208 contributions on record. Newest first, by sitting day. Page 3 of 5. Counted by Siambr
Obviously, our community green spaces matter for people, for nature and the places where people live. We are investing in programmes that protect and improve them, including in Newport and Islwyn. I want to build on that work, particularly in communities where access to good-quality green space is most limited.
Thank you for raising this issue. I am aware, actually, of the concerns that residents have raised on this particular issue. You will also know that this is a matter for Newport City Council; it wouldn't be appropriate for me to intervene in what is and should be a local decision. But I think the wider principle here is important. Communities need both accessible green spaces and opportunities to grow food. But it is important, of course, that those local decisions have to reflect the value that people place on these spaces, and access to nature shouldn't depend, really, on where you live. I want more people to have good-quality green spaces close to home, particularly, as I said in my initial answer, where access is currently poorest.
Thank you for the question. Obviously it's about striking the right balance, isn't it? We know that there is a demand for energy, we know that there is a demand for food, and consequently there will be, sometimes, conflicting demand for land. The planning system is there to try and protect the integrity of those demands in a way that strikes the right balance. Sometimes, planning authorities get it right, other times, maybe, people will disagree, and that's the nature of the situation that we're facing.
You will know—and I am straying into the territory of other Ministers here—that work is ongoing to look at planning policy, particularly in relation to energy infrastructure. There is also work happening on a new national energy strategy for us here in Wales. I will entrust that work to my Cabinet colleagues, and I am confident that they will get it right and also confident, of course, that all Members here in the Senedd will have an opportunity to scrutinise that when the time is right.
Well, thank you for the question. As you say, it's similar to the question that has been asked, and I feel that the answer may well be similar as well. But it is about striking that balance, I think, and, as I say, the planning system should, when it functions properly, take all of those considerations in the round and, hopefully, bring forward the right balance. But we are looking at planning policy in this energy space and we are working as well on the new energy strategy for Wales, much of which will not only deal with solar, but with the additional infrastructure that goes with some of these projects.
Thank you for drawing attention to that particular scheme. I always believe that this kind of work is most effective when you empower local communities to take action like that, and, of course, we have backed that commitment with practical investment through Local Places for Nature, for example, because that scheme alone has created or improved thousands of green spaces and pollinator sites across Wales. In Newport and Caerphilly particularly, 28 community garden packages were delivered in the last year, creating nature gardens, orchards, food-growing areas, but wildlife habitats as well. Another 70 nature gardens are planned by the end of this year.
So, there's a lot happening, backed up by the £16 million that the Government has allocated to Local Places for Nature this year. It's very commendable, the work that's happening, and what we really want to see is how we can replicate that as widely as possible across the whole of Wales.
I have regular discussions with my Cabinet colleague. In the coming weeks, I know that the Cabinet Minister for Enterprise, Connectivity and Energy will set out our plans to turn our manifesto commitment for the undergrounding of new electricity circuits in Wales into a new planning policy.
Thank you for drawing our attention to that. I'm always concerned when there are any circumstances that require police attendance and police involvement. There's a certain way of doing things, and I think decent courtesy means that that should always be adhered to. I won't be drawn on commenting on any specifics, because I'm sure you can understand that I'd be straying into difficult territory.
But we do expect all developments planned in Wales to have regard to all relevant planning policy, to be sensitively designed and implemented to avoid and to definitely minimise impacts, at least on communities and the environment, but also to maximise the benefits, because I think there are two sides to this coin. When you get it right, it releases a lot of opportunities economically, et cetera, but when you get it wrong, then those are the risks that sometimes appear.
Well, that isn't really a role of mine within my portfolio. Clearly, it has a relevance to the energy Minister and it will have a relevance to the planning Minister as well. So, maybe you'd like to direct your question to them when the opportunity arises.
I'm under no illusion about the difficult transition that we're on at the minute, from the legacy BPS programme through to the new sustainable farming scheme. It's a journey that we will continue to travel on. You said that the SFS is wholly inflexible. Well, I'd like to think that some of the decisions and announcements that I've made of late shows that we can make it flexible and more workable for more farmers, so we will continue to do that. I will not entertain dropping the transition by just 1 per cent, but I am of course considering making the SFS truly more accessible to as many farmers as possible.
'Just transition' is exactly what we are trying to achieve here. You say that we've done nothing; we've committed £1 billion over the coming three years to farming to make sure that those farmers who aren't sure about coming on board with the SFS can see that there actually is a quantum of funding there that they can access, that they can utilise, to make their businesses and their farms more resilient. Now, some will choose not to do that and I appreciate that. My job is to make sure that as many people as possible who wish to come on that journey can do so. I'm focused on doing that because that is the just transition that we need to see.
But it isn't only about money as well, of course. We have introduced the review into red tape, which will be, hopefully, a great benefit to farmers who are grappling with the amount of paperwork that they're dealing with. You mentioned the control of agricultural pollution changes. We have been pragmatic, we have been practical, and, where we can do that, we will do that. But, ultimately, we are on this journey transitioning into the sustainable farming scheme and we need to keep our focus on getting there.
Thank you. I won't get drawn on particular court cases, et cetera—you'll understand that I can't comment on those—but you make a very valid point about biosecurity measures, and I will write to the company and others to make sure that they are reminded of their responsibility particularly to respect those.
