The
proceedings are reported in the language in which they were spoken
in the committee. In addition, a transcription of the simultaneous
interpretation is included. Where contributors have supplied
corrections to their evidence, these are noted in the
transcript.
|
Dechreuodd rhan gyhoeddus y cyfarfod am
11:03.
The public part of the meeting
began at 11:03.
|
|
Craffu ar Waith
Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros yr Amgylchedd a Materion Gwledig:
Blaenoriaethau ar gyfer y Pumed Cynulliad
Scrutiny of
the Cabinet Secretary for Environment and Rural Affairs: Priorities
for the Fifth Assembly
|
|
[1]
Mark Reckless: I re-open the session. We are now in public
session and it’s my pleasure to welcome the Cabinet
Secretary, Lesley Griffiths, to her first session with the new
Climate Change, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee in the
fifth Assembly. Minister, it is a pleasure to welcome you. We have
received your briefing, some 55 paragraphs, which I’ve
enjoyed reviewing. Some of the priorities you’ve set out
quite comprehensively for the term. Could I perhaps, before we
commence, ask you to introduce your solid team of civil servants
that you have with you, so we know who everyone is?
|
|
[2]
The Cabinet Secretary for Environment and Rural Affairs
(Lesley Griffiths): Okay. I’ll ask them to
introduce themselves.
|
|
[3]
Mr Quinn: Matthew Quinn, I’m director of environment
and sustainable development.
|
|
[4]
Mr Slade: Andrew Slade, I’m director of agriculture,
food and marine.
|
|
[5]
Dr Glossop: I’m Christianne Glossop, Chief Veterinary
Officer for Wales.
|
|
[6]
Mr Davies: Prys Davies, head of decarbonisation and
energy.
|
|
[7]
Mark Reckless: The way I was planning to run this session,
Cabinet Secretary, was to have an initial question to you, perhaps
to highlight some of the areas from your written statement. What
we’re then looking to do is to have approximately the first
hour of the session, which will have a focus on the matters
we’re interested in for our post-Brexit agriculture and rural
development inquiry. Within that, we’re also likely to touch
on the areas of food and marine. The committee, late next week,
have a session in west Wales where we’re meeting various
producers and interest groups, as well as taking forward the
strategic planning for that post-Brexit inquiry. Having done that,
I’ll probably then have a 20 or 30-minute remaining part of
the session where I’ll ask Members who want to address you on
other areas. We’ve split it into 11 different areas, but
there’s no way we’re going to have a comprehensive
approach in our first hour and a half with you.
|
|
[8]
I wonder if I might ask, just to begin, what you really see as the
key areas and priorities that you want to achieve during your
period as Cabinet Secretary.
|
|
[9]
Lesley Griffiths:
Okay, thank you. I think, as you noted, it’s a very broad and
wide-ranging portfolio, and of course just one month after I came
into portfolio we had the European Union referendum, which changed
the complexion of a lot of things within the department. And I have
to say, certainly over the summer when I was visiting agricultural
shows and doing a significant number of farm visits, you can
imagine that that was absolutely the main topic of conversation,
particularly in the agriculture and fisheries sectors, and to some
extent in the environmental sector also. It’s obviously wholly devolved to Wales, so
whilst of course there are many challenges, I think—and this
is the type of person I am—we have to look at the
opportunities, and we’ve done a great deal of work in
preparation for what lies ahead.
|
|
[10]
In relation to other parts of the
portfolio, last term we had three major pieces of legislation that
came out of this portfolio, two of which I’m still
responsible for, and those are the Planning (Wales) Act 2015 and
the Environment (Wales) Act 2016, and there was the Well-being of
Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015, which now sits in the Cabinet
Secretary for Finance and Local Government’s portfolio. I
think a lot of the legislation will help us again in relation to
post Brexit.
|
|
[11]
From an animal health and welfare point
of view—something I’m personally passionate
about—I’ll be refreshing and having a look at the
eradication programme. I’ll be making a statement to the
Assembly next month, so that’s another priority
area.
|
|
[12]
The food and drink sector is very dynamic
and very important to the economy of Wales. And, again, I want to
continue to build on the excellent work that’s been done. I
remember being in Cabinet a couple of years ago when the then
Minister came forward with what I thought was an extremely
ambitious target of reaching £7 billion in this sector by
2020. We’ve already got to £6.1 billion, so we’re
way ahead of what I thought was a very ambitious target at the
moment. So, we’re working very closely with the sector to
continue that progress.
|
|
[13]
Planning is a bit more arm’s
length, obviously, but again the planning Act, I think, has given
us the basis for taking forward this to the mainstream. I think
we’ve all got issues in our constituencies around planning,
so again I think the planning Act will overcome much of that and
make it much more sustainable.
|
|
[14]
Energy has all come together in this
portfolio for the first time; it was previously in two portfolios,
and also a bit with the First Minister, so I think there’s a
lot of exciting opportunities in energy. Again, I’m just
having very early discussions and I will be making a statement
later in this current term, before Christmas, about my priorities.
I’m working very closely with Prys. We’ve been doing
some work over the summer to come forward with that and yesterday I
had a meeting on the tidal lagoon, for instance. So, I think
that’s covered all the different areas of the
portfolio.
|
|
[15]
Mark Reckless: Thank you. I know we’ll welcome the focus on
implementing legislation from the previous Assembly and making sure
that is working and taking us forward in the way that was intended.
