Orders of the Day — Transport (Wales) Bill

House of Commons, 17 October 2005.

New Clause 1 — Cross-border provision

Bill Wiggin (Conservative, Leominster)

I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.

With this provision, we seek to ensure that cross-border issues are dealt with definitely and effectively. We have argued the point several times throughout the Bill's progress in relation to a number of issues. Although some aspects have been suitably discussed and assurances given—I am certain that the Under-Secretary of State for Wales believes that his Government can protect the interest of English border travellers—we still have no definite proof that the Bill will work as the Government anticipate. We are trusting them on the Bill. The responsibility to ensure that it works for the benefit of the people of Wales, and not just according to Rhodri Morgan's unreasonable agenda, is firmly in the hands of the Government, although I have considerable reservations. On the BBC's morning programme, "Dragon's Eye", Rhodri Morgan gave his opinion of the Welsh Development Agency argument, saying:

"Mr. Hain can express personal views, but in the end who has the responsibility? Who has the responsibility in Wales? It's us, it's the Assembly."

Can we really trust Mr. Morgan to deal with cross-border issues reasonably and to listen to the views of the Secretaries of State for Transport and for Wales? Even if the Minister assures us that there will be collaboration and discussion, what real powers will the Government have to argue with Rhodri Morgan if he insists that the Assembly has total control over those transport issues in Wales?

The splits between Westminster and Cardiff have never been more obvious or more serious not only for policy development, but for the best interests of the people of Wales. I agree with the Secretary of State that the WDA is a worldwide brand and that the advice to take a long hard look was both sensible and responsible. However, although he said that the WDA is the most successful economic development agency in the world Rhodri Morgan told ITV Wales:

"Yes, but it's not a matter for him. This is a devolved matter."

ITV Wales asked:

"It doesn't bother you that the Cabinet Minister representing Wales is unhappy with your reform?"

Rhodri Morgan replied:

"Well, if it's a devolved matter it's a devolved matter, I don't know how often I have to repeat this. If it's a devolved matter it's a devolved matter, it's not a matter for the Secretary of State for Wales. I can say that 64 times, 64,000 times, 64 million times, I don't mind. The answer will always be the same."

I find that attitude extraordinary.

Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)

The hon. Gentleman is trying to make mischief. Does he truly believe that it would be better to have complete indecision in the process with two sets of people trying to make decisions on the same issue? Does he realise that the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council is the only forum in this country for reconciling differences when the law is not clear where the responsibility lies? That can hardly be where he wants such issues to be resolved.

Bill Wiggin (Conservative, Leominster)

The hon. Gentleman is usually a sensible chap and I am always happy to accept interventions from him. However, this problem is particularly worrying, because the Bill allows the Assembly to take responsibility for cross-border travel. It allows discussions between councils in England and the Welsh Assembly, but it is not clear who would finally adjudicate. He represents the interests of his constituents at Westminster, but no one in the Welsh Assembly represents my constituents. I am sure that the Minister will assure me that I need not worry about that difficulty, but the First Minister's attitude makes me worried about the Bill and about to whom people travelling to and from Wales across the border would have recourse.

Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)

The hon. Gentleman said that he particularly enjoyed giving way to me, so I am glad he has given way a second time. I know how consistent a man he is. He still seems to be arguing that there should be two people in charge of the same policy. If their views happened to be different, the only means of reconciling them would be by reference to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. Surely he is not suggesting that rail services on the borders of England and Wales should be decided by that body.

Bill Wiggin (Conservative, Leominster)

No. The hon. Gentleman should read the new clause. It seeks to ensure that any dispute would be referred to the Secretary of State for Transport. I am grateful for the hon. Gentleman's intervention. He is right.

How can we be certain that the Minister's promises in Committee or in the House today will be as helpful as we all want to believe they will be? We still have no explicit assurances in the Bill that English local authorities will have useful recourse to a Secretary of State in Westminster in the event of problems in the creation of local transport plans or in the implementation of policies on transport crossing the border. We are still unsure what form discussions between English and Welsh authorities will take, particularly the Welsh joint transport authorities.

We have no guarantees that people in England who use Welsh transport will be able to make effective representations to the public transport users committee for Wales. I still have deep concerns that people who live in authorities just outside Wales will have to suffer a long and drawn-out route of representation to the Assembly, if they are represented at all. It is bad enough that English local authorities must make representations to a Secretary of State who then makes representations to the Assembly, but it is unforgivable that there is no certainty of that occurring effectively.

Given the obvious trend in the opinions of the leadership of the Assembly, I wonder whether we should have taken a far less trusting approach to the Bill. I tabled the new clause to ensure successful cross-border and Westminster-Cardiff relations as regards transport in Wales.

Lembit Öpik (Liberal Democrat, Montgomeryshire)

Until I heard the comments of the hon. Member for Leominster (Bill Wiggin), the Conservative spokesperson on Welsh affairs, I had assumed that his new clause intended consultation with the Secretary of State for Wales, but it seems that he means the Secretary of State for Transport. Will he clarify that?

Bill Wiggin (Conservative, Leominster)

The hon. Gentleman is right, depending which was the more appropriate Secretary of State. Constituents who live outside Wales must have an opportunity to be represented, as they are in the House but not in the Assembly.

Lembit Öpik (Liberal Democrat, Montgomeryshire)

From the way in which the new clause is framed, it is not clear to me that that is the intention. The vagueness in the drafting could cause problems, but I am grateful for the clarification.

Bill Wiggin (Conservative, Leominster)

I hope that the Minister will give us assurances to allay my fears, but I appreciate the hon. Gentleman's comments on the drafting.

Lembit Öpik (Liberal Democrat, Montgomeryshire)

I thought of little else during the weekend. If I had been able to call the hon. Gentleman on Friday, I might have enjoyed my Saturday and Sunday more, but now I am relieved and Wales will breathe a sigh of relief after his remarks.

I understand the hon. Gentleman's concern, which we discussed during the Bill's earlier stages, but I am worried about the consequences of accepting new clause 1 as it stands. We all agree that there have been terrible problems with public transport in Wales, as in the United Kingdom. I agree that the Labour Administration in Wales have not done much to resolve the legion problems created previously by the Conservative Government. We have a serious transport problem caused by two Governments of different colours.

The new clause is really about cross-border provision and I look forward to hearing what the Minister has to say about that. I do not share the concerns of the hon. Member for Leominster, because it would be inconceivable for significant investment decisions to be made without pretty much automatic recourse to cross-border discussion. Any significant investment will necessarily involve a degree of negotiation between the Welsh Assembly and the Administration in Westminster, because a clear understanding of the financial jurisdiction of those two Administrations would have to be ironed out. That could not take place unless one had a fairly sophisticated and high-level strategic discussion beforehand.

Another reason I am not as worried as the hon. Gentleman is that there are plenty of precedents for this in other aspects of cross-border relations. All the work that we have done to deal with flooding in mid-Wales and with the considerable problems that we have with health has required a high level of cross-border discussion.

I have previously highlighted the risks involved in framing legislation on the basis of the current political environment. The hon. Gentleman gave his views about the individuals who are currently in charge in Wales. I ask him to look forward to another occasion where the strains might be even greater. Let us say that from 2009 to 2050 there is a benign Administration led by the Liberal Democrats in the Assembly and also in Westminster.

Bill Wiggin (Conservative, Leominster)

Get real.

Lembit Öpik (Liberal Democrat, Montgomeryshire)

Make it 80 years, then. Let us say that, after that time, there is a sharp divide between an Administration of one colour in the Assembly and one of another colour in Westminster, who would nevertheless have to negotiate about the matters that I mentioned. Subsection (2) of the new clause would be a green light to a significant division whereby the process of consultation could be used to hold up recommendations and decisions made by the Welsh Assembly. I understand the hon. Gentleman's concerns, but I am worried that his new clause could increase the likelihood of mischief where two Administrations from two parties seek to obstruct the progress of the other.

Nick Ainger (Labour, Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire)

I am grateful to the hon. Member for Leominster (Bill Wiggin) for trusting the Government on this. I hope to persuade him to withdraw his new clause, for reasons that I argued in Committee when we debated his amendment No. 1. I shall bear it in mind that everybody wants to conclude our proceedings as early as possible—especially Conservative Members.