Well, not only within my portfolio, as I think there's a huge responsibility across Government on all of us to lean more heavily on nature-based solutions, because we can mix concrete to our heart's content, but, unless we work with the grain of nature, we will always ultimately lose that battle. So, we do have to recalibrate our approach, and we absolutely are committed to those nature-based solutions. The wildfire summit in a few weeks' time will offer, hopefully, the starting gun for some particular work streams around that. I have some particular thoughts around how the sustainable farming scheme and land management can actually support that as well, particularly given the way that farmers stepped up to help fight some of the wildfires that we saw over the summer. Flooding as well, of course—we know there's talk of improving catchment or retaining water through various means in the uplands, et cetera. But key to all of this as well, of course, is it still needs funding, it still needs finance, because the interventions will cost. So, yes, Government has a role to play. Other authorities clearly have a role to play. But nature finance as well, I think, is a key area where we need to be focusing on. I very much intend to build on the work of the previous Government to really focus on that area over the coming months.
Thank you for that. I'm not 100 per cent sure where we are on that. I am aware, if I'm correct, and I don't wish to mislead the Senedd, that a review is happening of the evidence at the minute. I'm awaiting advice from officials. Maybe, if you'd allow me, I will write to you to give you an update of where we are, because it is an area that clearly needs to be addressed.
Yes, she's very good. She never does it to me. [Laughter.]
Thank you. There were a couple of questions in there. I haven't got the list in front of me of the membership of that group, but we are, you're right, looking at a whole food system, from gate to plate and beyond—well, no, where does it go after that? I'm not sure. [Laughter.] But, certainly, there is a need to make sure that all voices are heard around that table. And I know, of course, that the group itself will be utilising work streams that will draw on experience of others also through other fora and networks. And I know that the chair has engaged widely, to say the least, already, beyond what has been brought together around that particular stakeholder group.
It will have a number of work streams. We want to look at areas around the red meat supply chain in Wales. We want to look at horticulture and growing horticulture, and we want to look at food in schools initially. Those are some of the areas that will be prioritised in the first place. So, clearly, if we're looking at the red meat supply chain, then processors and others will be a big, big part of that conversation.
Well, after the session we had in committee, I made sure that I did write to the UK Government to make these representations, to make sure that any implications for Welsh agriculture are properly considered and any negative consequences are avoided. My understanding is, of course, that most of the fertiliser coming to the UK is from the EU—so they wouldn't be affected by the carbon border adjustment mechanism—mainly from the Netherlands, Norway, Germany, and Belgium. But there is some coming from beyond, and we need to guard against any negative consequences stemming from that.
To come back to your previous question as well, if we need to legislate on certain areas, we will. I think we need to wait and see what they recommend. I would prefer action that doesn't require legislation in order to get on with it more quickly, but where we do need to legislate, we won't shy away from that.
And on strengthening procurement policy as well, I know that there will be the publication of a new statement on public procurement policy from this Welsh Government soon, and I'm sure the relevant Minister will publish that when it's ready.
Protecting groundwater is essential for safeguarding drinking water supplies, the environment and Wales's long-term water resilience. Planning and environmental permitting processes require risks to groundwater to be assessed and managed. Where risks are identified, Natural Resources Wales can then require mitigation measures, monitoring and ongoing controls to protect water resources.
Thank you for that question. I know that this is a challenge that could occur in a number of different contexts. I hope you'll be reassured that the Welsh Government is working with Natural Resources Wales and local planning authorities through the planning and environmental permitting systems to make sure that groundwater risks are identified and that they are properly assessed and managed before major developments proceed.
We set the national planning policy framework that local planning authorities apply when determining applications, and Natural Resources Wales provide specialist technical advice on groundwater risks as a statutory consultee. Planning authorities can draw on their hydrogeological expertise when they consider whether further investigation or any mitigation or monitoring is needed before a decision is taken.
Where evidence identifies a specific local risk, local planning authorities and NRW can use their respective planning and permitting functions to make sure that proportionate monitoring and controls are in place during construction and operation. But, ultimately, we will work closely with those bodies to support the consistent and effective application of groundwater protections as a number of different development pressures—and environmental risks, no doubt—evolve.
Thank you for drawing attention to a very important area here. I won't get drawn on particular local issues, but, more generally, we do know that the nutrient impact on housing delivery is concerning. The Cabinet Minister for Local Government, Housing and Planning and I both recognise the importance of this issue.
To strengthen leadership and strategic co-ordination to try and address those nutrient-related challenges, the Welsh Government is establishing a new nutrient efficiency and resilience group. That group will bring together key partners and stakeholders, including regulators, water companies, the agricultural sector, environmental organisations and local authority representatives, to provide strategic oversight of nutrient management across Wales.
Its work will focus on both the immediate operational challenges, which are pressing, but also the longer term actions needed to restore and improve the health of our rivers and catchments, helping to deliver a more co-ordinated and whole-system approach to river recovery and environmental improvement, but also, hopefully, unlocking potential developments such as the one that you've referred to.
The Welsh Government is supporting family farms in Brycheiniog Tawe Nedd through its £340 million annual budget commitment. To help farmers facing significant pressures this year particularly, we've increased advance payments from 70 per cent to 80 per cent. The sustainable farming scheme is an accessible whole-farm scheme, designed to support the long-term resilience of farms.