I wonder if I might start the questioning relating to our
post-Brexit agriculture and rural development inquiry by asking you
about how you perceive any future agreement or framework at a UK
level in that area. You rightly say agriculture is devolved, but
it’s been devolved in a circumstance where many of the key
decisions, or certainly the key policy framework, have been set
at an EU level. So, leaving the European Union, we’re
all very keen that we should continue to receive that amount of
common agricultural policy funds, and certainly that that
shouldn’t be Barnett formulated, and that’s going to be
a priority in negotiations, but is the Welsh Government demanding
that that sum of money should simply be transferred as part of the
block grant, with no ring-fencing or any arrangements or even a
commitment to continue spending that on agriculture, or is there a
willingness to agree some pan-UK protocol or framework or approach
in any way?
|
|
[16]
Lesley Griffiths: Okay. I think we need to start at the
beginning. It’s obviously going to be a very, very long
process. We’ve had a great deal of activity, as I mentioned.
So, I thought it was really important to bring everybody together
straight away; I think it was 4 July. So, within two weeks of the
vote, we had our first stakeholder group meeting, and I thought it
was really important to bring everybody together because we
didn’t want people working in silos. So, it was no good
agriculture working here, fisheries working here, environment
working here, so we brought everybody together where we started to
talk about the future and how it would look. So, we’ve got
the activity that’s been undertaken with the stakeholders. We
had a stakeholder meeting on 4 July, and I held another one at the
Royal Welsh Show on 18 July, I think. From those two stakeholder
meetings, they told us that what they wanted to do was to have
workshops where they could drill down into different aspects of it.
Over the summer, officials have held four workshops. Have you had
four now?
|
|
[17]
Mr Slade: Yes.
|
|
[18]
Lesley Griffiths: You’ve had all four now. I
haven’t attended any of them, so I will ask Andrew to come in
a bit more about the workshops later. We’re having a fifth
one on 3 October, which I will attend, and then we’ll have
another stakeholder meeting on 21 October. So, that’s the
work with the stakeholders. Obviously then, there’s work
going on with the UK Government. So, I’ve already met George
Eustice, the UK agriculture Minister, and Michelle McIlveen, the
Northern Ireland one; I haven’t met Fergus Ewing yet.
I’ve invited all three Ministers—. I think it’s
really important that the four of us work together, whilst
we’ve got the devolution of the powers wholly devolved. It
might be that we’ll have individual agricultural policies
sitting under a UK framework for instance. I think it’s
really important that the four of us do work together, so
I’ve invited them to come to Cardiff, and that meeting,
hopefully, will take place within the next six weeks.
|
|
[19]
We’ve had initial analysis on legislation for instance, so
there are 5,000 pieces of legislation that affect my portfolio. So,
for officials to have to unpick all that, you can see it’s a
huge amount of work. I’m very keen not to see duplication, so
stuff going on in the Department for Environment, Food and Rural
Affairs that we could use and vice versa, and with Scotland and
Northern Ireland. However, for that to happen, we have to have
really good relationships and working between officials. There is
work being undertaken by Whitehall over the summer, which we
haven’t been party to. I know that there are some quite good
bilateral discussions going on at official level, but there is no
formal mechanism for that. So, I think it’s really important
that we get those mechanisms in place as soon as possible. Perhaps
Andrew would like to say a bit more about official discussions.
|
|
[20]
Mr Slade: Yes. We’ve got overarching machinery that
governs the constitutional arrangements, principally through the
Joint Ministerial Committee, and that machinery is being
strengthened in light of Brexit. That’s at a very high level,
an inter-governmental level, and the point the Minister is making
is that at portfolio level, there will be contact with Ministers,
and we expect other UK Ministers to come to Cardiff in the
not-too-distant future, which is very welcome. But, we’ve yet
to see the development of official mechanisms, or mechanisms below
ministerial level, to pull together all the Brexit thinking. So,
although there are a lot of contacts going on at departmental level
between sectoral interests, or policy officials dealing with
particular areas, we haven’t yet got the machinery that sits
behind that to formalise some of those contacts. And, as the
Minister says, Whitehall colleagues have clearly been doing a lot
of analytical work over the summer and it’s important that we
can be part of that process and make sure that Welsh interests are
properly reflected in that analysis.
|
|
[21]
Mark Reckless: Just one follow up on that, I think,
Minister, you accepted that there could be some areas where
we’d agree a UK-wide approach to a particular agricultural
policy. Is it possible that might also be the case for an overall
financing framework, as it has been in the CAP, even if it is in a
lighter and less interfering way?
|
|
11:15
|
|
[22]
Lesley Griffiths: Certainly in the discussions that
I’ve had with the sector, and again at the variety of
agricultural shows that I’ve been to over the summer, each
time I’ve met the National Farmers’ Union, the
Farmers’ Union of Wales and the Country Land and Business
Association. It’s interesting to hear their views because,
obviously, they’ve been receiving the funding a lot longer
than I’ve been involved. Some of them absolutely think that
we should have a Welsh-specific and some of them think we should
have some sort of UK framework. But, as I say, it’s very
early days, and those are discussions that we have. They’re
all very keen that we continue with the ring fence, but then you
wouldn’t be surprised to hear that, really.
|
|
[23]
Mark Reckless: Thank you. Could I open it to Members?