The new clause would require the Assembly to consult the Secretary of State for Transport if any passenger transport service that it secures using the powers in section 7 ran through England. I appreciate the concern of the hon. Member for Leominster regarding the cross-border implications of the Bill, which we have debated at length. As I said in Committee, the transport network in Wales is part of the wider UK network, and such issues cannot be ignored when considering the need for additional passenger services in Wales. The power in clause 7 will allow the Assembly to secure public transport services to meet transport requirements within Wales that would not otherwise be met. As such, the Assembly envisages that the power will be used sparingly to fill significant gaps in service provision. If such services were to run through England—which, if anything, is likely to benefit passengers from England because we are considering additional services—it is inconceivable that the Assembly would fail to consult the Secretary of State for Transport as a matter of course.

Let me reiterate the point. The hon. Member for Leominster said that he wanted to trust the Government on the matter. I have put it on the record that it is inconceivable that the Assembly would fail to consult the Secretary of State for Transport for what would be additional services for English passengers.

Bill Wiggin (Conservative, Leominster)

The Minister is doing a grand job of dealing with my concerns. He has talked about additional services. In view of the obvious breakdown of relations between the Secretary of State and the First Minister, may I ask who would adjudicate if, for example, the Secretary of State for Transport was asked for a lot of money during consultation on a new service that was to cross the border into England? Who would determine such matters?

Nick Ainger (Labour, Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire)

The hon. Gentleman has now raised a different matter. The Bill is clear that, in the case of any additional service that passed through England as a result of a policy that the Welsh Assembly developed, the Assembly would fund the part of the service that was in Wales. However, the fact that the route continued into England and possibly returned to Wales—a possibility on the border—would not place a requirement on the Department for Transport or a local authority to fund that part of the service. Clearly, such a service depends on the support of the Assembly. Clause 7 deals with that. We are considering services that do not currently exist and that local authorities are not willing to support, for whatever reason, but for which there may be a strategic need, identified by the Assembly. The Assembly would therefore fund them. It would not expect any other authority in Wales or in England or the Department for Transport to contribute to that service. I hope that that has reassured the hon. Gentleman and I therefore ask him to withdraw the new clause.

Bill Wiggin (Conservative, Leominster)

I am grateful to the Minister for dealing with the new clause and for taking my intervention. I am satisfied that the Bill covers the problem, especially since he was sensible and kind enough to emphasise the additional services, about which I was concerned.

I beg to ask leave to withdraw the motion.

Motion and clause, by leave, withdrawn.

Order for Third Reading read.

Nick Ainger (Labour, Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire)

I beg to move, That the Bill be now read the Third time.

The Bill, which received its Second Reading on 16 June and was considered in Standing Committee on 28 June, will enable the Assembly to take forward its integrated transport strategy by providing it with a comprehensive and coherent set of transport powers. It is an example of the sort of measure that could, in principle, be taken forward by the Assembly if the legislative proposals laid out in the "Better Governance for Wales" White Paper were already in force.

The Bill's objectives have been widely welcomed by all who have been involved in its scrutiny. It was first published in draft on 27 May 2004. Local authorities, regional transport consortiums, Assembly-sponsored public bodies, transport authorities, police and fire authorities, representative bodies and interest groups, utilities and transport operators were among those consulted on the draft Bill.

The Assembly received 48 responses following the publication of the draft Bill, including comments from a wide range of public and professional groups including the Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee, the Confederation of Passenger Transport and the Welsh Local Government Association. Of the 135 recommendations and comments received on the text, 60 were comments of general support, while six recommended amendments to clauses relating to rail that were subsequently removed. In total, 14 recommendations made as part of the public consultation were accepted, and subsequent changes were made to the draft Bill.

The Bill has also been scrutinised jointly by the Welsh Affairs Committee of this House and the Assembly's Economic Development and Transport Committee. Those meetings, which were the first time that a House of Commons Committee had formally met a Committee of a devolved Administration, demonstrated an innovative and progressive approach to pre-legislative scrutiny. The Bill was further debated in the Welsh Grand Committee in July 2004 and received widespread support. Indeed, the Bill has consistently received cross-party support, which was reflected in its smooth passage on Second Reading and in Committee. The thorough, detailed debate in Committee covered a wide range of issues and generated a high level of consensus.

I am grateful for the co-operation of the hon. Member for Leominster (Bill Wiggin) and other hon. Members on the overall aims of the Bill. However, that did not prevent detailed and vigorous discussion and a thorough examination of all its provisions. The Government did not table any amendments, and 18 of the 20 Opposition amendments discussed in Committee were withdrawn following an in-depth debate. Two Opposition amendments were lost on a vote.

In Committee, the hon. Member for Leominster asked me to reflect on a number of questions before Third Reading. The first was whether a local authority in England that objected to the draft transport strategy during the consultation process would be able to make appropriate representations to the Assembly. I would like to reiterate the point that I made in Committee that if such a situation arose, an English authority could make representations to the Secretary of State for Transport, who in turn could make representations to the Welsh Assembly and the Assembly's Economic Development and Transport Minister. However, one of the main purposes underlying the Bill is that local authorities in England whose areas abut Wales should be involved in the development of the Wales transport strategy, and that the strategy should work for people on both sides of the border.

The hon. Gentleman's second question was whether local authorities should have regard to their current commitments when drafting their local transport plans. As I mentioned in Committee, I cannot envisage a situation arising in which local authorities would develop policies to be included in such plans that did not take account of their existing commitments. However, those commitments should not be the main factor in developing local transport plans, which should evolve over time to take account of external factors and the changing needs of Welsh communities and businesses. Local authorities should not be restricted by current commitments, which will, in turn, also develop and evolve in line with the strategy.

The third question that the hon. Gentleman asked me to consider was whether a direction given by the Assembly to two or more local authorities to enter into joint working arrangements could result in increased costs for those authorities. The Assembly works in partnership with local authorities when developing its policies, and it will therefore consider how additional costs arising from any extra responsibilities imposed on local authorities will be met. I can reassure the hon. Gentleman that, under the partnership agreement, the Assembly would recompense local authorities for any additional functions they may take on, and that it is therefore unnecessary to include any provisions in the Bill in relation to that.

I was also asked to consider the wording of clause 5(5), which provides that local authority members must form the majority of any joint transport authority in relation to defining the quorum of a joint transport authority in the Bill. I have given careful thought to this suggestion. The Bill already states that at least half the members of a joint transport authority will be members of local authorities. It is not for us to specify here what the quorum would be, as any order of the National Assembly for Wales setting up a joint transport authority will specify that as well as detailing the composition, financing and functions of the authority.

While we are discussing joint transport authorities, it may be helpful if I make clear that it will not be possible to create a joint transport authority whose area extends outside Wales. I am sure the hon. Gentleman will be pleased to hear that. I hope that I have been able to deal with his concerns, and that he is content with the explanations that I have given.

The public transport users committee for Wales was discussed in some detail in Committee. I repeat that it will be independent of the Assembly, and will have autonomy to make a real difference for users of all modes of public transport in Wales. The London Transport users committee continues to be an effective representative of the views of public transport passengers in Greater London, and I see no reason why the Welsh committee should not function in the same way.

I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Clwyd, South (Mr. Jones), who chaired the Welsh Affairs Committee, to parliamentary colleagues, and to the Assembly for the scrutiny that it conducted when the Bill was published in draft. I also thank my hon. Friend the Member for Aberdeen, South (Miss Begg) for her chairmanship of the Standing Committee. She supervised the proceedings in a thoroughly professional and very expeditious way.

The Bill will enable the Assembly to start delivering its vision for an integrated transport system for the whole of Wales, particularly as it will place a duty on the Assembly to develop and implement policies for the promotion and encouragement of safe, integrated, sustainable, efficient and economic transport facilities and services. I commend it to the House.

Bill Wiggin (Conservative, Leominster)

I echo the Minister's kind comments about the Chairman of the Select Committee, and indeed the Chairman of the Standing Committee. Their help and hard work were greatly appreciated.

I think we are all familiar with the problems and issues that have been present throughout the scrutiny of our proposals. As the Minister said in Committee, the Bill is not about more powers for the Assembly, but about responsibilities for developing policies and strategies for the benefit of transport in Wales. However, the Assembly's responsibility to implement the policies as well is just one of the aspects that have created problems that are still present. We should all like to see positive changes in the delivery of transport services in Wales, and I am sure that everyone here hopes that the Bill will achieve them. Yet since the outset we have had a number of concerns, which remain unsolved to an extent. They were addressed in Committee, but we must be sure that the Government are genuinely committed to living up to the assurances they have given.

In Committee, the Minister admitted:

"There may well be severe problems developing policies within Wales."

If that is what the representative of the Government feels about the Bill's prospects, it is not really surprising that we too have our doubts.