Yes I will, because family farms, as you say, are the backbone of our rural communities in Brycheiniog Tawe Nedd and the rest of Wales as well, and we recognise the significant pressures that those businesses are facing. That's why we have been flexible, for example around the control of agricultural pollution regulations, in allowing a longer period to clear some of the slurry stores that farms have, but to do so in a responsible way, in a managed way, in a controlled way. Natural Resources Wales support that approach, because they recognise that there would be additional environmental risks from those stores overspilling or failing, which would be even more catastrophic. So, I'd like to think that we are being pragmatic and practical where we can be.
I spent the summer visiting a number of agricultural shows, and there were three things, basically, that farmers were asking for. One is certainty in a hugely uncertain world, and we are trying to deliver that with our commitment to long-term funding for farming. But they also ask for flexibility. When circumstances change, such as the drought we saw over the summer, then maybe we need to look at the way we ask farms to do things. We've introduced derogations within the SFS in terms of some of the things that they have to achieve directly as a consequence of some of those extreme weather events. The third element was general support. If you look at the red tape review, one of the steps that we've taken, then hopefully we're demonstrating that as well. So yes, we do need to make sure that farming is resilient and is sustainable for the future, and I will do everything I can to achieve that.
Thank you very much for the question. I think it's very appropriate that the enterprise Minister is sat next to me, because I fully hope that this will be a joint endeavour. But we are looking to increase that particular focus on some of the communities that feel maybe that they have been marginalised in some of these discussions in the past. But certainly, we want to consider that statutory duty to make sure that, when it comes to creating policy or making funding decisions, for example, that balance and that consideration in the round is taken. It isn't about setting one part of Wales against another. It's making sure that every part of Wales has a fair hearing, and that's certainly, when it comes to the rural-proofing duty, something that we want to achieve. You will be aware that we are consulting at the minute, that there is an opportunity for people to feed in around those proposals, and I very much look forward to receiving those.
We are making good progress in developing ambitious, legally binding biodiversity targets, which we must have in place by April 2028. The targets will be informed by expert and stakeholder advice, underpinned by robust evidence and impact assessment, and supported by delivery of our climate and nature action plan.
Thank you for the question. I am committed, as I said, to setting those targets across all the priority areas, and that work has to be done, in law, by April 2028. So, we will do that. As I said, we will work with stakeholders to get that in place. An independent advisory panel is providing expert scrutiny and evidence-based advice to us, while the biodiversity targets task and finish group brings together stakeholders from key sectors to help make sure that those targets are ambitious but also practical and realistically deliverable. They are being developed within a complex social, economic and environmental system. I could bore you with the theory of change and cost-benefit analysis and all of the work that's happening, but they are critical tools to understand that pathway to delivery, to assess the likely impacts and benefits of different interventions and then to build that robust evidence base that we need to support targeted development, implementation and evaluation. I hear what the Member is saying about transparency. I would expect that we would be looking to do that. I will maybe ask my colleague the Cabinet Minister for Government Effectiveness and the Constitution to write to you with an outline. But, certainly, we intend to do that with other metrics across Government, and I can't imagine that it would not be the case here as well.
Thank you. I meet regularly with Natural Resources Wales. This is something that I will raise with them. Clearly, I have confidence in their ability to do their job, but I also recognise that they are being stretched and there is great demand on the expertise that they have. But I will pursue that with them and ask for an explanation.
I will happily take that away and consider it. I think you make a fair point. I think the role of citizens—. And I said earlier, in relation to green spaces, when you empower citizens to take action and to respond to some of these circumstances, then you are really creating a more sustainable approach, moving forward. Citizen science, as well, I think, has a role to play. So, we'll consider all of that in the mix, and it's certainly something I can take on board. It's a point very well made.
Well, the Government monitors livestock numbers alongside evidence on farm viability, on emissions, on biodiversity and on animal health, including through the UK Agriculture Market Monitoring Group. Our aim, of course, is to support sustainable, productive farming, and the sustainable farming scheme, for example, will help farmers improve resilience, strengthen food production and, of course, environmental outcomes at the same time.
I think this is where Reform gets it wrong. You see it as one side against another. I would much rather find a way where we can mutually support both farming, by making it more resilient, but, in doing so, support the recovery of nature and tackling climate change as well. It isn't an either/or. I believe that we can—. And look, farming needs to become resilient. Nobody knows more than farmers the impact of climate change. They are the ones who are in the face of drought over the summer. They are the ones whose land sits under floodwaters for weeks on end. That has a direct impact on the economic bottom line. Many of the farmers I work with are the first ones to say, ‘We need to stop this flooding happening. We need support from Government and others to develop some of these interventions. Not only will it help nature and the environment, but, by damn, it will make our business more sustainable moving forward.' So, that is my approach, not this 'let's go and look for a fight' approach that we get from Reform.
Well, we are, I can assure the Member. We are strengthening rural resilience, Dirprwy Lywydd, across all rural Wales through investment in sustainable farming, in support for rural communities and businesses, actions to improve climate resilience, and new proposals for our rural-proofing duty, to make sure that the needs of rural areas are considered, of course, when developing policy programmes and spending plans as well.
