Yes, and we see that happening over and over again. The hon. Gentleman mentioned other service areas. I could mention the police as well, because the Welsh Government fund a number of additional police community support officers.
In effect, the people of Wales are suffering from a double whammy to maintain services in Wales, because they are paying in two instances. We are talking specifically about HS2 and the £6 billion. That money could make a measurable and significant difference to a Government dedicated to putting the interests of Wales first. It is deeply disingenuous of the UK Government to argue that Wales should be treated differently from Scotland and Northern Ireland, when treating it in the same way would make a clear difference to the rail infrastructure that we presently have, which is being maintained only to keep us in the status quo and is insufficient.
The additional subsidies that we are having to provide in Wales are a symptom of the chronic underinvestment in capital spending, which inevitably results in far higher maintenance costs. Capital spending on essential infrastructure such as railways should be seen as an investment and not as a burden; it should be a driver in addressing inequality. It should be seen as something that Wales needs as well as deserves, and of course it would reduce overall maintenance costs and provide a better service in the long term.
It is important to note that the costs of infrastructure projects in general have been driven up by a combination of covid-19-related supply chain disruptions and inflationary pressures, pushing up the costs of materials and skilled labour. The Welsh Affairs Committee recently heard of one such example in correspondence from the chief executive of Transport for Wales. He set out how the pandemic, escalating inflation and the consequences of leaving the EU have combined to push up the projected cost of the south Wales metro from £738 million to over £1 billion. These are political changes, and I would expect the Government in Westminster to take some responsibility for their role in aspects of them.
The impact of inflation on infrastructure projects in Wales must be considered in the wider context of the limited fiscal settlement within which the Welsh Government operate. Limits placed on their borrowing capacity and the clawback mechanism, which penalises them for carrying money over from one financial year to the next, combine to restrict the Welsh Government’s ability to deliver large-scale infrastructure projects.
Of course, this debate is part of a much wider discussion about how Wales’s fiscal settlement locks the economy into a damaging cycle of low productivity. However, for the purposes of today’s debate, I simply urge the UK Government to look again at the Welsh Government’s request that their borrowing capacity be increased, at the very least in line with inflation, and that consideration be given to the Welsh Government’s means of carrying money over, as Westminster can choose to do.