In Committee we debated, at some length, the finer details of developing the Wales transport strategy. I suggested that perhaps the Bill should require the Assembly to consult certain bodies as a matter of course. We were reassured about our desire to see all groups with an interest in transport developments, from local businesses to disabled people's charities, being offered a genuine say in changes.

The Welsh Assembly's previous tendency to consult similar bodies on issues each time, and the criticism voiced about failings in the Assembly's Committee system to deal properly with scrutiny, mean that we shall watch the development of that aspect carefully. We shall have to ensure that, as we were promised in Committee, the Assembly really does consult as many relevant organisations as possible, including those more likely to give unfavourable responses when new policies and developments are considered.

The Minister also assured us that when the Wales transport strategy was being developed, cross-border issues would be taken fully into account. I think that he did that in his closing statements. I am grateful to him for taking on board the points that I asked him to consider, and for the way in which he responded.

We have considered the cross-border issue consistently. In Committee, we were assured that the Government would accept responsibility for negotiating on behalf of English counties, and that any English local authority facing problems as a result of the strategy developed by the Assembly could make representations to a Minister such as the Secretary of State for Transport. We will be watching closely to ensure that the reasonable procedure that the Minister outlined for consultation and adjudication in the event of an impasse is followed.

We were also assured that the Assembly would work with organisations that span the border, such as the many train companies that operate throughout England and Wales. In Committee we were promised

"a great deal of discussion"

with organisations contributing to the network in Wales that are based outside Wales. I look forward to seeing the results of that, too.

In Committee, I stressed the need for local transport plans to be monitored to ensure that they were produced in reasonable time and stressed that, "as soon as practicable", the wording in the Bill, provides a closely monitored and sensible time limit. We were assured that no penalties were necessary to ensure the timely production of local transport plans and that local authorities must do as the Assembly says if it issues a direction regarding those plans. I was glad to hear the Minister confirm that and I hope that that will always prove to be the case.

We will also watch with interest to ensure that joint transport authorities are genuinely appropriately funded, neither forcing more responsibilities on to local authorities without suitable funds, nor becoming another example of waste and inept usage of Welsh taxpayers' hard-earned money. Despite assurances that the results of local authorities working together will be to produce savings rather than more costs, we must watch closely the impact of running a joint transport authority, which, sadly, is assumed will cost approximately £1 million per annum, in addition to £100,000 to £200,000 in set-up costs. The potential for the creation of costly administration and support teams, new quangos and more bureaucracy must be held in check. Financial controls operating in the Assembly must work to ensure probity when committing public funds and to ensure that those funds are appropriate and well placed. Indeed, I was grateful for the Minister's comments on that.

In Committee, we were informed that joint transport authorities cannot cross the border, but local authorities can be instructed to consult on matters with JTAs. The Minister mentioned that I would be pleased about that. I remain absolutely impartial. Of course, I want what is best for Wales but, if the JTAs are working particularly well we would like to see them in operation across the border, too. We must be certain to check that they are as good as we hope they will be when cross-border issues come into play.

We must also watch the practices of the public transport users committee for Wales, particularly on cross-border issues. In Committee, the Minister said that if those who live outside Wales have an issue relating to transport he

"would have thought that the committee would take up any representation that they made". [Official Report, Standing Committee F, 28 June 2005, c. 13, 8, 44.]

That does not seem to be a particularly definite or optimistic view on the ability of those who use Welsh transport to have a voice. However, I look forward to seeing a truly effective and representative committee of users of Welsh transport. I am sure that we will all keep a watchful eye on anything untoward should it occur.

We have debated in great detail the fact that the Bill gives the Assembly the ability to provide financial assistance only to services or facilities that would not exist without its help. We believe that the Assembly should be afforded the opportunity to help those services that can exist unaided even further. In certain cases, the Assembly should be given greater freedom to spend its money on whatever it believes to be the most beneficial recipient.

Perhaps that opportunity is most pertinent to aviation in Wales. I am sure that the Minister will remember that I said that I remain open-minded on the issue. Of course, it is advantageous to the Assembly to have the ability to fund air transport if it so desires, and those developments could have economic advantages for Wales, although that is far from proven. Obviously, the benefits to the Welsh economy must be considered.

David Davies (Conservative, Monmouth)

No doubt all Members will be pleased that my hon. Friend is so open-minded. Is he aware that the Liberal Democrat Welsh Assembly Member for South Wales West is less liberal on the issue? He said:

"I would far rather continue to improve pinch points on the A470 and A483 and use this money to subsidise a good rail service"

than put it into air services. Is not it about time that the Liberal Democrats got a coherent transport policy on this matter?

Bill Wiggin (Conservative, Leominster)

My hon. Friend is right but I think he is over-optimistic if he thinks that the Liberal Democrats will ever have a coherent policy. I admire him for his optimism, just as I admire the hon. Member for Montgomeryshire (Lembit Öpik) for his endless enthusiasm for Liberal Democrat policies, despite their lack of coherence.

Lembit Öpik (Liberal Democrat, Montgomeryshire)

rose—

Sylvia Heal (Deputy Speaker, Halesowen and Rowley Regis)

Order. I wonder if I could remind all hon. Members that we are debating the Third Reading of the Bill, rather than a particular party's transport policy.

Lembit Öpik (Liberal Democrat, Montgomeryshire)

It was exactly for that reason that I wanted to ensure that the hon. Member for Leominster (Bill Wiggin) would never accuse me of being anything other than utterly consistent in my support for aviation transport.

Bill Wiggin (Conservative, Leominster)

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely adamant about his admiration for air transport. We are all worried about whether the Assembly is spending its money in the most effective way for the people of Wales. We would like the Assembly to have the flexibility to help services that could exist but might need aid, which might be a better use of the Bill. The hon. Gentleman has been consistent in his desire to see flying in Wales, and he goes gliding at the weekend as well. No one could be more committed to gravity than he is.

The benefits to the Welsh economy must be considered, and we need definite answers as to how many people would use and benefit from Welsh air transport and on the comparative benefits of developing better road and rail services. The Assembly consultation document on intra-Wales scheduled air services suggested that a maximum of 80 direct jobs and 120 indirect jobs would result from such provision. I am not yet convinced that the estimated £800,000 required to subsidise air transport in year one and the £400,000 to upgrade facilities at Valley airport could not be better spent elsewhere. The need for subsidies to begin air transport services in the first place raises the issue of whether these services would be workable in the long term.

In the first quarter of this year, the number of passengers using Cardiff international airport slumped by 19 per cent. and it is possible that only 400 passengers a week might use flights within Wales. We must be sure to keep an extremely watchful eye on these developments and make sure that if subsidised services demonstrably fail, they do not turn into an expensive failure for Wales.

Several more important issues must be considered and monitored if and when the expansion of air travel occurs. We know that short-haul flights are particularly damaging to the environment. By 2050, aircraft will be one of the biggest single sources of greenhouse gases. Indeed, greenhouse gases from aircraft rose by almost 90 per cent. between 1990 and 2003. In Wales, carbon dioxide emissions have risen from their 1990 levels, making a great contribution as the Government, sadly, head toward missing their carbon dioxide emission targets. With the Government meant to be tackling climate change so seriously, there seems to be something of a contradiction in condoning a further increase in air transport in the UK, especially when the need for it or the number of those who favour it is far from proven.

The use of money on such a clearly unsustainable form of transport must continue to be monitored and scrutinised very carefully, especially when the Government are putting so little funding and effort into research towards development for cleaner fuels for air transport.

During the progress of the Bill, we have sought to test the Government's intentions and have received many valuable assurances. I am sure that we all look forward to seeing those put into practice. We have drawn attention to the various anomalies and problems present in the Bill and I still have some doubts about several aspects. But I hope that the Act truly creates safe, integrated, sustainable, efficient and economic transport facilities and services throughout Wales and look forward to seeing its positive effects making a real difference for the people of Wales.

John Smith (Labour, Vale of Glamorgan)

I rise to speak briefly in support of the Third Reading of the Bill, which I warmly welcome. I congratulate all those involved in guiding it through the House.

Unlike the hon. Member for Leominster (Bill Wiggin), I am a big supporter of Cardiff international airport. I should like to place it on record that despite the reduction in services experienced earlier this year, Cardiff remains the fastest growing regional airport in the UK and is on target to reach the aviation White Paper's target of a quadrupling of throughput of passengers by 2020.

Bill Wiggin (Conservative, Leominster)

What led the hon. Gentleman to come up with the extraordinary accusation that I am not a supporter of Cardiff airport?

