to the south of the city itself - more from Plaid Monmouth and Click on Wales.

Black vs Blue illustrated
(Taken from Google Earth - click to enlarge)

The Black Route

Supporters

• Welsh Government/Welsh Labour (as a "preferred route")
• Welsh Conservatives
• UK Government
• Newport City Council (Labour-controlled)
• Newport residents (South Wales Argus poll putting support at 69% [Jan 2014])
• Confederation of Business and Industry (CBI)
• Institute of Civil Engineers Wales

Proposals (as outlined)

A complete bypass of Newport stretching from Magor to Castleton (Junction 23a-Junction 29), built to three-lane motorway standard. It would pass south of the current steelworks road, cutting across northern edge of the Gwent Levels. Then, it passes through Newport Docks via a new crossing of the River Usk, travels south of Duffryn, before rejoining the M4 at Castleton, where it'll also tie in with the A48(M) which goes directly to Cardiff City Centre. As yet it's uncertain whether this new stretch of the M4 would be tolled or not, or what format the crossing of the Usk will take (tunnel or bridge).

Advantages

• Significantly increased capacity – It'll be wider than the existing stretch of the M4 through Newport and will include hard shoulders throughout its length. There'll also be fewer access points, meaning local traffic won't be weaving in and out trying to cross the city.
• Less disruption - It'll be constructed as a completely new "offline" route, with minimal disruption to current traffic.
• Big economic boost – It's said it would have the maximum impact in terms of economic activity, having a positive impact on logistics businesses and in terms of access to and from markets in south Wales. I haven't been able to find any raw figures, however.

Disadvantages

• It'll cost ~ £1billion – That's a hell of a lot of (borrowed) money for an ~11 mile stretch of motorway. You have to question if this is "taking a sledgehammer to crack a nut" (c/o Syniadau). There are disputes over the projected traffic figures which hint that the numbers used to support the Black Route are over-estimated, and car usage has "plateaued". This dispute could open the door to a lengthy and costly legal challenge.
• It might be tolled – I'm not sure if this has been completely ruled out or not, but you've got to wonder where the Welsh Government are going to get the funds to pay back the borrowing. It's not like there's a franchise charge like the railways. Experience from the UK's only toll motorway around Birmingham shows that tolling puts drivers off using it. If the Severn Bridge tolls are used to pay for the new M4 instead then it could prolong the use of high tolls there.
• Significant environmental impact – Although it's likely air quality will improve around the current M4, the Black Route crosses through the Gwent Levels – and several sites of special scientific interest – and is likely to produce significant amounts of carbon emissions just through its construction. "Sustainable" it ain't.

The Blue Route

Supporters

• Institute of Welsh Affairs (who sponsored/authored the report with Prof. Stuart Cole, University of South Wales)
• Plaid Cymru
• Welsh Liberal Democrats
• Green Party of EnglandandWales
• Federation of Small Businesses (FSB)
• Institute of Directors
• Friends of the Earth Cymru (tentative support)
• Gwent Wildlife Trust (tentative support)

Proposals (as outlined)

Described as a combination of the existing A48 Southern Distributor Road with the A4810 steelworks road (which was bought for £7.7million by the Welsh Government in 2010 and upgraded), the Blue Route runs from Junction 23a in Magor through to Junction 28 at Tredegar Park. It also includes a stretch of the A48 from the Coldra interchange (Junction 24).

All these roads would be upgraded to a four-lane dual carriageway motorway standard, and existing traffic light junctions and roundabouts along the route would be replaced by motorway-style grade separated junctions. The report says there should be enough room to expand to three-lanes in the future if required.

