The new Plaid Cymru Welsh Government have had a few months to “bed in”, so now is perhaps the time for me to set out what I think its transport priorities should be. I do this with an eye on the politics and so a need to deliver some benefits by the end of the current term – so by end 2029. That’s not very far away and will preclude the majority of new rail schemes set out by Transport for Wales in its “Today, Tomorrow, Together” prospectus from February 2026. So for me the bus reform agenda and new redesigned and integrated PT networks (bus/bus and bus/rail), more buses and bus prioritisation, etc will be key.
I also have a disclosure. In 2025 I was commissioned to prepare a paper for Plaid Cymru on this subject and especially the tough choices and compromises that are intrinsic to the politics of transport planning.
What I set out below reflects some of the content from that report – albeit with some updates including re: the M4 and Menai crossing! That paper was mainly qualitative and so merits challenge and scrutiny which I hope WG and TfW officials will be doing! I also suspect that my more politically challenging suggestions may not get much support – especially road pricing! And I really don’t know how much of that report will get traction with the new WG. Lets see?
Since my report for Plaid Cymru was prepared in 2025, the UK Government has made some political commitment to £14Bn of rail enhancements in Wales. However, this is not yet reflected in a UK Government Treasury commitment – which is only circa £300m to date – we await the next UK Government Spending Reviewing with bated breath!
WG need to push very hard on this commitment as well as increasing efforts to secure more powers (esp. changes to the current GB Rail Bill) and ultimately the full devolution of rail with an appropriate block grant adjustment. In my well evidenced view, this is the only means of securing the funding Wales needs for its rail network and to remove the dysfunction in its management and operations. My recent report for the Senedd Research team starkly evidenced this reality.
Also to note, as I have written at length about pretty much all of these issues and proposals, I have chosen to summarise; full details can be found in my book “How to build a Metro”, or my earlier blogs.
The primary challenges….
The primary transport challenge facing the new Welsh Government (WG) in 2026 is how to maximise the benefits of its transport investments, in particular connectivity, economic, regeneration and environmental (esp. carbon reduction), as well as ensuring equity in investment across the whole of Wales.
More challenging perhaps is achieving this within the constraints on both revenue and capital funding, exacerbated by the persistent dysfunction of the UK rail ecosystem vis a vis funding in Wales – directly related its non-devolved status. This will need to be addressed if we want to see the bulk of the programme set out below delivered.
The other stark financial reality is the increasing amount of the Welsh Government budget taken up by Health. Transport revenue funding is circa 3% of the total Welsh budget; Health is over 50%.
Nor we can we ignore the reality of Wales’s demographic asymmetry, that over half its 3.1M population live within 35Km of Cardiff, and that much economic activity results from cross border movement to/from southeast and northeast Wales into England. Outside the main urban areas around Cardiff, Swansea and northeast Wales, the country is low population and density thereof making investment in new fixed infrastructure very challenging.
Tough choices and compromises….
In developing a transport investment programme, clarity, focus and honesty is needed to systemically expedite; and in so doing navigate some tough choices and compromises. Principles also need to be established to help determine how constrained funding is allocated.
Figure 1 From Jarret Walker’s “Human Transit”
For example do we want to maximise passenger numbers to enable the most mode shift and improve financial efficiency of operations, or ensure everyone gets a service of some kind Figure 1 ; whether we wish to reduce operating costs of planned Core Valley Line(CVL) Metro services but in so doing probably have to deal with some Industrial Relations (IR) challenges; and noting the reduction of bus fares or making them free, will make the cost of the expanded bus services we need, more challenging given the additional subsidy per passenger required. Figure 2
Figure 2 Impact of free bus fare on affordable capacity
Roads and Road User Charging (RUC)…
We also need to address the “elephant in the room” and the opportunity presented by Road User Charging (RUC) or proxy thereof, which is both “fair” (given the negative externalities of excess car use/dependency) and the quickest means to address congestion. In so doing we need to recognise that for many people and trips, especially in rural areas, the car will still be a vital and in some cases, the only option. So, any RUC has to be differentiated to reflect this reality and perhaps implemented in parallel with a reduction in another ”tax”.
To help with broader and needed discussion on this matter this section of my book is worth a read. I would emphasise a few of points from that section to help “land this” .