Well, thank you for raising this issue again, in fairness. I share your concern about the problem with water pressure in Redwick and, as I say, it's something that you've raised previously. It is vitally important, first of all, of course, that people have a reliable water supply, but it's also important that farms and other businesses have the water that they need, and animal health and welfare considerations as well are essential, aren't they? So, my understanding is that Dŵr Cymru is investigating the situation and plans to update Redwick residents in October, but it is important that they assess the situation thoroughly and that the problem is addressed. This may, of course, need stages of action. There may well be short-term initial steps that they can take, but then there may be longer term requirements to plan and then implement schemes, and that will depend, of course, on what exactly the problem is and what exactly the best solution might be. But I will commit to raising this with Dŵr Cymru. I meet with them quite regularly, as it happens, and this is something that I will ask them about when we next meet.
Well, the Welsh Government is tackling social isolation in farming communities through its national connected communities strategy. We also support farming communities through the Wales farm support group, which brings charities together to share expertise to provide practical and well-being support.
Yes, improving mental health and well-being is an absolute priority for Welsh Government. We know that farmers face many challenges. I myself have seen it in terms of friends and family in the industry. That uncertainty that comes, of course, with so many aspects of farming, but the isolation and the loneliness particularly that you point to, can have a detrimental impact on mental well-being.
So, officials are working with local authority information and advice assistance services to identify people experiencing loneliness or isolation earlier, or as soon as we can, to try and connect them then to the support that will help them. The sustainable social services grant from the Government funds third sector projects that help people stay connected and active locally, including befriending, social activities and outreach for those at risk of loneliness in rural and farming communities. And the Welsh Government supports Farmwell Wales as well, an online hub offering farmers and their families accessible advice on personal as well as business resilience, including on isolation and loneliness, and we know, of course, that a lot of good work is being done by farming charities out there, and I, and I'm sure other Members of this Senedd, would want to pay testament to the work that they do. It is essential that we do everything we can to raise awareness of the importance of maintaining mental and physical health, and, if somebody is struggling, and I can speak from personal experience here: talk to someone. Share the load; talk to someone. That's how you start getting better. Diolch.
Diolch yn fawr iawn, Ddirprwy Lywydd. A gaf i ddiolch, yn y lle cyntaf, i Niamh Salkeld am ddod â'r ddadl yma i'r Senedd, gyda chefnogaeth Elwyn Vaughan, ac am y gwaith rŷch chi wedi'i wneud, ond hefyd i bawb sydd wedi cyfrannu i'r ddadl a'r drafodaeth yma heddiw? Dwi'n gwybod bod yna lawer iawn o gymunedau ledled Cymru yn pryderu'n fawr iawn yn dilyn y rhaglen Buried ar y BBC ac yn edrych atom ni am atebion. Ac nid PCBs yw'r unig bryder, fel rŷn ni'n gwybod, wrth gwrs. Dwi'n ymwybodol bod yna gymunedau sy'n poeni am gemegau eraill, er enghraifft y PFOAs ac yn y blaen, a rhai eraill eto sydd yn destun gofid i nifer.
Felly, dwi eisiau dechrau drwy roi sicrwydd i Aelodau bod y Llywodraeth yma wedi ymrwymo i sicrhau tegwch gwirioneddol i'r rhai sydd yn cael eu heffeithio arnyn nhw fwyaf gan ein gorffennol diwydiannol ni. Achos, ledled Cymru, mae llawer gormod o gymunedau yn parhau i fyw gyda'r etifeddiaeth honno—un sydd yn difetha ac yn difrodi yr amgylchedd y maen nhw'n byw ynddo fe. O hen fwyngloddiau brig a thomenni glo anniogel i safleoedd gwastraff hanesyddol, mae'r safleoedd hyn nid yn unig yn peri risg posib i bobl a'r amgylchedd, ond hefyd, wrth gwrs, yn atal adfywio a thwf economaidd ar yr un pryd.
Nawr, er mae lleihau unrhyw niwed posib yw fy mhrif flaenoriaeth i, wrth gwrs, dwi yn gweld cyfleoedd hefyd. Gall delio â'r safleoedd hyn fod angen technegau adfer newydd ac arloesol. Gall hyn alw am ymchwil newydd, gweithgynhyrchu, cyfleoedd creu swyddi sydd â sgiliau penodol hefyd. Ddylen ni ddim gweld hyn i gyd fel rhyw rwystr disymud; dwi'n awyddus i archwilio pob opsiwn i symud ymlaen ar y mater cymhleth yma, a hynny ar fwy nag un lefel.
Thank you very much, Dirprwy Lywydd. May I start by thanking Niamh Salkeld for bringing this debate to the Senedd, with the support of Elwyn Vaughan, and for the work that you've done, but also everyone who has contributed to this debate this afternoon? I know that there are many communities across Wales who are gravely concerned following the Buried programme on the BBC and are looking to us for answers. PCBs aren't the only concern, as we know. I am aware that there are communities who are concerned about other chemicals, such as PFOAs and so on, and there are others too that are a cause of concern to many.