Advantages

• It's cheaper and quicker to build – The Blue Route is estimated to cost £380million, saving at least £600million compared to the Black Route. That £600million could be spent on public transport improvements, and would go a long way to funding things like the South Wales Metro. Prof. Cole also estimates that the Blue Route could be completed by 2018 (more likely to be the early 2020s, IMO), while the Black Route could take until 2031 to be finished.
• Almost completely avoids the Gwent Levels – A huge environmental plus point is that it only skirts the edge of the Gwent Levels and would mostly be constructed along existing road corridors.
• It'll still be constructed to motorway standards – It'll just be a two-lane motorway instead of three-lane. It'll still increase overall motorway capacity and is only one lane narrower than the Black Route.

Disadvantages

• It'll cause more disruption during construction – You could easily see roads across southern Newport closed or restricted for several months at a time as the Blue Route is built. This could cause problems along the current A48 in addition to all the problems on the current M4. If both diversionary routes suffered major disruption at the same time that would be the equivalent of a fatal heart attack to south Wales transport.
• Too many junctions could create more bottlenecks – Some of the existing problems with local traffic using the M4 to get from one part of Newport to another will simply shift to the Blue Route. While you can even argue that because it's to the quiet south of the city it might not attract enough local traffic at all.
• The grade separation of existing junctions could be difficult – Looking along the route on Google Earth you can see that there's not much room to fit full blown grade-separated junctions in without creating junctions similar in style to that of Junction 41 in Port Talbot. It'll be an engineering challenge and could be an unforeseen cost as there's no detailed plan of the Blue Route available yet.

Plaid's Premature Presentation?

AMs often complain that their committee work isn't given the attention or respect it deserves.
So why did Plaid Cymru preempt an inquiry by a committee one of their own AMs chairs?
(Pic : National Assembly of Wales)

The National Assembly's Environment and Sustainability Committee – chaired by Alun Ffred Jones AM (Plaid, Arfon) - are currently undertaking an inquiry into the Newport M4 plans.

On 5^th June, they sent a letter (pdf) to Business & Economy Minister, Edwina Hart (Lab, Gower), expressing concerns about the environmental impact of the Black Route and asking her to outline how and why the Welsh Government decided to prefer it over other options.

I should point out that plans to completely bypass Newport have been in place since at least 2004 (pdf), and the Black Route is a continuation of those plans.

A few weeks later, Plaid Cymru publicly threw their backing behind the Blue Route, using their weekly debate in the National Assembly on 18th June to call upon the Welsh Government to rule out the Black Route on value for money and environmental grounds.

With the committee inquiry yet to report back, some AMs questioned the timing of Plaid's debate. During First Minister's Questions on 17^th June, Carwyn Jones said :

"What I find farcical is that the....Committee is looking at the M4 at the moment, the Chair has sent a letter to the Minister, and we have a debate tomorrow prejudging the entire issue.....It calls into question the committee’s entire proceedings in that regard. Why on earth have committee proceedings when, half way through, a party makes its own mind up? That makes no sense at all. "

Both the person who led the debate - Plaid's economy spokesperson, Rhun ap Iorwerth AM (Plaid, Ynys Mon) - and Eluned Parrott AM (Lib Dem, South Wales Central) defended opposition parties' right to scrutinise the government whenever they choose. Eluned was less forthcoming when it came to the timing however, suggesting it was "serendipitous" that the debate coincided with the publication of the letter to Edwina Hart from Alun Ffred Jones laying out the committee's concerns.

Mick Antoniw AM (Lab, Pontypridd) – a member of the Environment Committee – went further, saying it was, "imprudent and highly irresponsible....asking the Assembly to adopt a position on the issue....before we have completed our inquiry". Mick was exaggerating things but he has a point. The correct term is predetermination (c/o Tim Kerr QC).

Two days after the debate, Edwina Hart wrote back to the committee (pdf) saying that as there was a formal ongoing decision-making process she was unable to give further evidence to them. I'm sure the preempting of the committee report gave her an excuse not to as well.

Committee work is often held in high regard by AMs (and myself), so I doubt I'm the only person disappointed that Plaid chose to go about this in the manner that they did. The Blue Route deserved to be treated with a bit more care, as it isn't the be all and end all it's being made out to be. It has problems of its own.