- Any “charge” has to be influenced by – vehicle traction power, size and weight of a vehicle, emissions, distance travelled, occupancy and availability of PT alternatives.
- … a big petrol SUV with one person, covering many miles in an urban area pays most and a small EV covering only a few miles in a rural area the least, and perhaps nothing. This approach will provide an incentive for smaller, lighter EVs with multiple passengers and shorter trips. I am also acutely aware than in rural areas, PT is difficult and costly to provide, and so car use will likely remain much more important than in urban areas. On that basis we ought to charge a lot less in such places.
- As part of a move to a more progressive fiscal regime some of the revenues ought to be used to reduce some local taxes, for example domestic council tax. This may be a necessary measure to sweeten the RUC itself.
In respect of roads, I did advise that given the earlier WG Roads Review (PS for those at the back WG have been and are still investing in roads – eg recent circa £2Bn plus to complete the HoV Road) we really are not going to be engaging in major large new motorway style roads – esp. given the data on induced demand and the well evidenced effectiveness of road charging to address congestion.
On reflection though, I do think the politics and their strategic importance may merit exploring schemes for the Menai crossing and measures to increase the capacity of the Bryn Glas tunnels. To be clear though to expand those tunnels to 3 lanes will come at a very high capital cost (circa £0.5~1Bn perhaps?) and whilst marginally increasing the capacity of the M4 will not address congestion unless we add a toll or charge to the M4.
We will almost certainly also need to close one or two junctions around Newport – the impact of which should be mitigated by increased Public Transport (PT) capacity including the Burns Stations & Services (as originally set out in the Metro Impact Study!) a Caerleon station and further Marches line measures as well as “more bus”. Remember, Newport is not short of major roads or motorway junctions (it’s probably the best served in Wales in this regard!) – it is though woefully short of good public transport options for many, if not most trips people make.
We also can’t ignore how much traffic can be removed from the M4 if PT in Cardiff is improved – and especially Cardiff Crossrail Phase 2. For example, someone living in north Cardiff (say Rhiwbina) working in Bristol will almost certainly drive. However, if we can get a Metro service frequency on the Coryton line (so at least 4tph vs the woeful 2tph currently planned!) then a fast metro trip from Rhiwbina to Cardiff Central and then onto a Burns Service on the SWML to Bristol, will likely make that more attractive than a car trip involving a toll!
Be honest on how we approach romantic schemes…
In addition, I also advised that some “popular” schemes need to be properly challenged and some relegated to the long term. This includes the proposed reopening of the Carmarthen-Aberystwyth railway; to allocate at least £1Bn of capital to deliver this scheme would then require very significant revenue support to operate given the relatively low population served. Progressing this scheme would also impact the opportunity to progress many more beneficial schemes across Wales that could be delivered more quickly as well as better value for money, and more innovative alternatives.
To navigate these choices, I suggested the development and application of a strategic and largely qualitative triage process to differentiate major schemes. This would combine an assessment of scheme impacts based on traditional data sets re demographics and the economy, as well as using transport considerations such as demand. It would also include economic development/ regeneration – especially more Transit Oriented Development (TOD) – and environmental benefits; and, relevant in Wales’s asymmetric demographic landscape, some measure to ensure equity of funding and support. In that regard it is likely that capital funding per capita will be higher in more populated areas, but lower population areas will attract more revenue support per capita.
Wider benefits and Transit Oriented Development…
In respect of economic development and regeneration, and particularly around our public transport (PT) network and stations (so Transit Oriented Development – TOD) we also need to consider the need for additional institutional capability and capacity to help deliver these wider benefits; a “Metro Development Corporation(s)” perhaps. Such a body could augment Transport for Wales’s (TfW) development of the South Wales Metro (or Cardiff Capital Region Metro) with initiatives to bring forward the many more affordable homes we need, and a programme of high street regeneration across the region. Such functions could also be embedded within Transport for Wales as I suggested in this recent article for Wales Housing Quarterly.
I estimate, over 15 years, a programme of circa £4Bn of capital expenditure is needed; the implicit expansion of public transport capacity will also require more revenue support (perhaps an additional circa £100~150M pa) especially relevant in the context of bus reform that will need more revenue support to operate more bus services.