Huw.
|
|
[24]
Huw Irranca-Davies: It’s very early days yet, Cabinet
Secretary. It’s very interesting that the dilemmas that this
throws up are things such as pillar 1 and pillar 2 payments. We
currently have a European structure, and devolved administrations
can already make decisions on how much they allocate to rural
development and how much they allocate to straightforward single
farm payments, et cetera. The results on overarching structure are
to do with environmental payments as well, albeit we have different
schemes in Wales to England. What are your initial thoughts on the
way forward? I know it’s very early days but, for example, if
England decided that they wanted nothing to do any more with rural
development funding and they were purely going to go down the farm
subsidy payments route in some form or another, that could
potentially leave our farmers at a disadvantage. Is that the sort
of discussion, at least, that you are having in these early stages
to try to develop that framework?
|
|
[25]
Lesley Griffiths: No. I haven’t started discussing
that. What you’ve got to think is that we’re probably
going to be in the EU realistically until 2019.
|
|
[26]
Huw Irranca-Davies: Yes. Absolutely.
|
|
[27]
Lesley Griffiths: So, we’re focusing on things that we
need to do now rather than the kind of long term, but we will have
to look at that. As you say, it is likely that within the three
devolved administrations and the UK Government things will diverge.
We’ve had these powers for 17 years and, as you say, we have
done things differently. I just think that what it gives us is an
opportunity to have a look at what would be best for Wales and to
be Welsh-specific. Clearly, in the conversations that we’ve
had over the summer, that’s something that’s come
through very strongly.
|
|
[28]
Huw Irranca-Davies: But in doing so—I’m not
asking for the detail—are you and your very well-experienced
officials as well cognisant of the fact that, in these new freedoms
that will come at some point, there are also potential dangers with
that, including competitiveness of farming and agriculture, and
also of leaving rural development high and dry? It’s that
feeling of the framework that the Chair alluded to there. There
needs to be some sort of agreement, it would suggest. I’m not
talking about rolling back devolution at all—you
wouldn’t expect me to say that—but some sort of
understanding as to the general approach within the UK to avoid
that.
|
|
[29]
Lesley Griffiths: Yes, and I think it’s about getting
that balance right. When I met with George Eustice—and
I’ve only met with him once up to now—he was talking
about a British agricultural policy. It was like, ‘No, we
will have a Welsh agricultural policy wholly devolved, and
that’s how it will be’. However, I want to collaborate
as much as I can. I don’t want duplication of work. I think
the farming sector, in particular, want to see that level of
collaboration. You’ve already heard Andrew say that
it’s really important that officials engage, and, as you say,
Andrew is very experienced, and in European affairs also. I
don’t know if there’s anything you want to add.
|
|
[30]
Mr Slade: I think the question about pillar 1 and pillar 2
is an interesting one. So, most of our thinking, of course, over
the last 20 plus years or so since devolution has been in that
context, so, we’ve got to un-think some of that as we move
forward. So, that’s the first point. The second is, to pick
up on the Minister’s point about what’s in the best
interests of Wales, if, having taken the powers ‘back’
from Brussels under devolution, the best way forward, as determined
by Ministers, is that we should be participating in some wider UK
arrangement for our sectors, for our natural resources and
management thereof and so on, that will be where we will come from.
The slight risk in a devolution context is a sort of starting
presumption that everything happens at the UK level and then we
work out what comes to you. That’s not how the devolution
settlement works. I think there’s a third point that you sort
of touch on, which is around: when does a Minister in Whitehall
speak for the UK and when do they speak for England? I think, in a
post-Brexit scenario, that becomes a much more pointed question,
not just for us but also for English farmers or land managers in
that context.
|
|
[31]
Lesley Griffiths: Yes, I think the most important thing is
that we are around that table at every opportunity. The Prime
Minister came to meet with the First Minister, and I think that
that was very welcome. I was very keen to meet with the agriculture
Ministers as soon as possible; as I say, I managed to meet with two
of them at the Royal Welsh Show. Hopefully, when we meet in
Cardiff, we’ll have a very specific agenda where some of these things can be—you know, we
can start those discussions at a ministerial level that, hopefully,
are going to take place at official level as well.
|
|
[32]
Mark Reckless: Simon.
|
|
[33]
Simon
Thomas: Diolch. Tra ein bod ni’n dal yn trafod egwyddorion
sylfaenol yma—[Anhyglyw.]—rhai o’r
manylion. Rwy’n deall hynny. A fedrwch chi jest gadarnhau
beth yw safbwynt y Cabinet ar hyn o bryd ynglŷn â
masnachu? Mae’n siŵr eich bod chi wedi clywed yr un
neges gan ffermwyr ag a glywais i dros yr haf, sef eu bod nhw
eisiau dal i fasnachu fel y maen nhw wedi bod yn masnachu yn y
farchnad sengl. Byddai rhai’n disgrifio hynny fel cael y
deisen a’i bwyta hi, ond dyna’r sefyllfa yr ydym ynddi.
Ddoe yn y Cyfarfod Llawn, fe roddodd y Prif Weinidog ddwy
weledigaeth bur wahanol o sut y gall hyn gario ymlaen. Un oedd drwy
berthynas fasnach rydd gyda’r Undeb Ewropeaidd, lle mae
mynediad i’r farchnad sengl, megis ar y ffurf gan Ganada,
sydd wedi dod i fodolaeth ond sydd ddim eto’n weithredol, ond
sydd yn seiliedig ar fasnach rydd, ac un sy’n seiliedig ar
aelodaeth o’r farchnad sengl, drwy EFTA neu rywbeth tebyg.