So, I would like to start by reassuring Members that this Government is committed to ensuring real fairness for those most affected by our industrial past. Because, across Wales, far too many communities continue to live with that legacy of environmental degradation and damage. From old opencast mines and unsafe coal tips to historical waste sites, these sites not only pose potential risks to people and the environment, but also, of course, prevent economic regeneration and growth.
Now, although minimising any potential harm is my main priority, I also see opportunities. Dealing with these sites may require new and innovative remedial techniques. This could require new research, manufacturing and job creation opportunities with specific skills. We shouldn't see all of this as some implacable barrier; I'm keen to explore all options to move forward on this complex issue, and to do that on more than one level.
However, I also agree with the motion that at the heart of this issue is a simple, simple principle: those responsible for pollution should cover the costs of putting that harm right. Now, the polluter-pays principle is an important safeguard for communities and for taxpayers, and I believe it's an essential part of delivering environmental justice.
I recognise that determining contaminated land liability can be challenging for regulators. Some of these sites we're dealing with, as we've heard today, relate to activities from decades ago, even hundreds of years ago, and that can mean that there's often little evidence left behind to link the contamination to the polluter. Indeed, the polluter may no longer even still exist. Yet, despite these challenges, I'm keen to strengthen this core principle, and we will work closely with regulators and the UK Government and, indeed, others on an international level, over the coming months, to identify the options that we have to get to grips with this properly.
On the point of working with others, I welcome the numerous calls for the UK Government to play their role in addressing these issues as well. I'm under no illusion that, in the absence of any polluter being able to pay, then dealing with the legacy of contaminated land will require sustained investment. However, communities that have lived with these issues for many years rightly expect us to work together to deliver those lasting solutions. So, we've already seen what we can achieve through the joint commitment of the Welsh and UK Governments on coal tip safety that a number of Members have referred to, and I believe that that gives us a strong case for a similar approach here. This partnership hasn't only helped to address coal tip safety, but also has removed the economic burden on coalfield communities as well, and I am keen that this model is something that, hopefully, we can adopt in this context as well.
That's why, of course, we are continuing to press the UK Treasury on the importance of providing funding to support our joint efforts to address this legacy, through both the restoration of coal tips, yes, but also the remediation of contaminated land, as highlighted in the debate today. And I know that the First Minister has written to the Prime Minister, encouraging him to engage to develop this joint endeavour. I'm also aware that the finance Minister raised this with the previous Chief Secretary to the Treasury, as well, of course, more recently on more than one occasion with the current incumbent as well. I can also confirm that we will be making the case to HM Treasury to secure funding for this work at next year’s UK spending review.
Turning now to the request for a national framework, I recognise concerns have been raised about how sites are assessed and the need for more testing. Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 is the statutory regime for contaminated land in Wales. Local authorities are the lead regulators and have a statutory responsibility to identify and, as well, to prioritise sites in their areas. This will be based on local knowledge and different assessments that they undertake.
Whilst I want to avoid duplication or, indeed, undermining the importance of that local expertise, I am supportive of exploring a possible all-Wales approach to site prioritisation. For example, I understand that individual local authorities may actually use different parameters and different tools to risk-assess a site. Well, really, could there not be merit in adopting a standardised approach for all, so that we all know where we stand, and that it's done on a consistent basis? So, that is certainly something that I will be exploring further with my officials.
It's also important to note, of course, that, for a site to be designated contaminated land, it needs to be causing, or having the potential to cause, significant harm to human health or the environment. Now, the legislation adopts a risk-based approach. So, in simple terms, land contamination only becomes a Part 2A problem when there is something harmful, and then a way for it to move, and something that can be harmed by it. Remove any one of these, and the risk linkage is broken.
However, I recognise that, whilst this approach is intended to ensure those sites causing direct risks are prioritised, it can create uncertainty when a site is not legally defined as contaminated land. I am keen to see how these sites are considered to explore how we consider that, and whether a wider, again, national framework could capture such sites if a legitimate burden is being placed on a community or a local authority.
I also understand, of course, that people living near polluted sites want answers. Why wouldn't they? Of course they do. And they want reassurance as well when it comes to their health particularly, and I'm aware that Public Health Wales is working with its partners, including health boards, local authorities and Natural Resources Wales, to review the concerns raised in the BBC Buried programme.
I also understand Public Health Wales have urged caution in relation to calls for widespread blood testing for PCBs, noting the limitations and the barriers to adopting this type of approach. They've noted that managing current and future risks to the population should involve a focus on identifying and containing potential routes of exposure to PCBs from sites of concern.
Finally, on the call to support local authorities with their statutory responsibilities, I've already asked my officials to provide options as to how best to achieve this. I recognise that individual local authorities will have different levels of resource and different levels of experience available to them. I want to make sure that any support we may provide is reflective of these differing needs so that everyone is able to benefit, regardless of the capacity of their local authority.
Once again, I welcome this opportunity today to engage with Members on this issue, and to listen the concerns that have been raised. I've certainly been making notes and I'll be looking to see how some these issues can be directly addressed. As previously noted, this is, of course, a complex area, with many years of evidence gathering and research undertaken to help regulators. Consequently, some changes may take longer than others to make. However, despite these potential challenges, we as a Government are absolutely committed to developing a Wales-wide strategy to progressively restore post-industrial land and to protect communities from those potential risks that come with that legacy. I hear the calls for action and I will ensure that former industrial land is made safe. I'll protect public health and deliver long-overdue environmental justice for the communities that have been most affected by this. I look forward to all Members, hopefully, supporting this motion today and to help continue this journey to protect both people's health and the environment for future generations. Diolch.