John Smith (Labour, Vale of Glamorgan)

I am sorry, Madam Deputy Speaker. Perhaps I misunderstood the hon. Gentleman, but I thought that in placing on the record the decline in passenger services this year, he was attacking the growth in short-haul flights and the increase in air travel.

David Davies (Conservative, Monmouth)

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the Welsh Assembly Member for South Wales West, Alun Cairns, has done a huge amount in the fight to get a bypass to Cardiff airport from the M4?

John Smith (Labour, Vale of Glamorgan)

I have campaigned on the issue of surface access to Cardiff international airport for the past 20 years, and I am completely unaware of any proposal for a bypass.

Importantly, the Bill will enable joined-up thinking on how we can tackle what is probably one of the most important transport issues affecting Wales. Its powers and provisions—the hon. Member for Montgomeryshire (Lembit Öpik) will support me on this issue, given his long background in campaigning for the Welsh aviation industry—will enable suitable surface access to Cardiff airport. However, the numbers will not grow in the way that I mentioned earlier if this issue is not addressed seriously and quickly. I hope that the Bill will help in that regard by bringing together all the players involved in the provision of vital access to the airport, in order to help find the quickest possible solution to this problem.

I welcome the opening earlier this year of the Vale of Glamorgan railway line, which was a huge step forward not just for my constituency but for transport policy in Wales as a whole. It provides an excellent commuter run all the way from Bridgend—my hon. Friend the Member for Bridgend (Mrs. Moon) is not present—to Cardiff via Barry; and, vitally, it provides a direct link to Cardiff international airport via Rhoose Point. So people will be able to travel by train nearly all the way to what is the fastest growing regional airport in the UK, and will need to take only a short bus journey from Rhoose Point station. But with the best will and according even to the most positive predictions, that line is unlikely to carry more than 10 per cent. of all the passengers using the airport. That presents a huge problem in terms of congestion on the roads surrounding the airport and people's ability to get to it. If that problem is not solved first, we will not be able to achieve the tasks set out in the White Paper.

Nigel Evans (Conservative, Ribble Valley)

I agree with the hon. Gentleman that we need all possible links to Cardiff Wales airport to ensure that the numbers using it are boosted. But does he not agree that the Welsh Assembly Government should have pulled their finger out a long time ago by working with everybody to ensure the creation of that link road? Will he also carry on campaigning with Conservative Members to ensure that British Airways comes back to Cardiff Wales airport?

John Smith (Labour, Vale of Glamorgan)

It certainly is absolutely outrageous that British Airways took its regional services away from the airport. That said, I am absolutely delighted that bmibaby not only replaced those services but added to them substantially. It is British Airways that lost out by pulling out of the airport. This is a vital matter, and I agree that we must develop and enhance all routes to the airport in the interests not just of my constituency and the south Wales economy, but of all Wales.

Lembit Öpik (Liberal Democrat, Montgomeryshire)

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that there is no long-term alternative to having a public transport link from the centre of Cardiff to the centre of the airport without the bus connection? Does he further agree that, although there are significant associated logistical and investment problems, in the long term the provision of such a link is the single most important thing that we can do to ensure sustainable connections to the airport?

John Smith (Labour, Vale of Glamorgan)

I want to think carefully before I answer that question. I believe that a direct link into the airport—a spur off the Porthkerry viaduct—that is integrated into the UK inter-city network would provide a huge advantage. In the longer term, that is clearly something that we should press for. Similarly, we should press for a direct link—not a bypass—from the airport through the A4232 at Five Mile lane and right through to the M4 at the Llantrisant junction. However, that is a long way off.

David Davies (Conservative, Monmouth)

Does the hon. Gentleman acknowledge that the only thing preventing that from happening at the moment is the Welsh Assembly Administration, which is run by his colleagues in the Labour party?

John Smith (Labour, Vale of Glamorgan)

I do not want to get involved in a childish tit-for-tat on Third Reading, Madam Deputy Speaker, when we have an important Bill before us. I am not getting into the business of knocking anyone; rather, I am in the business of providing Wales with a transport network that is the envy of the world. A network that integrates our air services would provide exactly that, because there is no example in the world of a successful economy generating and regenerating itself without a first-class international airport providing scheduled business flights throughout the world. That is exactly what we all should be striving for in respect of Cardiff international airport.

On both sides of the House, we should be campaigning for a direct rail link, just as we should be striving for a direct dual carriageway link to the M4 corridor, which would get us into the UK road networks. However, that is going to take years, if not decades, and the problem is that we cannot stand still on the issue.

I hate to use the example again—there is always a danger of highlighting the problems at Cardiff international airport, when it is the fastest-growing regional airport in the UK—but it was Digby Jones as director-general of the CBI who described the existing road from the M4 corridor to the Cardiff international airport as the only such airport road in the world on which one could get stuck behind a milk float for nine miles.

Stephen Crabb (Conservative, Preseli Pembrokeshire)

How can Cardiff airport be the fastest growing in Europe if passenger numbers are falling?

John Smith (Labour, Vale of Glamorgan)

I did not say in Europe, Madam Deputy Speaker. The hon. Gentleman is obviously not listening and not interested in the debate. I said that it was the fastest growing airport in the UK, as defined by growth over the last five years—not on the basis of one quartile assessment, the findings of which have been abused to bash the airport this afternoon. We must act immediately and I believe that the Bill may well help us to do so. That is why I am speaking in favour of it this evening.

Proposals have been put forward by the Welsh Assembly Government and are under consideration right now. However, it must be stressed that this is a short-term measure to try to tackle the problem that Digby Jones referred to. We are talking about a tiny road, one of the most congested junctions in the whole of south Wales, at Culverhouse Cross, and then mini-roundabouts that currently have to be negotiated all the way to the airport. We will not be able to develop our airport as long as that type of access continues.

You will be delighted to hear, Madam Deputy Speaker, that I have it on good authority that Catherine Zeta Jones is going to be delighted. When flying into Cardiff to visit her home in Swansea, she has often complained that she cannot easily get from the airport on to the motorway. She has, in fact, been using the "Zeta Jones shortcuts"—down the Five Mile lane, cutting across through the country lanes to Pendoylan. The Welsh Assembly Government have proposed trunking the A4232, Five Mile lane, and the trunking of a short section of the A48 as an interim measure to try to tackle the problem of the congested existing road that feeds the airport.

Nigel Evans (Conservative, Ribble Valley)

I am devastated by the news that the hon. Gentleman has brought us about Catherine Zeta Jones. Perhaps she could ask her husband to fund the project.

Sylvia Heal (Deputy Speaker, Halesowen and Rowley Regis)

Order. Once again I remind hon. Members that we are discussing Third Reading of the Transport (Wales) Bill.

John Smith (Labour, Vale of Glamorgan)

I am extremely grateful for that ruling, Madam Deputy Speaker, because I would not want to answer that question.

Proposals have been put forward. As I understand it, they are still out to consultation. They are temporary, immediate proposals to try to ease the problem of access to the airport. They are not satisfactory. The upgrading of Five Mile lane is a blessing and is welcome, because it is one of the most dangerous stretches of road in the country. The maintaining of the A48, if properly done, may improve the situation. Sadly, however, the local authority, the Vale of Glamorgan county council, has completely shelved the proposals to—

Stephen Crabb (Conservative, Preseli Pembrokeshire)

Who runs that?

John Smith (Labour, Vale of Glamorgan)

I have no wish to go into that. My concern is to meet the challenge and improve access to the airport, which is what everybody from all parties wants.

Bill Wiggin (Conservative, Leominster)

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. All parties want that, but it is not covered by the Bill. Responsibility for roads is already devolved. The second problem is that existing successful businesses will not be eligible for the sponsorship that the Bill allows. Those businesses will not get more money. Only businesses that do not exist, or cannot exist without the necessary funding, will be eligible for the funding that the Bill makes possible.

John Smith (Labour, Vale of Glamorgan)

My understanding is that the Bill strengthens the powers of the Welsh Assembly Government to direct local authorities and other providers of transport strategies and transport provision. That is exactly the point. We have a ridiculous situation in which the Welsh Assembly Government have put forward an interim measure to help alleviate the problem of getting to Cardiff international airport and the local authority has dumped plans to upgrade the existing road, the A4050, the north-east access to Barry. That is vital not only to the future development of the airport but to the future development of Barry town. Barry has been left out of the transport loop by the proposals.

David Davies (Conservative, Monmouth)

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that there is clearly a problem in funding those local authorities?