In developing that report much of the detail was drawn from my own knowledge, the work of Transport for Wales (TfW), the regional Corporate Joint Committees (CJCs) and Local Authorities (LA) over the last few years. Much of which is reflect in my book, “How to build a Metro”. I also assumed that many smaller local schemes, especially Active Travel (AT) and road space reallocation measures, will be managed via the CJCs and/or LAs and were not the primary focus of my report.
The major PT schemes…. immediate priorities
The proposals below are based on the presumption that TfW’s commitments and the schemes announced in the 2025 UK Government’s Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR) to circa 2029/30 will be delivered. Whilst these should be checked with TfW and the Department of Transport (DfT), it is understood these include:
- 2tph on Vale of Glamorgan (VoG) Line beyond Barry
- 4tph Metro services to the Heads of the Valleys (HoV) via Pontypridd & Caerphilly as part of the wider South Wales Metro
- Cardiff West Junction enhancement (combined with renewals) to enable 4tph on City Line (expected 2028/29)
- Relief line upgrade and Burns (Metro Impact Study) stations & additional services to Bristol Temple Meads from Cardiff/Swansea
- Metro Central (WIP)
- Cardiff Crossrail Phase 1a (WIP)
- New Lumo Open Access (OA) services from London to Carmarthen (reduced journey time)
- Padeswood sidings and 2tph Borderlands service
- NWML level crossings removal
- Increased service frequency on NWML and between Wrexham and Chester (Yes some uplift from May 2026)
- A direct Llandudno-Liverpool service (introduced in May 2026)
- Upgraded signals at Gobowen to increase Marches Line capacity.
Then, for the first five years of a new Welsh Government, and with some appreciation of supply chain capacity and scheme dependencies in rail, it is recommended that the focus is on “fixing” the Metro in Cardiff and delivering Bus Reform across the whole of Wales. So, to add to the commitments above, by 2029/30 or 2030/31 we also deliver:
- Cardiff Crossrail Phase 2: 4tph on City & Coryton Lines, new stations, “Station Link”, OLE to Penarth & tram-trains for Penarth integrated with Crossrail
- Reverse some CVL Value Engineering
- 2tph on Maesteg branch
- All Wales bus revenue support, franchising & network redesign with more overall services (will include bus prioritisation measures and expanded fleet)
- N-S Express bus service in the west as part of all Wales Express bus network (an enhanced Traws Cymru). Note – this has already been announced!
The schemes…. post 2030
Then from 2030/31 to 2035/36:
- Wrexham-Liverpool with Stadler electric 777s direct operations from Wrexham
- NWML Upgrade for more frequent and faster services (and more stations)
- Chester Station capacity measures
- Shotton Interchange
- Infrastructure improvements & additional rail services to Swansea/West Wales
- Swansea Metro Initial Phases: Bury-Port and Pontardulais to Swansea High Street
- Further CVL enhancements (further stations and Aberdare-Hirwaun)
- 4tph on Ebbw Valley line to Llanhilleth combined with upgrade of Marches line south of Abergavenny so Metro services can operate (including new stations eg Caerleon)
- SWML Electrification & other infrastructure enhancements west of Cardiff
- Cardiff Crossrail: East to Newport Rd and Radyr/Coryton link (direct or indirect)
- Marches Line upgrade north of Abergavenny.
Out to 2040/41 we can consider the completion of Cardiff Crossrail (Northwest Corridor to RCT), Metro Cross-Valley, expansion of Swansea Bay Metro and perhaps the application of “longer distance” tram-train in northwest and northeast Wales and later perhaps for north-south in the west.
Funding and delivery challenges…
The funding challenges are well known, nonetheless, to make progress we need to address them (especially the rail devolution/funding issue) and consider new/additional funding sources. A RUC has been mentioned, but other local proxies (CF the Versement in France) ought to be examined. Similarly, the scale and focus of concessionary fares and discounts should be interrogated.
Even without my advice we need a discussion that can ultimately lead to the development and implementation of an ambitious and equitable public transport investment programme for the whole of Wales. One that is explicitly linked to carbon reduction, economic development and regeneration – especially Transit Oriented Development.
Finaly, whilst we need to inform the discussion and the debate with a robust evidence base, the ultimate decisions will always be political. In that vein, as the mayor of Vancouver is reputed to have once said, “better to focus your efforts on where you agree, and not where you don’t, as you will always run out of money before you run out of agreement”.