Diolch o galon, Ddirprwy Lywydd. Dwi'n falch iawn heddiw o fedru diweddaru Aelodau am y cynllun dychwelyd ernes yma yng Nghymru. Ar 20 Awst, fe gyhoeddais i benodiad Exchange for Change fel y sefydliad rheoli ernes inni yma yng Nghymru. Gyda’r penodiad hwn, wrth gwrs, rŷn ni'n symud gam yn nes at system a fydd yn lleihau sbwriel, yn cynyddu'r gwaith o gasglu deunyddiau gwerthfawr, yn cefnogi ailddefnyddio a hefyd, wrth gwrs, yn helpu i sicrhau Cymru lanach a mwy cylchol.
Thank you very much, Dirprwy Lywydd. Today, I am very pleased to be able to update Members on Wales's deposit-return scheme. On 20 August, I announced the appointment of Exchange for Change as the deposit management organisation for us here in Wales. With this appointment, of course, we move one step closer to a system that will reduce litter, increase the collection of valuable materials, support reuse and also, of course, will help to deliver a cleaner and more circular Wales.
Now, the appointment of Exchange for Change followed a robust process to identify an organisation capable of delivering the scheme here in Wales. As the deposit management organisation, Exchange for Change will now work with producers, retailers, local authorities and other stakeholders to establish the return network, collection and processing infrastructure, producer registration arrangements and operational arrangements and systems needed before launch. As a producer-led scheme, of course, they will now play a crucial role in delivering a DRS that works for Wales.
As Exchange for Change, of course, has previously been appointed to deliver the schemes in the other UK nations, it means now that we will have a common administrator across the UK. This provides the strongest possible foundation for interoperability between the UK schemes and for businesses operating across borders.
As Wales continues to lead the UK on recycling and resource efficiency, it remains vital that the introduction of the scheme delivers clear benefits in Wales whilst ensuring the scheme is interoperable, as I say, with other schemes across the UK.
Nawr, mae Cymru eisoes yn cael ei chydnabod am gyflawni un o’r cyfraddau ailgylchu uchaf yn y byd, ac er mwyn cyfiawnhau’r buddsoddiad a’r newidiadau sydd eu hangen gan fusnesau a defnyddwyr, mae'n rhaid iddo fe ddarparu manteision ychwanegol y tu hwnt i’r cyfraddau ailgylchu uchel y mae pobl Cymru eisoes yn eu cyflawni gartref.
Now, Wales is already recognised for achieving one of the highest recycling rates in the world, and to justify the investment and the changes that are required from businesses and consumers, the scheme must deliver additional benefits beyond the high levels of recycling that the people of Wales already achieve at home.
The scheme will include metal and plastic drinks containers from day 1. Glass containers will also be in scope from day 1, but reflecting our manifesto commitment, we will work closely with Exchange for Change, and the wider drinks industry, on a pragmatic approach to glass. This includes the four-year transition period, during which no deposit will apply and in which no DRS-specific labelling will be required, as well as the phased introduction of reuse.
Working with Exchange for Change, our focus is now on the scheme’s implementation by October next year, and on supporting businesses, delivery partners and consumers to be ready for launch. In doing so, we will work to ensure Wales secures the benefits of the scheme, including reduced litter, the capture of high-quality materials for recycling back into the economy, and a clear pathway towards the roll-out of reuse. The coverage of all materials ensures that the scheme can tackle the litter seen on our streets and in our communities, of all drinks container types, from the outset. It also means that we can not only retain more valuable materials within the economy, but it also puts in place a pathway to the roll-out of reusable drinks containers, and the benefits the best schemes in the world are already delivering internationally.
Litter is not only a blight on our communities, it also imposes costs on local authorities, on taxpayers and on land managers as well. As DRS has been proven to do in other countries, by preventing litter and capturing drinks containers of all material types, it'll not only keep the materials from polluting the environment, or posing a hazard to people and wildlife, but it'll also reduce the burden of litter management and clean-up activities.
With Wales having experienced significant wildfire incidents this summer, as climate change increases, it is important as well to avoid preventable sources of ignition. With the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service having identified discarded glass bottles as one potential cause of wildfires—as sunlight passing through glass can, of course, focus heat onto dry vegetation and ignite fires—it is a reminder of the risks that littered glass in particular can present.
A successful deposit-return scheme will therefore help deliver cleaner communities and public spaces in our town centres, parks, beaches and countryside. As a Government, supporting businesses, particularly our small and medium-sized enterprises, to successfully transition and benefit from the scheme is a priority. We will therefore work with Exchange for Change to ensure that small and medium-sized businesses are fully engaged as we progress to implementation.
The success of the scheme depends on the participation of businesses of all sizes, and the regulations therefore include low-volume producer exemptions, exemptions as well for smaller retailers where that's appropriate, and flexible return arrangements. Together, these measures provide certainty and reduce compliance costs, and the four-year transition period, of course, for the deposit on glass also gives businesses more time to adapt.
