English: The car may need to be king in rural areas, but in inner city urban areas like Cardiff public transport has to be the default option for those unwilling or unable to walk or cycle. People in Cardiff are starting to wear face masks like they do in Beijing. This is the consequence of the do-nothing approach to 80,000 people commuting into Cardiff and Newport from neighbouring authorities by car. The whole region experiences road gridlock at peak times. If the Welsh Government fails to act over the illegal levels of air pollution, they will end up in court, costing a huge amount of money that we could be spending on public transport. People want to do the right thing. The demand for rail has grown from 20 million passenger journeys to 30 million in the last decade. That's just on the Valleys lines. It's impossible to drive more people out of their cars and onto rail services without increased capacity, so one of the things we need to know is: at what point in the contract for the new rail franchise provider will there be greater capacity and ticket transferability to enable more people to do the right thing? This motion welcomes the commitment to the first stages of a south Wales metro, but I want to ask: where is the rest? It's five years since Mark Barry's report, 'A Metro for Wales' Capital City Region', and two years since Cardiff capital region board identified that an integrated transport system, aligned with land use planning, could be the catalyst for economic change across the region. And at the heart of this aspiration is the metro vision for a modern, high-quality, multimodal, integrated public transport network. The Central Cardiff enterprise zone is expected to attract thousands of jobs to Wales, but only a fast metro connection will enable the people of the south Wales Valleys to access these jobs. Inward investors have been promised access to 1.5 million people within a 30-minute commute, and that cannot be achieved without the metro. Only a fast metro connection can cater for the tens of thousands of predictable short journeys people make every day to and from work and school. So, the consensus is there, but where is the money? We know that £734 million has been allocated for the south Wales metro, of which £250 million is from the Welsh Government and £375 million from the UK Government, which includes £150 million for electrification. And then there is some European money of something in the region of £120 million to £130 million. So, in this £375 million the UK Government has promised is a conditional sum of £125 million to electrify the Valleys lines, only if the Welsh Government also puts in at least £325 million for electrification. If not, the £125 million from the UK Government can be withdrawn. So, I'm concerned that we're going to put at least £450 million of this £734 million into electrification, and it's not cost-effective. The topography and number of stops on the Valleys lines means heavy electric trains will never achieve speeds in excess of 50 miles an hour, and that can be provided by trams. Like Nick Ramsay, I am a fan of the tram. It's a much cheaper alternative. It means that from Pontypridd, instead of six or seven trains an hour with an electrified train, you can get 10 to 12 fast trams. From Merthyr, two trains an hour could be substituted by three or four trams an hour. Only then can you reduce the journey time from Merthyr to 40 minutes - you can't do that with heavy rolling stock - because you can run light rail much closer together and they stop much more quickly. So, what if the successful rail franchise bidder says that electrification of the Valleys lines is a waste of money and a much more cost-effective approach is light rail on all or nearly all Valleys lines? Will we have to be dictated to by London and go ahead with a less effective, more costly approach? What does that say about Welsh Government desire for industry to provide the answer to what mode of transport will work best through market testing and eventual bidding procurement processes? I want to ensure that we are able to do the right thing so that we have enough money to get the rest of the metro vision of an integrated public transport network, with centralised ticketing, and to make it cost-effective. We know that, in order to get the rest of the money, pound for pound, a mile of rail investment costs about the same as a motorway mile but benefits up to 20 times more people. We have to stop chasing car-centric investment and invest in a fully integrated public transport system if we're to provide a practical alternative. This is the shift -