You would expect all AMs, from all parties, to approach major issues like this objectively. Committee inquiries are often the main avenue by which to form an objective opinion after lengthy written and oral evidence submission, followed by cross-party deliberation. Having a committee report backing your party view is therefore very important in terms of forming an argument. In this case Plaid come across as impatient and intellectually lazy.

Although it's no secret that Plaid oppose the Black Route and have done for some time - it was Ieuan Wyn Jones who put a halt to the original plans - it's like telling the Assembly, "We've made our mind up without considering all of the evidence - even from a committee one of our own AMs chairs. Now we expect you to as well".

Considering he's a consummate parliamentarian, I'm sure that if Dafydd Elis-Thomas AM (Plaid, Dwyfor Meirionnydd) were still chair of the Environment Committee he would never have allowed this debate to go ahead. He abstained during the vote on the motion.

Plaid's motion supporting the Blue Route was comprehensively altered and rejected, after Labour were (seemingly) whipped into not voting on the motion at all due to the minister's "ongoing decision-making process". The Tories were never going to back it so it sunk.

I'm not aiming criticism at anyone in particular because Plaid aren't the only party that do this; the Tories preempted an ongoing tourism inquiry with their own debate last week, while Labour tried something similar in relation to the Williams Commission. Plaid have also shown recently - via their sport discussion paper and others - that they do take committee inquiries into account when presenting an argument or coming up with new policies. I don't see why it had to be different this time.

Sadly, Plaid have form when it comes to adopting positions or taking decisions without considering all of the evidence. Bad habits like these can become a political party's dark side if they're not careful.

UPDATE 16/07/14 : Well there you have it; the Black Route has won. The Welsh Government made the announcement that it was to go ahead earlier today.

I'll give credit to Edwina Hart in that she doesn't muck about, and she justified the decision based on the consultation evidence alone. But any moral high ground Welsh Labour might've had after Plaid's preempting of the committee inquiry has just evaporated, making the First Minister and Mick Antoniw look silly after their righteous indignation a few weeks ago.

There might still be time for this decision to be reconsidered, and the Environment Committee are yet to report back on their inquiry. What I fear now is that this project is going to suck up a significant portion of Welsh transport spending, and the South Wales Metro - which could probably be completed in 10 years - is now going to become a 30-40 year "generational" project.

As I said last week, "sustainability" is meaningless in Welsh politics.

UPDATE 17/07/14 : A new post covering all the developments and the politicial fallout - Newport M4 - Smell the Glove

Read More

M4 Newport consultation and rail upgrades in Gwent

The Welsh Government have, at last, formally launched their consultation into possible solutions to the "bottleneck" at the Brynglas Tunnels in Newport. The consultation website is here and comments are due by 6^th June.

I'm on record opposing a new M4 bypass around Newport, as is Syniadau. It would be complete overkill and likely to become a costly white elephant, especially if it were tolled to help pay for the £1bn+ construction costs. That would be a double-toll on entry to Wales if the Severn Bridge tolls weren't removed at the same time.

The Welsh Government, following on from the previous Welsh Government, have short to medium-term plans to improve the duel-carriageway that runs to the south of the Glan Llyn development site and Llanwern Steelworks. It's a relatively inexpensive way to partially solve the problem. If local traffic were encouraged to use this - combined with the selective closing of slip-roads on the M4 through Newport - it could help reduce congestion and provide more resilience to the Brynglas Tunnels. It would probably mean that this road would need to be upgraded, perhaps with a few grade-seperated junctions, to ensure it's a "proper option" for drivers.

BBC Wales, The Western Mail and South Wales Argus have reported that one option on the table is the widening of the Brynglas Tunnels themselves at the cost of some £550m. That's probably a good "middle option" between the "sledgehammer and nut" M4 bypass and the "bang for buck" Llanwern improvement.