Mae’r ddwy weledigaeth yn wahanol iawn, ac mae’r ddwy
yn gwrthddweud ei gilydd, ac mae’n rhaid bod gan y
Llywodraeth un amcan. A fedrwch chi gadarnhau beth yw’r amcan
a beth yw safbwynt y Cabinet? Ai mynediad drwy fasnach rydd, neu
aelodaeth o’r farchnad sengl yr ydych chi’n chwilio
amdano ar gyfer cefn gwlad ac amaethwyr Cymru?
|
Simon Thomas: Thank you. While we’re still discussing the
fundamental principles here, I know you can’t provide details
at the moment. I understand that. Can you just confirm what the
Cabinet’s viewpoint is at the moment with regard to trade?
I’m sure you’ve heard the same message from farmers as
I’ve heard over the summer, that they want to continue
trading as they have been trading in the single market. Some would
describe that as having one’s cake and eating it, but
that’s the situation we’re in. Yesterday in Plenary,
the First Minister provided us with two very different visions of
how to take this forward. One was through a relationship based on
free trade with the European Union, in which access to the single
market would be similar to what is happening in Canada and which
has come into being but is not active, based on free trade, and one
based on membership of the single market, through EFTA or something
similar. The two visions are very different, and they contradict
each other, and the Government must have one aim. Can you confirm
what the aim is and what the Cabinet’s viewpoint is? Is it
access through free trade or membership of the single market that
you are seeking for rural Wales and its farmers?
|
|
[34]
Lesley Griffiths: I think you’re absolutely right; the
overwhelming message that’s come through is that we must
continue to have that access to the 500 million people, and,
certainly, that’s absolutely the red line, I think,
that’s coming from the agricultural sector. You will have
heard the First Minister say yesterday that we had our first
meeting of the Cabinet sub-committee in relation to EU transition
on Monday. We discussed what we’re looking at, and you heard
the First Minister say yesterday about the two models, and we are
going to have that discussed at the next meeting also.
|
|
[35]
The farming sector in particular is very concerned about tariffs.
They’re also very concerned about New Zealand lamb, for
instance, and what could happen there. It’s no secret that a
lot of farmers voted ‘leave’, and, in my discussions
with them over the summer, I’ve always asked them what they
voted if they’ve raised the EU with me. Sometimes, I think
they’ve perhaps not told me the truth because they think
I’m going to shout at them, but I really want to understand
why they did, because to the general public they can’t
understand why farmers would vote ‘leave’ because of
the level of subsidy et cetera. So, when you drill down as to why
they voted ‘leave’, mainly their concerns were around
regulations, for instance, and you have to say, ‘Well, look,
we haven’t been dragged reluctantly to sign up to
these—particularly environmental—directives, et
cetera’. So, it’s not about subsidy. They want the free
trade. So, what is it? It tends to be about regulation. But I think
that also they were led—. You know, I think some promises
were made by the ‘leave’ campaign that are now showing
not to be true. But the absolute red line for them is that access
to the single market, and they are very, very concerned—and
why wouldn’t they be—about that. So, I think
that’s a discussion that we will continue to have at Cabinet,
and I’m sure the First Minister will bring forward a further
statement.
|
|
[36]
Simon Thomas: So, just to be clear, then, because membership
of the single market, which you can have through something like
EFTA, means you carry on with the regulations that the farmers
voted ‘leave’ to get rid of—
|
|
[37]
Lesley Griffiths: Not all of them.
|
|
[38]
Simon Thomas: Not all of them, no, but a majority, certainly
in west Wales, unfortunately, but it’s true. So, that seems
unlikely. On the other hand, with any free trade agreement, there
is no guarantee there are no tariffs. You can have access to the
single market but you might have tariffs, because with any free
trade agreement we don’t know what negotiation there will be,
and we don’t know what’s going to happen to that 50-odd
per cent of New Zealand lamb that gets spread around the EU at the
moment and doesn’t come to these shores. So, from what
you’ve said, the Government as yet does not have a preferred
position as to whether, of those two options—
|
|
[39]
Lesley Griffiths: Well, you heard what the First Minister
said yesterday, and that will—
|
|
[40]
Simon Thomas: Yes. I was trying to find out what you
thought. [Laughter.]
|
|
[41]
Lesley Griffiths: And those discussions will continue, and
it will certainly be on the agenda at the next meeting.
|
|
[42]
Mr Slade: And, if I may, Minister and Chair, part of the
problem with the various models is that they don’t
necessarily include primary production. So, for a number of these
arrangements, agriculture is not actually in the mix anyway, so
they’re subject to a different set of regimes. Also, in
addition to tariffs, we’ve got all the non-tariff barriers
that might be associated with new trading arrangements, including
some on Christianne’s side. The export health certification
and anything to do with animals and animal products brings with it
a whole suite of regulatory requirements that are international in
origin and where there’s a lot of paperwork associated with
them. If you’re trading across the EU at the moment, you
don’t have to worry about those elements. That’s fair,
isn’t it?