John Smith (Labour, Vale of Glamorgan)

My understanding is that the increase in funding to Welsh local authorities has been substantial over a number of years. How local authorities decide to spend the money has until now been entirely a matter for them. My hope is that under the Bill more pressure will be exerted on irresponsible local authorities such as the one that has shelved one of the most important road building proposals in my constituency.

I hope that the Bill will put that right. It is the hope of everybody in the House that the Bill will put that right and that the local authority will put a vital road back into its roads strategy so that we can improve the links to our airport, which will benefit everybody in Wales. That is why I support the Bill tonight.

Lembit Öpik (Liberal Democrat, Montgomeryshire)

I left my office in Montgomeryshire at 10.20 this morning and, thanks to the years of under-investment by the hon. Member for Leominster (Bill Wiggin) and his colleagues and the failure to turn things round in the past eight years, I arrived in Westminster at 3 pm. It took a little short of five hours, with four extra station stops, three trains, two delays and one cancellation. In fact, the only thing that prevented me from losing my temper was the nice man at the information desk at Birmingham International, who said he thought that I should be the next leader of my party and then spoilt it by adding, "Good luck in tomorrow's ballot." [Interruption.] I say that not to seek sympathy—or the nomination of the hon. Member for Leominster—but to give a small and pertinent example of how badly our transport system needs to be sorted out.

Rail services in Wales and across the UK have been allowed to decline in earnest since the 1970s. British transport policy for the last three decades has been confused and ineffective, and the result is that we all have to put up with overpriced and unreliable services. By comparison, to make the same journey by car as I made by train today would have taken a little less than four hours, door to door. While it is a hassle to drive, at least people know that they will get where they want to go. That is the biggest single reason why so many people choose to drive instead of taking public transport.

Transport problems have plagued Wales for a long time now. A lack of good-quality local public transport is a great opportunity for the Assembly to show that it is better than Westminster at solving some basic problems. The Bill does not provide the answers, but it will enable the Assembly to do just that. The problems need to be solved because they have a direct impact on business. Transport problems in Wales have undoubtedly caused serious harm to the national economy. They have accentuated the two-paced nature of the Welsh economy by inhibiting growth across much of the country—the areas that are difficult to access. Of course, rural—mostly western—areas have suffered most.

Transport problems also affect the quality of people's lives. They have hit rural areas such as mid-Wales particularly hard, and the most vulnerable people hardest of all. Pensioners in Powys are caught between a rock and a hard place: either they roll the roulette wheel of local public transport and hope they do not get stuck, or they take their cars, bear the brunt of sky-high petrol prices and add to congestion.

The Bill is to be welcomed as a new chapter for Welsh transport, and I hope that it will mean brighter times ahead. However, it also provides a great opportunity in the third dimension. We could finally establish a modest but important inter-Wales air network. The signs are good. The long talked-about expansion of Welshpool airport is to go ahead, which is a good example of what can happen when the case is argued with the Welsh Development Agency, the local authority and the Assembly. The facts showed that the expansion would be a good economic investment, with no terrible environmental consequences.

While the expansion seems a small step, it hints that we may be reaching a point at which we can begin to capitalise on the potentially great advantages that a developed Welsh air network could bring. The nature of the Welsh landscape is such that on many routes, air is the swiftest, and most convenient, means of travel. We should not ignore the possibilities.

I always listen with interest to what Conservative Members say about air transport. Much is made of the environmental and economic costs of short-haul flights, but that debate usually involves Boeing 737s, which are large 100-plus seater aircraft, which would not be used for trips from north to south Wales.

David Davies (Conservative, Monmouth)

The hon. Gentleman listens to what we say about air transport, but has he listened to what his colleagues say about it? The Welsh Assembly Member for Cardiff Central has said:

"North-South Air-links are a good idea in principle, but the number of people who want to travel to the North West of Wales is limited."

Lembit Öpik (Liberal Democrat, Montgomeryshire)

That does not contradict what I am saying; in fact, it fits in with my point exactly. No one will ever run a Boeing 737 from Anglesey to Cardiff because there are not enough people to justify it. However, as my Assembly colleague said, there is a limited demand for that service. Obviously, it is preferable to make journeys by rail, for example, where that is feasible and effective, but unless it is Conservative policy to build a direct rail link from Anglesey to Cardiff, the only sensible way to provide a fast connection between north and south Wales is by air.

We are looking at small numbers of passengers in some cases, and it is small aircraft that could provide us with the backbone of an effective, quick means of getting from A to B. A Piper Chieftain can easily take eight passengers—perhaps nine at a push—from north Wales to Cardiff in as little as 50 minutes. As for environmental consequences, such a flight would take about three gallons of fuel per person—less than that used by eight or nine people each driving themselves from north Wales to south Wales and back again. We know that oftentimes people drive because they have to get from north to south and the railways would take far longer.

David Jones (Conservative, Clwyd West)

Has the hon. Gentleman made any assessment of the demand for such a service? I recall that in 2003 Air Wales started a service between Cardiff and Liverpool, which is far closer to the large population centres in north Wales, and it closed within six weeks because of a lack of demand.

Lembit Öpik (Liberal Democrat, Montgomeryshire)

I can tell the hon. Gentleman that we have made some limited assessment of demand, although it is notoriously difficult to do so because, with air services, demand often follows supply rather than the other way round. The hon. Gentleman is now asking me about an area about which I perhaps know too much, but as he has asked, I will answer.

In 1997–98, when the right hon. Member for Neath (Mr. Hain), now the Secretary of State for Wales, and I were considering these matters, it seemed that there was potential underlying demand, but in my judgment it will justify not 100-seater aircraft but something that will take one or two dozen people. There is a well established precedent: in the south of Ireland a strategic decision was taken to connect the country with a regional air network. That has been fabulously successful in driving the economies in those areas, many of which have a relatively small population, because they can now be quickly accessed by business people.

When I was working for Procter and Gamble in Newcastle upon Tyne—

Sylvia Heal (Deputy Speaker, Halesowen and Rowley Regis)

Order. I know that the hon. Gentleman has extensive knowledge of this subject, but perhaps he could return to the Third Reading of the Transport (Wales) Bill.

Lembit Öpik (Liberal Democrat, Montgomeryshire)

My very next words were to have been, "and that is why the Third Reading of this Bill is so important to air transport in Wales." I apologise for digressing, Madam Deputy Speaker, but I get very excited about aircraft. The brief opportunity to sit down has calmed my spirit.

Returning to the specifics of Wales, I say to the hon. Member for Clwyd, West (Mr. Jones) that, in implementing the Bill, we have to make an informed assessment of what is feasible for air transport in the medium term. That ties into something that I need to clarify about my view of how the opportunity to support and fund regional aviation in Wales should be approached. I would be very resistant about taking the opportunity provided in the Bill to have an indefinite subsidy for aviation services. Although I can understand, at a push, that people even more fanatical than I might argue for that, it is my judgment that the best investment that this Bill provides is pump-priming. At Welshpool airport, the infrastructure is being built; nevertheless it would not be prudent for the Welsh Assembly to end up in an open-ended commitment to subsidise air transport that would necessarily be the domain primarily of business customers and perhaps a few wealthy private travellers. I agree with those who think that we must not place an enormous strain on Welsh expenditure by entering into something that we do not understand. The good news is that the Bill does not require that to happen, but does require some sensible investment.

I agree with the hon. Member for Vale of Glamorgan (John Smith): we have a hub airport in the form of Cardiff. Although we have to think about the macro-environmental effects of aviation overall, that is no reason to hold Cardiff back. All of air transport must start living up to its environmental responsibilities. In that context, we should all agree that if Wales is to prosper and be an attractive centre of investment and tourism, we have to ensure that Cardiff international airport is well connected internationally, as well as internally in terms of land transport. I associate myself with the hon. Gentleman's comments in that respect.

Those who question the benefit of aviation should remember that all the parties have proved its advantage. All the party leaders have been seen flying about the country. The right hon. and learned Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Mr. Howard) was seen in his small helicopter, cruelly referred to by some of my colleagues as the batmobile. That shows that everyone who wants to travel quickly and can afford it tends to use aviation.

Although the Bill provides a good opportunity to discuss the infrastructure developments needed for Wales to establish its own regional air network, other matters, not directly related to the Bill, need to be considered. There are questions, which I shall not go into in great detail, about the use of American-registered aircraft in Wales and the UK as a whole, and the instrument rating and other qualifications that are required in the UK compared with the United States. I am glad to be able to inform the House that the Under-Secretary of State for Transport, the hon. Member for Regent's Park and Kensington, North (Ms Buck), has agreed to meet me and MPs from other parties to discuss those issues. I am optimistic that that will smooth the way to using the opportunities created by the Bill to the full.