Following on from the passing of the legislation by the Senedd earlier this year, the appointment of the deposit management organisation is a significant step forward to the delivery of DRS here in Wales.
Nid cynnal y perfformiad ailgylchu presennol yw unig ddiben y cynllun, ond dal deunyddiau gwerthfawr a fyddai fel arall yn cael eu taflu fel sbwriel, eu colli o’r system ailgylchu, neu eu casglu ar ansawdd is, gan hefyd osod y sylfeini ar gyfer symud ymhellach i fyny’r hierarchaeth wastraff tuag at ailddefnyddio.
Dwi’n hyderus drwy weithio gydag, ac mewn partneriaeth gydag Exchange for Change, y bydd y cynllun dychwelyd ernes yn llwyddiannus yn lleihau sbwriel, fel dwi'n dweud, ond hefyd yn cefnogi’r newid tuag at ailddefnyddio ac yn atgyfnerthu safle Cymru fel arweinydd byd eang ym maes effeithlonrwydd adnoddau. Mae hwn, Ddirprwy Lywydd, yn fuddsoddiad mewn cymunedau glanach, mewn economi gylchol gryfach ac mewn Cymru fwy cydnerth i genedlaethau’r dyfodol. Diolch.
Maintaining current recycling performance is not the only aim of the scheme. It is also to capture valuable materials that would otherwise be littered, lost from the recycling system, or collected at a lower quality, whilst also laying the foundations for moving further up the waste hierarchy towards reuse.
I am confident, therefore, that by working collaboratively with, and in partnership with Exchange for Change, the deposit-return scheme will be successful in reducing litter, as I've said, but also in supporting the transition to reuse and reinforcing Wales's position as a global leader in resource efficiency. This, Dirprwy Lywydd, is an investment in cleaner communities, in a stronger circular economy, and in a more resilient Wales for future generations. Thank you.
Well, what I would say initially is if we pause, if we wait, then I have no doubt that you would be on your feet then complaining about the risk of fraud. Because the rest of the UK is moving in this direction, okay? And everybody who was up in arms saying, 'Oh, if Wales isn’t moving in this direction then there will be fraud, there will be all sorts of problems and all sorts of concerns'—[Interruption.] The other parts of the UK would be the first to complain. So, we are all on a journey here, but what we have to recognise is that Wales is starting from a very different place.
We are asking producers, local authorities, consumers as well, to do something different. But if we are asking them to do something different, then we have to see a benefit from that, and including glass in the scheme is one benefit that we want to realise, because we need to keep that glass in the system. The one element that you have neglected, I think, in your analysis, is that this takes us closer to reuse. It's not about recycling. We need to move further up the waste hierarchy. Reuse would allow the same bottle to stay in use a number of times, reducing costs in terms of businesses that have to source those materials regularly. So, there are other benefits.
Littering, I mentioned in my statement. We have good records for recycling in the domestic space. We have regulations around improved recycling in business and in the workplace. On-the-go littering is a big problem, but this can be a big part of the answer, as we've seen from some of the international examples, where we can really bear down on on-the-go littering. A Keep Wales Tidy survey showed that drinks-related litter is on 43.6 per cent of our streets—nearly half of our streets are littered just by drinks-related litter. This can take us a step along that journey, reducing costs then, of course, for local authorities, for the work in terms of collecting some of that. And I mentioned the dangers from broken glass as well—well rehearsed. We know that there's more that we can and we need to do.
It's a deposit. It's a deposit; it's not an additional cost. Yes, those return points need to be accessible, of course they do, but there is no deposit payable in the first four years. This is a process of education, a process of working now with Exchange for Change to make those points as accessible and as easy to reach as possible. They won't only be in retail. I can imagine there'll be public spaces where those return points will be available as well. Where people tend to go or gather, we can provide them. And that as well is something that I think we need to keep in mind.
And council revenues, there are new waste streams coming online. Plastic film is one that's being trialled and developed now. There will be an additional stream of revenue coming for that. So, it's about striking that right balance.
The key thing for me coming from this statement today is that we now have a DMO here in Wales that brings us that partnership. That UK-wide partnership is embedded, really, because it's the same DMO that's delivering these services in all parts of the UK. And of course it's business led, it’s industry led; Exchange for Change is industry led. So, they can work with businesses, and we and others can make sure that we speak up for the communities as well in that process, as we work to delivering the operational model.
Some people want to scaremonger. There are legitimate issues that will need to be addressed over the next 12 months, but that's the point: we work up to October and the start date. I can't wait for us to get a point where, in five years' time, potentially, when the deposits kick in in terms of people paying, we will see a real material difference on the ground.
Thank you very much for welcoming this. Clearly, we're building on work that was done previously by our predecessor Government. It's something we inherited, but it's something we're embracing, and we're working hard to make sure that it works for everyone.
The biggest milestone is October next year, of course. That is when the scheme goes live across the UK. I know people have been concerned that we have been a little bit behind the curve in terms of appointing the DMO, so work is now happening on an official level to identify exactly how that is going to be achieved. I'm happy for a briefing to be held for Members—it's something I think we should do more of—just to sit down with Members, to respond to some of those concerns that some people are still raising, but also maybe to talk through the process in finer detail.