|
|
[43]
Dr Glossop: Yes, that’s absolutely right. So,
we’ve got to be thinking about the arrangements that would
have to be in place within Europe and then obviously with third
countries. It’s going to be a very different matter. Of
course, the powers to negotiate export certificates on a health
basis is not a devolved matter. So, we would, in that case, have to
be working with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural
Affairs and our colleagues in other administrations to negotiate
the certificates and then, from that point on, when we’ve got
the arrangements in place, that’s when we can start looking
at the competitive nature of the market.
|
|
[44]
Simon Thomas: Can I just follow up on two things? That’s me
done then, but I’ll follow up now because they’ve been
raised and I wanted to raise them at some stage. The first one is
animal health. One of the things that I wanted to ask you at the
moment is whether you’ve been able at all to start
discussions around the TB eradication programme—not the
details of it now; I know that you’re going to announce that
and we’ll have another opportunity to talk about that. But
the fact is that we are able—through the single market and
having an EU-approved TB eradication programme, there is no problem
with exports: no problem with dairy exports and no problem with
cattle and so forth. Once we have a trigger of article 50 or a
different relationship with that single market, then it is
perfectly feasible that a member country or the EU could look at
our TB status here in Wales and be very unhappy with it and start
to raise objections to exports and so forth. So, has that at all
been flagged up with you and have you been able to start
discussions on that?
|
|
[45]
Lesley Griffiths:
It certainly has been flagged up with me,
particularly by farmers, but also at—. We have discussed it.
I’m going out to Brussels a week on Sunday to meet with,
hopefully, the commissioner, Phil Hogan, and it’s certainly
something that I would want to start having discussions on. I think
it’s very important that we have those discussions early
because, obviously, it could be a very difficult issue.
|
|
[46]
Simon Thomas: But there’s no hint of any resolution at the
moment.
|
|
[47]
Lesley Griffiths:
It’s far too early.
|
|
[48]
Simon Thomas: Okay.
|
|
[49]
Y cwestiwn olaf
sydd gen i, i droi at rywbeth gwahanol: un o’r materion
eraill sy’n dod fel rhan o aelodaeth o’r farchnad sengl
yw deilliad bwyd, fel petai—provenance, hynny
yw—yn arbennig pethau fel statws protected geographical
indication ar gyfer nifer o gynnyrch o Gymru.
Mae Llywodraeth
San Steffan wedi dechrau sôn am ryw fath o system o adnabod
ble mae bwyd yn dod ohono ac roedd rhyw drafodaeth yn y wasg wedi
bod am y system yma. A ydych wedi dechrau eto? A ydych wedi dechrau
trafod hyn a beth fyddai’r posibiliadau, ar ôl gadael
yr Undeb Ewropeaidd, o sicrhau bod bwyd o Gymru yn dal gyda marc
bwyd o Gymru ac yn dal gydag ansawdd a’r lles anifeiliaid
hefyd sy’n dod gyda’r marc yna?
|
The final question that I have, to turn to something
different: one of the other issues that arises from being a member
of the single market is the provenance of food, and in particular
things such as the PGI status of a number of products from Wales.
The Westminster Government has started to mention a system for
identifying where food comes from and there has been some
discussion in the press about this system. Have you started to
discuss this yet and what the possibilities would be, after leaving
the European Union, of ensuring that food from Wales still has a
food mark from Wales and the quality and animal welfare that comes
with that mark?
|
|
[50]
Lesley Griffiths:
Yes, absolutely, this has been raised
with me. I visited Halen Môn and Puffin Produce Ltd over the
summer, and, as you can imagine, both of those, and, obviously,
Welsh lamb—. So, it is something that’s been
highlighted and, again, it would be something that I’d want
to get on the agenda very early when we go to Brussels. It would
depend on how we come out of the EU. We may still be able to have
that use. If not, we would have to have our own and that would
probably be at a UK level.
|
|
[51]
Simon Thomas: Again, that goes back to if we’re members of
the single market, we can probably still use it, but if we just
have access with some sort of free trade—
|
|
[52]
Lesley Griffiths:
That’s right. So, it depends on the
exit that we have. But it’s definitely something that’s
being flagged up.
|
|
[53]
Simon Thomas: And that will be something that you’ll discuss
with Phil Hogan.
|
|
[54]
Lesley Griffiths:
And that’s something that I very
much want to discuss, yes, when I go to Brussels.
|
|
[55]
Mark Reckless: I think David had indicated next and I’ll then
go to Jenny.
|
|
[56]
David Melding: I just want to follow this issue of, really, how
you’re planning and thinking because I realise you
don’t have all the answers yet. We’re unlikely to be
members of the single market and we’re very likely to exit
the European Union’s custom union. As well as tariffs as a
consequence of that policy—where we’d have to have
either bilateral agreements with all other nations in the world,
all rely World Trade Organization rules—would Welsh
agricultural exports be particularly vulnerable to
quotas?
|
|
11:30
|
|
[57]
Mr Slade: I think, particularly in relation to red
meat, particularly lamb, that would be an issue. So, among some
of the potential sector vulnerabilities in terms of future trade
deals, red meat is certainly up there on our radar, and, indeed,
we’ve already fed that into UK Government. You would expect
us to. But, similarly, our shellfish sector, most of that produce
goes straight from our shores across to mainland Europe. The wrong
trade deal done there could have very profound impacts very
quickly, and that’s been flagged to us very early on by the
fisheries sector.
|
|
[58]
Lesley Griffiths: I think I
put in the evidence paper that 90 per cent of Welsh produce is
exported to the EU. So, it’s going to have a massive
impact.