I hope that the scepticism that I have heard from the hon. Member for Leominster and others does not suggest that they oppose the Airbus developments in Hawarden. The A380 is the single most significant civil airliner being constructed in the world today and I am proud of the fact that that development is taking place in north Wales. I strongly support the environmental benefits that it will bring in terms of reducing emissions while carrying the same number of passengers as other aircraft.

Mark Tami (Labour, Alyn and Deeside)

I am glad that the hon. Gentleman has made that point, because there was a great deal of concern when Mr. Isherwood, the Assembly Member for North Wales, questioned the legality of repayable launch investment, in a clear attempt to undermine the project.

Lembit Öpik (Liberal Democrat, Montgomeryshire)

It is a shame that people do that. We have enough trouble with Boeing without having enemies in our own ranks. I hope that, to use a phrase from another time, it was merely a moment of madness. [Laughter.] That, Madam Deputy Speaker, was also a rhetorical point.

Overall, we should aim to create a regional air network but, coming back to earth, we should recognise that the single most environmentally friendly way to make long-distance journeys is by rail. Rail is also a vital tool of regeneration for deprived areas, so it must be the centrepiece of transport reforms. Many people have written to me on the subject, and I am sure that other hon. Members have had the same experience. To mention only one, the Very Reverend Archimandrite Father Deiniol has discussed rail infrastructure extensively. I hope that the Assembly will take a strategic decision to support the long-term investment required in rail infrastructure. That will be expensive. The Bill does not provide the funds; it merely provides the opportunity and gives the Assembly the freedom to discuss the issue meaningfully.

Daniel Kawczynski (Conservative, Shrewsbury and Atcham)

I hope that the hon. Gentleman agrees with me that improving rail services across the border in England would benefit his constituents and that he will help me to secure a direct rail link from Shrewsbury to London.

Lembit Öpik (Liberal Democrat, Montgomeryshire)

In normal circumstances I would criticise hon. Members who come late into a debate. However, as I happen to agree with the point that the hon. Gentleman has made, I thank him for making the effort to come from his office to highlight the fact that cross-border rail links are important. For example, it is a shame that one cannot take a direct service from Aberystwyth to Euston, going through the constituency of the hon. Member for Shrewsbury and Atcham (Daniel Kawczynski). I look forward to working with him to try to persuade politicians, rail providers and service providers that these links should be made available and that they should be bolder in running such services for rather longer to enable demand to increase. For example, I think that Virgin was premature in abandoning a service that had made it as far as Shrewsbury, only for it to be closed down.

Huw Irranca-Davies (Labour, Ogmore)

Will the hon. Gentleman applaud the initiative linked to the powers in the Bill that allows the Welsh Assembly, with Arriva Trains and Network Rail, to reintroduce from the humble Llynfi line a train that from November will run all the way from Maesteg to Gloucester? That is the joined-up, cross-border thinking that we look forward to under the Bill.

Lembit Öpik (Liberal Democrat, Montgomeryshire)

The hon. Gentleman probably knows a little more about that service than I do. However, once the flow lines are in place, demand tends to follow. For so long, there has been under-investment in the British rail network and its services have been slashed. As a result, people have become accustomed to making journeys in a different way. I am encouraged that the Bill gives the Welsh Assembly the opportunity to make courageous decisions of the sort that the hon. Member for Ogmore (Huw Irranca-Davies) has described.

On a local level, the more integrated approach that the Bill encourages and advocates is both welcome and necessary. Our vision should be of a co-ordinated network where bus and rail services complement rather than compete with one another, and where local authorities work together to increase efficiency and ease the burden of bureaucracy.

An important omission in the Bill is that of accessibility. A report entitled "Mind the Gap", produced by Disability—Leonard Cheshire—highlighted the fact that many disabled people still experienced enormous problems accessing public transport. For example, nearly half of all the disabled people surveyed had found their choice of jobs restricted as a result of lack of accessibility to the transport that they needed to get to that employment. Nearly a quarter of those people had had to turn down a job offered because of a lack of accessible transport.

Improving the accessibility of transport for disabled people means more than free bus passes. They must be able to get on and off the transport that is available to them. If there are only a few trains a day, they need to be able to board those trains. More progress is needed in that area. One omission—I criticise myself in this instance—is that we did not think sufficiently through disability discrimination legislation and its implications for Welsh transport. I hope that the Welsh Assembly will make good what we omitted.

The Bill provides the framework to take Welsh transport forward. The hope is that the Government in Cardiff succeed where successive Westminster Governments have failed. Westminster Governments have shown themselves incapable of delivering a reliable and affordable public transport service. It is not integrated and it is not working well. The Assembly has the capacity to be more responsive to Welsh needs and to make the rail, bus and air system in Wales work. That system is not working so well in Britain. The Liberal Democrats have been grateful for the opportunity to discuss these matters. I hope that we shall be successful in convincing the doubting Conservatives of the benefits of a limited air network in Wales, and that there can be optimism that the Assembly will run with the powers that the Bill confers.

Siân James (Labour, Swansea East)

I welcome the opportunity to support the Bill's Third Reading. We know that transport to, from and within Wales is extremely important. We must ensure that we are never at the end of the line in any way, shape or form. We must be at the forefront of all forms of transport and ensure that they are of the highest quality for the citizens of Wales.

The coherent set of powers that the Bill will provide for us will ensure a positive future. It will be a future where all forms of transport can become integrated. That will enable us to achieve many of the things that we all want from our rail passenger, bus transport and air services. We want sustainability; we want to achieve modal shift; and we want to get people back into using public transport. We want to make sure that more freight uses various forms of freight transport. We must make sure that we compete not only in Wales but in the UK and Europe. We therefore need consistent services, and we must achieve the best transport services possible.

Those opportunities are much needed in Wales. The Bill makes provision for joint transport authorities and adopts a regional approach. People can therefore identify what is required locally to meet their daily needs. The National Assembly for Wales will provide a flexible public transport service that will plug the gaps, and that will depend on joint working on local transport plans.

Huw Irranca-Davies (Labour, Ogmore)

Does my hon. Friend agree that the Bill could lead to much more joined-up bus networks, which are sorely needed in the valleys and her constituency of Swansea, East? Getting local authorities and bus providers to work together across valley tops is vital for job creation if nothing else.

Siân James (Labour, Swansea East)

I agree. We are already working together in Swansea, East and west Wales on projects such as SWWITCH—the South West Wales integrated transport consortium—to achieve that modal service.

On air transport, please forgive me, Madam Deputy Speaker, for mentioning Catherine Zeta Jones again, but she is a great supporter of local airports. When she visits Swansea she always uses Fairwood airport, and is a great ambassador on our behalf all over the world. The consultation and worries about it across the border are important. The Bill, however, will improve transport provision and ensure that dialogue is always open. We need to talk Wales up and discuss what is achievable. We need to be at the forefront by establishing a public transport system that is the envy of the world. We can achieve that identity for Wales if we are able to talk up our services, and the Bill is the first step in that journey.

David Jones (Conservative, Clwyd West)

Like my hon. Friend the Member for Leominster (Bill Wiggin), I broadly welcome the Bill, but I have concerns about its implementation in the hands of the Welsh Assembly, which, in the years since its inception, has shown itself to be an increasingly acquisitive and centralising body.

I have two primary concerns about the Bill. First, clause 5 provides for the establishment of joint transport authorities. The power to establish such authorities is permissive, not mandatory. The Minister was at pains on Second Reading to stress that the Assembly will not be obliged to implement the power conferred by the clause. However, once it is conferred, the Assembly may be tempted to exercise it as a matter of course, which would clearly be wrong. Local authorities throughout Wales are already working in collaboration through consortiums such as Taith in north Wales and SWWITCH in the south-west. The consortiums are mostly working effectively, so it would be regrettable if the Assembly usurped their functions without very good reason indeed.

Hywel Williams (Plaid Cymru, Caernarfon)

Far be it from me to defend the Minister or anyone else but, if memory serves, I seem to recall that those powers are to be used when local voluntary arrangements have broken down or are not working satisfactorily rather than being something that the Welsh Assembly would use as a matter of course.