With the exemptions, you will be aware that some of the exemptions were outlined in regulations—from export shops to drinks supplied before the relevant commencement of the scheme. Small product lines are defined in the regulations, but also 'drink now' sales and hospitality. You will have situations where something is bought on premises, drunk on premises, so there are clear exemptions there. Again, I'm happy to write to you with that list in totality.
On the final point you made, the benefits of reuse are clear to us all. I touched earlier on the fact that it reduces costs in terms of having to source bottle after bottle and raw materials to produce those containers. But also there's a benefit in environmental terms in not having to keep creating those materials. But the quality of recycled material as well, when it is recycled, is much better, which, of course, is more valuable in terms of revenue streams. But keeping valuable resources like that in circulation for as long as possible is what we're trying to achieve here.
There are also additional economic benefits embedded in the whole process, because if we are reusing bottles, then we need reuse hubs, we need washeries, and those create jobs. I've seen a figure that a properly implemented DRS scheme would generate potentially up to 3,000 jobs across the UK. So, there are multiple benefits that we could realise here, but it is a transition. It's not going to happen overnight and neither should it, because things have to be introduced in a pragmatic and practical way. But that is the journey that we're on and one I'm determined to pursue.
Thank you. There's quite a lot there. In terms of why include glass, given the costs involved and the implications for business, for local authorities and the changes in consumer behaviour that will be required, any scheme that we run in relation to DRS has to deliver meaningful additional benefits for Wales, rather than simply delivering what we already achieve. We need those tangible additional benefits, and without including glass, we don't see that, because we're recycling as we are—much of that is already happening—but we are going further because we do need to move in the direction of reuse, because that's what brings us greater prizes further down the line.
You asked about the 10-week delay. There was a robust appointment process first of all—we needed to be confident that, in appointing Exchange for Change, it was the right decision. I am confident that that is the right decision. One benefit that that brings is that given that they are delivering similar schemes across other parts of the UK, they could hit the ground running. They're embedded in this sector; they understand what's needed. That, I think, will allow us to make sure that we can meet the October 2027 target in terms of going live.
On extended producer responsibility, including glass in DRS doesn't create an entirely new cost burden, because drinks producers using glass already meet producer responsibility obligations under the EPR scheme for packaging, meaning that many costs will transfer from EPR to the deposit-return scheme, rather than being an additional cost. Nation-specific reporting requirements are already in place under EPR, so it's not a new innovation when it comes to DRS as well.
You ask about UKIMA. I am confident that we are compliant with UKIMA. If you want to write to me with what you are suggesting, then I'll look at that, but I'm confident that we're not stepping outside the scope of that in what we intend to do. And there is a transition period. I won't repeat the point I made about the risk of fraud. The biggest risk of fraud is if there's no scheme here in Wales, and there will be.
As regards pubs and bars in the hospitality sector, I think I mentioned earlier that there are exemptions for 'drink on' sales in specified settings. Where deposit items are supplied for immediate consumption at mixed retail premises or on-sale premises such as hospitality, then there are flexibilities and exemptions there. So, again, it's something that we're mindful of, and as we develop the scheme, these are exactly the points that we need to be making sure that people understand.
Thank you. I can assure you that we will continue to work across the UK nations on this. Certainly, I know that a lot of work was done by my predecessor and the corresponding Ministers across the UK—that is continuing. Officials from all four nations are working closely, as are regulators. With the scheme administrator now, the DMO, we have that alignment, in that we have the same DMO delivering. I'm confident that we can work closely together on implementation and that that level of collaboration will continue as we move towards October next year and beyond.
It's important that we progress along the waste hierarchy. We do need to deliver significant improvements in the collection of high-quality materials for recycling and invest early. There are huge advantages to being an early mover in this space. Okay, internationally, there are examples of other countries that have already done this, but, within the UK, we in Wales could be reaping much of the economic benefits, particularly around glass, because I have no doubt that, ultimately, other parts of the UK will catch up with us, but we will have the infrastructure in place. We will have the washeries, the hubs in place to deal with much of this, and the infrastructure and the expertise as well in that space. So, I really see this not only as an environmental policy but also as a policy that will deliver multiple economic benefits as well, and that goes for good governance, I think, in that we're realising a number of benefits from one particular policy.
Well, I'll refer the Member to our manifesto. We are committed to this scheme. No. 1, of course, it's the law. We have to do it. The law says that we have to deliver this scheme. But we have said in our manifesto that we will deliver the deposit-return scheme, but we will be pragmatic and practical in the way that we do it to make sure that not only does it work for businesses, for local authorities, for retailers, for consumers, for the environment, but for the economy as well. Now, we're all on a journey here in terms of achieving our ambitions around recycling and moving up the waste hierarchy. This is a significant step in the right direction. Our work is to make sure that it's done in a way that delivers and realises the benefits that the DRS has delivered and realised in other countries in the world—from Germany to Denmark, to Lithuania, to Finland, to Latvia. It's there; the proof of the pudding is in its delivery in other parts of the world. We want a part of that.
Counted by Siambr from the Record's rows. Chaired contributions, spoken under the Record's title for the chair, are counted apart and never added in.
Each page holds 50 contributions at most and keeps a sitting day whole, unless the day alone is over 50.
The Record of Proceedings for each sitting day, quoted verbatim.