|
|
[59]
David Melding: I was going to say that I’m encouraged
that you’re thinking about it—perhaps
‘encouraged’ is not the right word. Clearly,
we’re quite vulnerable, I think, in terms of whatever
arrangements, but we could feed into a more vigorous food policy,
of course, and consume some of the wonderful shellfish ourselves
and feed our increasing number of visitors, perhaps, in boutique
restaurants and hotels. So, there is a bit of a silver lining
there, but I think the cloud is a pretty heavy one.
|
|
[60]
I just want to return to this issue of where we’re going to
get to in terms of the type of agricultural policy, both in terms
of farm payments and in the wider rural economy that we’re
likely to have. I have to say, I thought the First Minister said
yesterday that the Welsh Government’s position was that
agriculture would be fully devolved, by which I think he meant that
the Welsh Government would want all the current funding stream that
comes from the European Union to be transferred into our block
grant forever. I’m sure we all would agree that that should
be our negotiating position, but it’s somewhat unlikely given
that current payments come from a European scheme—the common
agriculture policy. It’s not directly funded by Britain at
all. Obviously, the British state at the moment makes a
contribution to the EU, but the funding payments that go around the
EU are in no way uniform. Some countries do better than us, some
not so well. So, what does happen if we cannot negotiate that from
the UK Government, and would it be better, then, to focus on at
least a UK scheme that tries to put together a sort of funding
scheme that has some comparison to the current EU CAP?
|
|
[61]
Lesley Griffiths: You will have heard—. I’m
thinking that the First Minister said this yesterday in First
Minister’s questions: you will have heard him say that
he’s had the information now from the UK Government that
we’re okay till 2020, basically; that we will receive that
funding. But after 2020 we don’t know where those farm
payments will come from. We don’t know where that
funding’s going to come from. So, we are going to have to
negotiate that. In reply to your question ‘Would it would be
better to have a UK one?, I don’t know yet. That’s
something that we’ll have to discuss going forward.
|
|
[62]
I’ve had discussions with the agricultural sector over the
summer in a variety of areas, as I’ve explained already, and
the agricultural sector accept that up until now—and some of
them don’t like this expression—they haven’t had
to justify themselves to the taxpayer because that funding has come
forward. But, basically, if we don’t get the
funding—there is no way we would not fund agriculture. We
couldn’t. If you think about what farming does—and I
think this is part of the difficulty and, again, I’ve had
this discussion—some farmers want to now be called food
producers. Some farmers don’t like that because they do so
much more than just produce food. They’re custodians of the
countryside, they’re land management—some examples of
land management are absolutely exceptional. But I don’t think
the public kind of link that. Okay, when you go to buy your food
from the supermarket, they don’t think about where that comes
from, and I think we need to get that out there, and the farming
community agree. That’s not a job just for Government,
that’s a job for everybody to get that out there. But at the
moment we don’t know where that funding is going to come from
after 2020. The First Minister, again, has said that the funding
should come till 2023. At the moment we have assurance that it will
come till 2020, but that’s to be negotiated.
|
|
[63]
David Melding: How feasible do you think it’s going to
be to retain a structure that has roughly the current levels of
funding going into agriculture and the wider rural economy? On a UK
basis, I can see the lobbies working hard and, you know,
effectively, it’s the policy in England that’s going to
drive this, isn’t it? Because if they reserve the current
amounts or something around that sort of current level of support,
then I can see that we are going to get a reasonable deal and, you
know, we could even argue that as we currently do a bit better than
the rest of the UK, that is something that should continue.
|
|
[64]
I wish you well, but I think it’s going to be very difficult
for Wales to go it alone and say, ‘Well, this is really what
we need to be preserving’. I just wonder what sort of
discussions you’re having with George Eustice. I mean, I
don’t know what future his career will have if payments are
not roughly equivalent to what they were before, because he clearly
said in the run-up to the referendum that that would happen. The
Scots and the Northern Irish have similar concerns here and it
seems to me that all of you farming Ministers around the UK should
be battling hard with the Treasury to have a UK scheme, but then
with maximum devolution to Wales. Wouldn’t that be a much
better way of progressing?
|
|
[65]
Lesley Griffiths:
Absolutely, and I can assure you I will be battling very hard. I
think you’re right about looking at the UK Government. I
cannot imagine that they won’t keep those current levels, so,
therefore, you know, we will be able to have that level of funding
coming in as well. But it is important that we talk and
that’s why I’ve invited them—I thought,
‘Get in there quick’—to Cardiff first, because I
think it is really important that the four of us do sing from the
same hymn sheet on this aspect of funding.
|
|
[66]
David Melding: So, that’s more important than a battle over
the block grant, is it?
|
|
[67]
Lesley Griffiths:
Say that again, sorry.
|
|
[68]
David Melding: That approach is more important than the battle over
the block grant.
|
|
[69]
Lesley Griffiths:
I think we need to make sure we have that
funding. I want to see the agriculture sector in Wales continue to
be sustainable and resilient and, you know, they need that funding.
So, I’ve assured them that we will have that battle if need
be, but equally I think they have a role to play in ensuring the
public understand why they need that funding, because I’m
sure we’ve all had discussions with members of the public
about this. So, it will be on the agenda for when we meet in
November. I do hope we will meet regularly after that. As I say,
I’ve not had the opportunity to meet with Fergus Ewing yet.