David Jones (Conservative, Clwyd West)

That is not what the clause provides for. The power exists, and that might prove too much of a temptation for the Assembly. I mentioned my reservations on Second Reading, and I remain concerned that clause 10 contains powers for joint transport authorities to impose levies on local authorities. If those are imposed, they will filter through to council tax payers in the form of additional council tax. The establishment of a joint transport authority should be a last resort, and only if the Assembly is satisfied that, without it, it would not be possible to discharge the general transport duty set out in clause 1. I hope the Assembly will not do that without proper consultation and serious consideration of the views of local authorities and all other proper consultees.

My second major concern relates to clause 11, which provides for financial assistance for air transport services starting or ending at airports in Wales. We have heard much about that this evening. It is clear from the debates on Second Reading and in Standing Committee, as well as the debate that has developed in the National Assembly, that the thrust of the clause is to help promote an intra-Wales air service, primarily between north and south Wales. That would be an expensive exercise and I must express severe reservations about it.

There has been much discussion about the possibility of developing part of RAF Valley for commercial aviation services. The concern is that Valley is situated in one of the least populous areas of Wales, remote from large or even middle-sized centres of population. That is obviously a sensible place to locate a military airbase. I understand that at one time Valley had the second highest number of air movements in the whole of the UK, but it is not the logical place to site a commercial airport.

Despite what the hon. Member for Montgomeryshire (Lembit Öpik) says, the sad truth is that north-south air services have a history of failure, as I mentioned in my intervention on him. The Air Wales Liverpool-to-Cardiff service was launched amid much fanfare towards the end of 2003, and six weeks later it shut down, blaming a lower than average take-up rate.

Mark Tami (Labour, Alyn and Deeside)

Does the hon. Gentleman accept, though, that Valley would serve north-west Wales? North-east Wales is served by Manchester and Liverpool, so its needs are adequately served from the English side of the border, whereas there is no service available in north-west Wales.

David Jones (Conservative, Clwyd West)

Yes, I agree. What the hon. Gentleman says supports my argument. If an established airport such as Liverpool, which has an existing infrastructure and which is much closer to the large centres of population in north Wales, cannot support a route between north and south Wales, it will be extremely difficult for a smaller airport such as Valley to support such a service.

My hon. Friend the Member for Leominster (Bill Wiggin) has produced figures that tend to indicate that the potential cost of subsidy in the first year of establishing Valley would be about £800,000. The likely capital cost of upgrade would be £400,000. That is a major subsidy from public money. The Assembly should be very careful before it commits public funds to such a heavy subsidy. It should do so only if it is entirely satisfied that there is a good commercial case for that. The people of Wales would be dismayed if that level of public subsidy ended up subsidising the movements of civil servants and politicians between north and south Wales.

Lembit Öpik (Liberal Democrat, Montgomeryshire)

Perhaps we are approaching consensus. If a business case can be made for investment in the infrastructure of an airport that would benefit a part of Wales, would the hon. Gentleman be sympathetic to it? Does he acknowledge that that is exactly what we have done in our analysis with regard to Welshpool airport, where a six-figure sum has been invested in the belief that sufficient economic benefit will accrue to the area to justify the expense?

David Jones (Conservative, Clwyd West)

I have no objection to the provision of what the hon. Gentleman called pump-priming money. A reasonable business case could be made for that. My concern is that clause 11 potentially envisages an on-going public subsidy year on year. The people of Wales would resent that bitterly, particularly if it were primarily to subsidise the movement of politicians and civil servants between north and south Wales. That would be most regrettable.

If the Bill is enacted, the Assembly will have to utilise the powers given by clause 11, and all the other powers, judiciously and sensibly. I hope that it will exercise those powers wisely and not simply continue the process of sucking up powers from local authorities and spending public money on projects that do not meet the needs of the people of Wales.

Stephen Crabb (Conservative, Preseli Pembrokeshire)

I am grateful for the opportunity to make a few remarks about the Bill before it goes to the other place.

In introducing the Bill to the House on Second Reading, the Secretary of State for Wales concluded by saying:

"A world-class transport system for Wales is vital to our future economic and social development."

On that we can all agree. There has been widespread agreement and consensus on the aims of the Bill in our discussions on Second Reading and in Committee.

Economic success, even in this age of iPods and e-boundaries, is still underpinned by high-quality transport networks that allow the safe, efficient and economical physical movement of people, goods and services. The Secretary of State went on to say that he believes that the Bill

"will enable the Assembly to deliver integrated transport for the whole of Wales."—[Official Report, 16 June 2005; Vol. 435, c. 420.]

Last December, the Assembly's Minister for Economic Development and Transport, Andrew Davies, announced his 15-year transport review, saying that his proposals will create a fully integrated, effective and world-class transport infrastructure throughout the country. There are big claims and worthy aims coming from this House and from Cardiff bay on the subject of transport in Wales, but the principal question in my mind is to what extent the Bill will lead to a step change in the quality of the transport network affecting my constituents.

Pembrokeshire is home to two ferry ports providing passenger and freight links to Ireland, and the fourth largest seaport in the UK. It is currently seeing the construction of two of the world's largest liquefied natural gas facilities. Pembrokeshire is one of Wales's premier tourist locations, and it lies on the strategic trans-European network linking Ireland to the European continent. Yet for all that, it has dismally poor transport connections. A train journey from Milford Haven to Cardiff can take the best part of three hours. I have spoken before about the serious need to upgrade the A40 west of St. Clears into Pembrokeshire; by that, I mean dualling. Pembrokeshire people therefore have every right to ask what the Bill will do fundamentally to alter the transport scenario that affects them. I hope that I am proved wrong, but I suspect that the answer that comes back will be pretty thin. I am happy to be made to look foolish on that.

The backdrop to all the measures in the Bill, and the factor that will determine whether Wales is to have a truly world-class transport network, is investment—significant and strategic investment targeted at projects that will unlock wealth and opportunity. However, the fiscal outlook, with the Government's existing spending plans becoming less affordable by the day, means that such investment is unlikely to be forthcoming on anything like the scale that is needed. There is a danger that the Bill will give the Assembly new powers and responsibilities to create grand transport strategies on paper and allow it to create new bureaucratic arrangements for ensuring consistency across transport planning in Wales, while the transport plans become empty and meaningless because of a lack of funding and poor implementation.

I turn to two of the concerns that I raised on Second Reading, which were dealt with to some extent in Committee. I suggested that clause 2 should place on the Assembly a clear duty to consult business organisations when drafting the transport strategy. I still think that that is important. Why should not the private sector be regarded as an equal stakeholder alongside the public sector in the drafting of a transport strategy? That does not mean trying to prescribe which specific organisations should be consulted. A broad duty could have been framed requiring the Assembly to consult organisations representing people carrying out business in Wales, as happens under other similar pieces of legislation—for example, the requirement on the Greater London Assembly to consult business.

At a meeting with representatives of small businesses in my constituency 10 days ago, concern was again expressed about how seriously the Assembly engages the business community in genuine consultation. Road haulage and the wider freight sector were mentioned as examples of subjects about which the Assembly needs to improve its understanding. The Minister tried to give reassurances about that on Second Reading and in Committee but, ultimately, it will be out of his hands. I take the point that he made in Committee about the spirit of partnership in which the Assembly goes about consulting, but I would rather place my faith in a clear statutory duty than rely on the spirit of partnership.

When the First Minister can come to Pembrokeshire, as he did several months ago, and question the economic case for dualling the A40 west of St. Clears, one has to wonder whether any genuine dialogue takes place with the business community outside Cardiff bay. Almost to a man and woman, the business community in Pembrokeshire—not only the road haulage sector—supports dualling the A40. However, Andrew Davies's 15-year transport strategy disappointed Pembrokeshire's hopes, and no dualling is envisaged for at least 15 years.

The other concern that I raised on Second Reading was the proposal to raise taxpayers' money to support—

Sylvia Heal (Deputy Speaker, Halesowen and Rowley Regis)

Order. I remind the hon. Gentleman that we cannot have a repeat of Second Reading. We are now considering Third Reading.

Stephen Crabb (Conservative, Preseli Pembrokeshire)

I apologise. Several people have expressed concern about the proposal to use taxpayers' money to support a daily air service between Anglesey and Cardiff. I shall not go into detail about that because it has been adequately covered. I was reassured by the recognition of the hon. Member for Montgomeryshire (Lembit Öpik) that we need to move to a position not of continuous subsidy of an air service but of more strategic use of the money to invest in developing infrastructure and airport facilities. I would support that.