As I'm not an engineer, I can't give informed comment on a project like that, but I would assume it would cause massive disruption and probably lead to the demolition of the houses above the tunnels. So, we would likely need an upgraded Llanwern improvement anyway during this period for diverted traffic. I goes without saying there's more than enough potential for a significant cost overrun.

It makes me wonder if it's a genuine Welsh Government option, one for the construction company or just an opportunity to pick a fight with Westminster over borrowing powers.

Credit where it's due, I made a point about Labour echo-cho-ho-o-ing previously announced announcements a few weeks ago, including this, so it's nice to have something on the table at last.

On public transport options in the area - and in my opinion that's just as important - SEWTA published documents last year on possible upgrades to rail services in Gwent including (for definite):

• A new two-platform station at Caerleon adjacent to St Cadoc's Hospital
• Upgrade to Abergavenny station– including new car parking off the A465, DDA footbridge, bus turning circle and possible bay platform for additional services in the future
• Upgrade to Cwmbran station – including new car park on Somerset Road, DDA footbridge and ticket machines
• Minor improvements to Pontypool & New Inn station with possibility of future park and ride site
• An extra two-hourly service

And also proposed/rejected at present/future improvements:

• New stations at Llantarnam and Sebastopol on Marches Line
• New station at Llanwern on South Wales Mainline with linked bus service and park and ride site.
• Upgrade to Severn Tunnel Junction station, with new station building, large park and ride site and possible future direct access from M48
• Improved Chepstow station with DDA footbridge, new ticket office and toilets

Read More

Welsh Government's reprioritised National Transport Plan

Local Government and Communities Minister Carl Sargeant (Lab, Alyn & Deeside) has unveiled the Welsh Government's reprioritisation of the National Transport Plan (NTP).

Transport has been one of the areas where, in my opinion, successive Welsh Governments can point to some success. We've seen multiple road schemes delivered after long waits, rail lines and stations reopened and a clear commitment to sustainable development.

Unfortunately I think that's coming to an end now.

I realise that transport isn't a sexy portfolio for Labour in particular. The fact it's been inexplicably lumped in with Local Government portfolio - instead of the economy - shows what Labour consider transports role to be – not an economic driver or key plank in infrastructure but as something to be "tweaked" at a "community" level to provide "opportunities".

We could've done far worse than have the capable Carl Sargeant in charge of transport, but having looked at the reprioritisation I can't help but feel let down.

Far from prioritising "key" east-west transport links, it appears as though "tweaking" has won the day. The Welsh Government may point to 40% cuts in capital expenditure but just take a look at the Scottish Government's plans for infrastructure development and weep.

Instead of " standing up for Wales", we're increasingly going to be looking to Westminster as the key driver of infrastructure development. The ridiculous M4 Newport bypass has already been resurrected from the grave for the umpteenth time along with that other zombie the Severn Barrage. I don't think either will happen to be blunt, despite the headlines.

Before I'm accused of bias, I don't think Ieuan Wyn Jones's original NTP was "blow your socks off" stuff either and he didn't have to deal with the capital budget cuts. In Plaid's defence, they offered an alternative model to raise money – something the Scottish Government have taken onboard. Labour have offered nothing but excuses.

It isn't all bad news though.

• The commitment to complete A465 duelling by 2020 remains and construction of the next stage is imminent.
• New bypasses for Newtown, Caernarfon and Builth Wells are included in the "taken forward" programme.
• New stations at Brackla (Bridgend) and Energlyn (Caerphilly) by 2015 plus capacity improvements in the south Wales valley rail network and between Wrexham and Chester.
• A commitment to an hourly service between Aberystwyth and Shrewsbury and redoubling of track between Llanelli and Gowerton.

As you can probably see, the reason I'm so disappointed is that many of these things have already been announced. None of it is "new" and I'm not convinced that these schemes are seriously going to boost the economy. I'm more relieved  that these things have been kept in.