At an official level, has that conversation started?
|
|
[70]
Mr Slade: It began informally, but, again, I go back to my
earlier point about having the mechanisms in place to have those
discussions on a more formal footing, and in a world—back to
our earlier conversation—where the traditional blocks of the
CAP as we think of them will no longer apply. Nevertheless, under
the current arrangement within the CAP, we have an allocation that
comes to Wales and it is for Welsh Ministers to determine how that
money is spent within the framework of the EU rules,
whether—
|
|
[71]
David Melding: Yes, to give
you flexibility.
|
|
[72]
Mr Slade: Yes. Whether that’s in relation to
flexibilities under pillar 1 direct payments, or under the rural
development programme. And the starting position must be that,
under devolution, the right to engage in that discussion comes
first to Ministers to determine how we move forward. But if, as you
say, the best way forward is through a UK approach, then it is for
Ministers to agree that.
|
|
[73]
Mark Reckless: Thank you. And thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for I
think a more nuanced approach, perhaps, than I was able to receive
from the First Minister yesterday. But, clearly, it’s going
to be key to negotiation and I think key to our inquiry as well.
Jenny, and then I’ll go to Vikki.
|
|
[74]
Jenny Rathbone:
I just want to pick up on the issues of
regulation in relation to our negotiations across the four devolved
or non-devolved administrations. Because, looking at it from the
perspective of the consumer, regulation is extremely important and
we seem to be talking about this as if the CAP was set in aspic,
when it’s obviously had many iterations. The whole purpose of
the rural development programme was to foresee the gradual
reduction in the amount of money that the EU was spending on
agricultural subsidies. So, it’s rather depressing to me this
idea that George Eustice’s future is dependent on continuing
to shell out large sums of money to millionaire farmers.
|
|
[75]
So, there are two points, really, which
are around what aspects of regulation you think need to be
devolved, and I’m thinking around things like control of
disease. You know, we’ve got a porous border here,
so, although we have a
separate—we’ve been much fiercer in controlling the
movement of animals in order to eradicate TB. If we don’t
collaborate with our partners in the other parts of the British
island, we’re quickly going to see how people smuggle
contaminated animals back into Wales. Equally, the consumer wants
to know that if they’re going to pay premium prices for Welsh
lamb, they want to make sure that it is Welsh lamb, not New Zealand
lamb masquerading as Welsh lamb. So, how much, in your discussions
with the four agricultural Ministers, are you going to be able to
agree on these important points for consumers? How much of that
will be down to politics and therefore we’ll need to have it
devolved so that we’ve got specific measures that best meet
the needs of the Welsh community?
|
|
[76]
Lesley Griffiths: If I could start on subsidies, I think, if
you speak to most farmers, they would not particularly want to be
reliant on subsidies. If we want to have trust and confidence in
our food, I think it’s very important that we work closely
with the sector to make sure the public have that. Welsh produce I
think is amazing. I’ve seen some fantastic examples over the
summer and we need to protect that as much as possible.
|
|
[77]
The point you made about New Zealand lamb masquerading as Welsh
lamb—packaging and labelling—I think that’s a
really important point, and there might be opportunities. Looking
at the opportunities, rather than the challenges, I think
that’s one area—. I was at the, I want to say the
Anglesey show—I think it was the Anglesey show—where
somebody just came up to me and said, ‘Look at this,
I’ve just bought this bacon’—
|
|
[78]
Mr Slade: Yes, it was Anglesey.
|
|
[79]
Lesley Griffiths: It was Anglesey, wasn’t it? And on
the packaging was the dragon flag, but when you read the small
print, it had been packaged in Wales, but it wasn’t from
Wales. Now, to me, that is wrong, because this woman had bought it
thinking it was Welsh produce. Now, nobody is going to scrutinise
the little writing at the bottom, but you see the dragon—.
I’m going to Puffin in Pembrokeshire. Their packaging is
fantastic I think. I was actually in Morrisons the other day, and I
saw somebody rooting around to try and find that Welsh packaging,
and I asked—people will think I’m a bit mad now in
Wrexham—why she was looking for that, but it was because she
wanted that Welsh produce. So, I think packaging and labelling are
things that I would want to look at very carefully going
forward.
|
|
[80]
I don’t know if Christianne wants to—
|
|
[81]
Jenny Rathbone: So, is that something you think we should
endeavour to get a UK-wide approach to—
|
|
[82]
Lesley Griffiths: Well, I think it would be something that I
would like—
|
|
[83]
Jenny Rathbone: —because, otherwise, we’re
always going to get people trying to smuggle things in?
|
|
[84]
Lesley Griffiths: I would like to do more around packaging
and labelling. That would be an area I would like to look at.
Perhaps Christianne could say something more about the movement of
animals.
|
|
[85]
Dr Glossop: Yes, of course. Thank you. Of course, when it
comes to exotic disease that we don’t have in the United
Kingdom, we are united in trying to keep those diseases out. So, as
chief veterinary officers, we scrutinise the risks across the world
on a monthly basis and work together. I think that we are very
closely aligned with our objectives on keeping infection out.
|
|
[86]
When it comes to diseases that have a different disease picture
between England and Wales and Scotland, then we all have to be very
mindful and respectful of those differences to make sure that we
can protect what we have and seek to, sort of, improve health
levels. That’s why we work together as chief vets. We meet
regularly, we provide each other with a challenge function and we
also seek to raise standards collectively. When it comes to a
disease difference between countries, then, of course, we have to
have the right measures in place, and they are in place already.