Welsh: Efallai y bydd angen i'r car deyrnasu mewn ardaloedd gwledig, ond mewn ardaloedd trefol yng nghanol dinasoedd fel Caerdydd mae'n rhaid i drafnidiaeth gyhoeddus fod yn opsiwn diofyn i'r rhai sy'n anfodlon neu'n analluog i gerdded neu feicio. Mae pobl yng Nghaerdydd yn dechrau gwisgo mygydau wyneb fel y gwnânt yn Beijing. Dyma ganlyniad yr ymagwedd gwneud dim i 80,000 o bobl yn cymudo i Gaerdydd a Chasnewydd o awdurdodau cyfagos drwy ddefnyddio ceir. Mae tagfeydd ar ffyrdd yr holl ranbarth ar adegau brig. Os yw Llywodraeth Cymru yn methu gweithredu ynghylch y lefelau llygredd aer anghyfreithlon, byddant yn gorfod wynebu'r llysoedd, a bydd hynny'n costio swm enfawr o arian y gallem fod yn ei wario ar drafnidiaeth gyhoeddus. Mae pobl eisiau gwneud y peth iawn. Tyfodd y galw am reilffyrdd o 20 miliwn o deithiau gan deithwyr i 30 miliwn yn ystod y degawd diwethaf. Ar reilffyrdd y Cymoedd yn unig oedd hynny. Mae'n amhosibl ysgogi mwy o bobl allan o'u ceir ac ar wasanaethau trên heb gynyddu'r capasiti, felly un o'r pethau y mae angen i ni ei wybod yw: ar ba bwynt yn y contract ar gyfer darparwr masnachfraint newydd y rheilffyrdd y ceir mwy o gapasiti a thocynnau trosglwyddadwy er mwyn galluogi mwy o bobl i wneud y peth iawn? Mae'r cynnig hwn yn croesawu'r ymrwymiad i gamau cyntaf metro de Cymru, ond rwyf am ofyn: ble mae'r gweddill? Mae'n bum mlynedd ers adroddiad Mark Barry, 'A Metro for Wales' Capital City Region', a dwy flynedd ers i fwrdd prifddinas-ranbarth Caerdydd nodi y gallai system drafnidiaeth integredig, i gyd-fynd â chynllunio defnydd tir, fod yn gatalydd ar gyfer newid economaidd ar draws y rhanbarth. Ac wrth wraidd y dyhead hwn mae'r weledigaeth fetro am rwydwaith trafnidiaeth gyhoeddus modern amlfodd integredig o ansawdd uchel. Disgwylir i ardal fenter Canol Caerdydd ddenu miloedd o swyddi i Gymru, ond cysylltiad metro cyflym yn unig a fydd yn galluogi pobl Cymoedd de Cymru i gyrraedd y swyddi hyn. Addawyd mynediad i fewnfuddsoddwyr at 1.5 miliwn o bobl a allai gymudo o fewn 30 munud, ac ni ellir cyflawni hynny heb y metro. Cysylltiad metro cyflym yn unig a all ddarparu ar gyfer y degau o filoedd o deithiau byr rhagweladwy y mae pobl yn eu gwneud bob dydd i ac o'r gwaith a'r ysgol. Felly, mae'r consensws yno, ond ble mae'r arian? Gwyddom fod £734 miliwn wedi'i ddyrannu ar gyfer metro de Cymru, a daw £250 miliwn ohono gan Lywodraeth Cymru a £375 miliwn gan Lywodraeth y DU, sy'n cynnwys £150 miliwn ar gyfer trydaneiddio. Wedyn, ceir oddeutu £120 miliwn a £130 miliwn o arian Ewropeaidd. Felly, yn y £375 miliwn hwn y mae Llywodraeth y DU wedi ei addo, ceir swm amodol o £125 miliwn i drydaneiddio rheilffordd y Cymoedd, os yw Llywodraeth Cymru hefyd yn rhoi o leiaf £325 miliwn tuag at drydaneiddio. Os nad yw'n gwneud hynny, gallai'r £125 miliwn gan Lywodraeth y DU gael ei dynnu'n ôl. Felly, rwy'n pryderu ein bod yn mynd i roi o leiaf £450 miliwn o'r £734 miliwn tuag at drydaneiddio, ac nad yw'n gosteffeithiol. Mae topograffeg a nifer yr arosfannau ar reilffyrdd y Cymoedd yn golygu na fydd trenau trydan trwm byth yn cyrraedd cyflymder uwch na 50 milltir yr awr a gall tramiau gyflawni hynny. Fel Nick Ramsay, rwy'n frwd o blaid y tram. Mae'n ddewis llawer rhatach. Mae'n golygu, o Bontypridd, yn hytrach na chwech neu saith trên yr awr wedi eu trydaneiddio, y gallwch gael 10 i 12 o dramiau cyflym. O Ferthyr Tudful, gallech gael tri neu bedwar tram yr awr yn lle dau drên yr awr. Ni fyddwch yn gallu lleihau'r amser teithio o Ferthyr Tudful i 40 munud hyd nes y gwnewch hynny - ni allwch wneud hynny â cherbydau trwm - oherwydd gallwch redeg trenau ysgafn yn llawer nes at ei gilydd ac maent yn stopio'n gyflymach o lawer. Felly, beth os yw cynigydd llwyddiannus y fasnachfraint reilffyrdd yn dweud bod trydaneiddio rheilffyrdd y Cymoedd yn wastraff arian ac mai dull llawer mwy costeffeithiol yw rheilffyrdd ysgafn ar bob un neu bron bob un o reilffyrdd y Cymoedd? A fydd yn rhaid i Lundain ddweud wrthym beth i'w wneud a bwrw ymlaen â dull llai effeithiol, sy'n fwy costus? Beth y mae hynny'n ei ddweud am awydd Llywodraeth Cymru i weld y diwydiant yn darparu'r ateb o ran pa fath o drafnidiaeth a fydd yn gweithio orau drwy brofi'r farchnad a phrosesau cynigion caffael yn y pen draw? Rwyf am sicrhau ein bod yn gallu gwneud y peth iawn fel bod gennym ddigon o arian i gael gweddill y weledigaeth fetro ynghylch rhwydwaith trafnidiaeth gyhoeddus integredig, gyda system docynnau ganoledig, a'i gwneud yn gosteffeithiol. Er mwyn cael gweddill yr arian, punt am bunt, rydym yn gwybod bod milltir o gostau buddsoddi yn y rheilffyrdd yn costio tua'r un faint â milltir o draffordd ond mae'n sicrhau budd i hyd at 20 gwaith yn fwy o bobl. Rhaid inni roi'r gorau i chwilio am fuddsoddiad car-ganolog a buddsoddi mewn system trafnidiaeth gyhoeddus gwbl integredig os ydym am ddarparu dewis amgen ymarferol. Dyma'r newid -