I was expecting Labour to want to stamp their own mark on the NTP and perhaps drop some, if not all, of the "north-south" improvements and deliver at least one of the "big bang" transport schemes Wales is crying out for. Schemes that would really boost the Welsh economy.

In my view these "big bangs" are:

• Electrification of the Valley Lines (or a clear commitment/timetable with Westminster cooperation)
• Upgrade the A48 around Newport to near-motorway standard (i.e some grade separation of junctions on the SDR) and remodel the existing M4 through Newport
• The A4232 Cardiff Periphery Distributor completion (Cardiff Bay-Newport Road)
• A494 Queensferry-Ewloe Upgrade

....none of them made the list, although there is some vague reference to provide more "resilience" to the M4 at Newport. Perhaps there's still time for Carwyn, Kirsty or Carl to pull a rabbit out of the hat with the £200-odd million coming courtesy of Gorgeous George's Autumn statement but I'm not holding my breath.

I mean why the hell are we going to have to wait until after 2015 for an express bus to Cardiff Airport for heaven's sake!?

Read More

Tunnel Vision - Renewed calls for an M4 Newport bypass

The severity of yesterday's fire shouldn't be underestimated,
however the M4 bypass plan refuses to die.
(Pic : BBC Wales)

For the second time this year, the Brynglas tunnels closed due to a vehicle fire, causing massive disruption in and around Newport and beyond. Yesterday's fire seemed to be far more serious than previous ones. Mercifully, nobody was killed or seriously injured, but the pictures and videos clearly indicate that could've easily been a different story.

Predictably (and harking back to my post on Wales's lack of perspective) there have been calls - by business leaders like David Rosser of the CBI and William Graham (Con, South Wales East) - to resurrect the M4 bypass around Newport.

To quote MH at Syniadau, it's a case of "taking a sledgehammer to crack a nut. It is overkill."

Accidents happen. However frustrating closures of the M4 are, it doesn't warrant a £1billion+ PFI scheme combined with a (possible) double-toll on entering Wales. What message is that going to send to business, commuters and visitors?

If the Brynglas tunnels close due to a fire, that suggests that they need some sort of sprinkler system (to put out fires before structural damage takes hold, and enable quicker clear-ups) which would cost significantly less than £1billion, I presume. In addition, there are probably several more road schemes just as important to the Welsh economy that don't get enough attention because of this notorious pinch point - including completing the Cardiff Peripheral Distributor and widening the Britannia Bridge.

Here's a suggestion. Tell business leaders they can have the bypass. However, only if they are willing to pay for it through hikes in business rates for M4 corridor companies, surcharges on office parking spaces as well as shouldering a big chunk of the PFI debt.

The National Transport Plan has gone largely unappreciated and unnoticed (with the exception of the likes of Syniadau). The previous Welsh Government were right to abandon the Newport bypass. They were also right to introduce variable speed limits and improve the A48 and Llanwern road - hopefully taking more local traffic off the M4.

These are perfectly sensible bang-for-buck projects that fiscal conservatives would otherwise be praising if it were not for the recession, which has reduced everything to zombified, frothing at the mouth "Must! Pwomowte! Gwowff!"

Progress on the crucial Llanwern/Magor improvement has been depressingly slow. That project clearly needs to step up a gear (excuse the pun). At the moment, the Welsh Government are going through one of those tiresome "consultation processes" which are expected to last into early 2012.

Not good enough.

In the longer term, providing more public transport options in and around Newport - including new railway stations, park and rides and bus corridor improvements - are also required. Of course, all this requires capital spending and there's precious little of that about. But "business leaders" seem to think the Welsh Government can magic £1billion out of their backside at their beck and call.

It's said that the M4 is one of south Wales's coronary arteries. A fair analogy. Yesterday's fire should serve as the heart attack that prompts lifestyle changes. Invasive heart surgery is something everyone should want to avoid, and quite often, never solves the underlying problems.

Read More