I am slightly worried that some of the environmental questions that have been legitimately raised by organisations such as the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds Cymru and Friends of the Earth have been glossed over. No one has mentioned the principle of the polluter pays. It would be interesting to see how that fits into the context of subsidising air services. Ultimately, the air service will be small scale for high-value individuals, companies and public servants.

I do not object to the notion of sensible transport planning at Assembly level. However, I am somewhat sceptical of the value of grand transport strategies on paper when there is no real investment stacked behind it. Hon. Members may remember the Prime Minister's declaring in his first annual report in 1998 that the integrated transport strategy for the UK was "delivered". Delivering words on paper is all well and good but what matters for transport is funding, tough and correct choices of competing infrastructure projects and the ability to manage them ruthlessly to completion.

I hope that my worries prove groundless and that the Bill, along with other measures, does exactly what its salesmen have claimed for it in the House.

Hywel Williams (Plaid Cymru, Caernarfon)

I was glad to take part in the long, drawn-out and detailed consideration of the Bill, and I am equally glad to take part in the conclusion of its passage through this House.

I have always been struck by a paradox about the hon. Member for Leominster (Bill Wiggin) and his detailed consideration of border issues. I am a Welsh nationalist and a Welsh speaker from what could perhaps be termed the wild west of Wales, and he is an English Conservative and Unionist, yet he seems much more concerned about the border than me. Perhaps he will explain that to me later over some refreshment.

David Davies (Conservative, Monmouth)

In the Conservative and Unionist party, we believe that we are all part of one big happy family in one united country. That is why my hon. Friend the Member for Leominster (Bill Wiggin) is so concerned about what happens in Wales.

Hywel Williams (Plaid Cymru, Caernarfon)

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that. Earlier, the hon. Member for Montgomeryshire (Lembit Öpik) prayed in aid his experiences on the train to London today. Such experiences have unfortunately sometimes made me into a driver rather than a reluctant passenger. One of my regrets, which was discussed with the Minister some time ago, is the specific exclusion from the Bill of mainline services from Wales to England. As I said then, people on both south Wales and north Wales routes use mainline services in Wales as local services. It is regrettable that those mainline services were not included.

Historically, Wales has suffered great difficulties because of the lack of an integrated transport system and policy. The best transport links in Wales have always been built through Wales from east to west rather than directly serving the specific needs of the country. Obviously the A55 and the M4 are great engines of economic prosperity, but we now need to look beyond the narrow corridors around those two roads, and to plan and develop a variety of transport systems to serve the whole of Wales. I must note my disappointment at the spatial plan that has been produced for Wales, which also seems to restate a preference for those two corridors in the north and the south, apparently ignoring much of the middle of Wales.

We need a system that will serve the transport needs of all the people of Wales in terms of the economy, social use, tourism—the latter has not been mentioned a great deal, but it is very important in my constituency—and agricultural requirements. The Bill goes a long way towards meeting those long-term aims, and it is very welcome. I hope that, when it is enacted, it will allow the National Assembly to co-ordinate and ensure consistency between all forms of public transport and, importantly, to make key improvements to the road system—a point that I made in our earlier discussions—particularly in deep rural areas and on the north-south road route.

We also hope that the legislation will enable the continuation of improvements in freight rail use. The hon. Member for Montgomeryshire (Lembit Öpik) referred to correspondence that he had had with the Tad Deiniol from Blaenau Ffestiniog. I have also had that correspondence. We look forward to improvements on the line between Blaenau Ffestiniog and Llandudno so that freight can be carried, as that would lead to great economic improvements in that constituency and elsewhere. I am glad that the Bill recognises the importance of cycling and making proper provision for pedestrians. The Government very graciously acted on suggestions on those issues when they were pointed out to them, which will result in a great improvement.

Plaid Cymru welcomes the establishment of joint transport authorities, if and when there is a desire for them locally, and if the voluntary arrangements are not satisfactory. We are glad that the Government have agreed with the Welsh Affairs Committee—of which I continue to be a member—that the majority of members of the joint transport authorities should be from local authorities. That was a well-made point, and I am glad that the Government have responded to it. However, as a past and present member of the Welsh Affairs Committee, I have to say that it was disappointing to me personally that the Government refused to accept the Committee's recommendation that the transport commissioner's office be located in Wales. Perhaps we can take heart from the Government's assurance that that matter will be kept under review, and that the location of the office might be changed if there are further concerns about the accessibility of the commissioner in Wales.

The Bill contains many good points. It represents a positive step forward and we certainly welcome it.

David Davies (Conservative, Monmouth)

I am grateful for this opportunity to add a brief comment to everything that has already been said. Before I do so, however, I should like to point out to the hon. Member for Montgomeryshire (Lembit Öpik) that Conservative Members have always recognised the importance of an integrated transport system and have always realised that, without such a system, there will be no economic growth. That is why successive Secretaries of State for Wales under the previous Conservative Government did so much to link the valleys of south Wales to the M4, and the areas of north Wales to the A55. Those Secretaries of State for Wales embarked on a huge road-building programme that brought inward investment, jobs and prosperity to corners of the world that had long been forgotten by the socialist local authorities that controlled them—

Sylvia Heal (Deputy Speaker, Halesowen and Rowley Regis)

Order. I must remind the hon. Gentleman that we are discussing the Third Reading of the Transport (Wales) Bill, not its history.

David Davies (Conservative, Monmouth)

I am grateful to you for reminding me of that, Madam Deputy Speaker.

It is because we recognise the importance of an integrated transport system that, when we started to consider the Bill, we sought to deal with it in a constructive fashion. We certainly support its overall objectives. However, there is a missed opportunity in clauses 3 and 4, because very little has been said about safety. I appreciate that the hon. Member for Montgomeryshire briefly touched on the issue when he talked about the importance of international standards in aviation. The hon. Member for Ogmore (Huw Irranca-Davies) is also well aware that we must ensure that we have internationally recognised standards and that pilots are properly qualified. I feel very strongly about that, but I am not sure that we have adequately tackled the issue of road safety.

Mark Tami (Labour, Alyn and Deeside)

What about caravans?

David Davies (Conservative, Monmouth)

I shall be more than happy to take interventions if anyone wants to discuss vehicles and what they tow behind them.

Wales has a problem, in that many people who travel long distances have to do so using trunk roads rather than motorways. Many of those trunk roads go straight through towns and villages. Sometimes speed limits are in place, but there is not nearly enough enthusiasm for ensuring that they are enforced. It could almost be suggested that some people who work in the police force would rather concentrate on catching large numbers of people who have just broken the speed limit, in order to get more money, and that they are less interested in putting speed cameras up on less well-used trunk roads where the impact of speeding could be far more dangerous.

Mark Tami (Labour, Alyn and Deeside)

I am somewhat confused about the hon. Gentleman's view of speed cameras. I saw a grimace on the faces of his colleagues when he mentioned them. Is he in favour of them or against them?

Sylvia Heal (Deputy Speaker, Halesowen and Rowley Regis)

Order. May I remind hon. Members on both sides of the House that, interesting though a discussion on speed cameras might be, it is not the subject of the Bill?

David Davies (Conservative, Monmouth)

I shall be happy to deal with that issue on a separate occasion.

I would like to talk about safety, and about why it is not mentioned in clauses 3 and 4. The Minister should do more to ensure that speed limits are brought down on trunk roads that go through towns and villages. If I drive over the border from Wales into the Forest of Dean or into Herefordshire, I am immediately struck by the fact that I am expected to comply with a 30 mph speed limit every time I drive through a town. That simply does not happen in Wales. I have been told on good authority by no less a person than a previous Minister in the Welsh Assembly Government that one of the reasons for that is bureaucratic inertia, and that nobody can be bothered to sort out the paperwork required to reduce the speed limit on a trunk road from 60 or 70 mph to 30 mph. That simply is not good enough. There are 4,000 people dying on our roads across the whole of the United Kingdom—as many as died in the tragedy of 11 September in New York. We must do more to reduce the number of preventable road deaths, and I see nothing in the Bill that will help to achieve that—

Sylvia Heal (Deputy Speaker, Halesowen and Rowley Regis)

Order. I must remind the hon. Gentleman that, on Third Reading, we are discussing not what should be in the Bill but what is in it.

David Davies (Conservative, Monmouth)

In that case, Madam Deputy Speaker, this is probably not the moment for me to plead with the Minister to examine what is happening on the A449, but I hope to be able to do so on a future occasion.

I shall end by saying that we need an integrated transport strategy, but if we do not have a transport strategy that is safe, it will not be worth a torn-up bus ticket.

Question put and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read the Third time, and passed.