Scotland, for example, has a very good programme to eradicate
bovine viral diarrhoea. They’re ahead of us on that at the
moment. So, there are measures in place to prevent infected animals
moving into Scotland. That’s just one example
where—it’s not even a statutory disease, but there are
arrangements in place to protect health statuses. That needs to
continue. That’s very important, because we know that
infectious disease does not respect the boundaries between England
and Wales, or Scotland and England. We have to work hard to protect
those ourselves.
|
|
11:45
|
|
[87]
Jenny
Rathbone:
But do farmers realise that, in
their desire for a bonfire of the regulations—do they
understand that, if they’re going to continue to be able to
sell their goods, regulations are required to ensure that what it
says on the tin is what people are getting?
|
|
[88]
Lesley
Griffiths: Yes, absolutely. In the discussions
I’ve had with them, when they’ve come up with one of
the reasons they voted ‘leave’—because of the
perception of the regulation—I have said, ‘We have not
been dragged kicking and screaming to sign up to these regulations,
or reluctantly; we have signed up’. I think one farmer said
to me, ‘We’ve had so much imposed on us’. Well,
it hasn’t been imposed. We’ve been part of that vote in
the European Parliament. I think it’s 98 per cent of EU laws
we’ve signed up to, we’ve voted for. We will have that
regulation and maybe we’ll strengthen that regulation in some
areas, when we look at our own Welsh-specific requirements going
forward.
|
|
[89]
I just thought this
might be a good point, Chair, to bring in Matthew, to give us some
information around the four workshops, because that is starting to
shape future policy.
|
|
[90]
Mr Quinn:
Just to pick up that
particular point, it was very striking. So, these workshops are
across the whole of the portfolio—stakeholders in the
environment and both the terrestrial and the marine. It was very
striking on this particular point about standards, where
there’s been lots said and assumed, that actually all the
sectors were saying that high standards in relation to environment
and animal welfare were a central part of their market, whether
that was marine or water or whatever sector we were talking about
in this portfolio. So, while there may be individuals hoping that
individual bits of controls that annoy them might go away, as
sectors, the sector representatives are saying, ‘Actually,
this is crucial and this is part of it’. We are not looking
at a race to the bottom in Wales. That would not benefit us. We get
premiums for a lot of our produce at the moment because of the
recognition of those standards, because of the recognition of
origin. So, there was a really strong sense that that was not what
people were looking to see, which was very welcome.
|
|
[91]
In terms of the rest of
the work, I think there was a real sense around looking for the
benefits to society. The Minister mentioned the linkages between
farming and what farming provides. Quite a lot of discussion across
the sectors was around the scope for things like payment for
ecosystem services; for example, a discussion around water quality,
where Dŵr Cymru specifically said ‘This is how much it
costs us to treat the water in this area’. That money,
theoretically, is available to those farms in order to manage that
land differently. So, there’s a very interesting dialogue
going around different ways in which we could deliver and what the
specific issues and requirements are for Wales.
|
|
[92]
Picking up the earlier
point from David Melding, the market one is one we’ve spent
some time on, looking at where things actually go, and it is
striking that at the moment we are very much part of these wider
markets. One of the consequences of that is that we don’t
have that much local processing, so one of the issues identified
very early across almost all the sectors was that, if we were going
to prosper in these areas and perhaps, as you suggested, have more
of a closed loop with things in Wales, then we needed to look at
how we were going to reinstate some of those facilities that
perhaps, over time, in a wider market, have been going elsewhere.
So, overall, the positiveness of the events and the commonality of
interest and the desire to work within the framework of the new
legislation to deliver a long-term product for Wales is very
beneficial, and I think will stand us in excellent stead in
bringing to the table discussions about what Wales stakeholders are
looking for and what Wales’s voice is within that.
Particularly picking up the questions about frameworks, there is
this sense that the FM’s raised about having a truly federal
relationship in which, if we’re having a UK framework,
it’s one we’ve all agreed—it’s not one
that’s just given to us.
|
|
[93]
Lesley
Griffiths: I
think the confidence in brand Wales is something that’s come
out very clearly, and farmers take huge pride. We have fantastic
produce in Wales. It’s of a very high quality, and farmers
take great pride in that, and I think Matthew’s
right—we don’t want that race to the bottom. We want to
keep that high quality. I have been, I suppose because I was new in
portfolio and I didn’t know the sector very well—.
Perhaps at the Royal Welsh it was a bit more downbeat, but
that’s gone now, and there is a real optimism, I think,
amongst the sector going forward that we can have some very
Welsh-specific policies for the community.
|
|
[94]
Mark
Reckless: That’s good to hear. Can I
move on to Vikki?
|
|
[95]
Vikki Howells: Thank you, Chair. I’d just like to go back to
the rural development programmes that we are currently operating
under pillar 2 of CAP, because we know they are absolutely
crucial to many of our marginal farmers in particular, and that was
certainly the message that I picked up on my recent visit to a farm
in my constituency.
|
|
[96]
Obviously, the cycle that we’re operating in at the moment is
2014-20, and as you said earlier, we know that that period is safe,
so to speak, in terms of funding. But, thinking in particular about
the Glastir scheme, which we know has huge environmental benefits
in terms of the woodland planting, but also these crucial economic
benefits to farmers who engage with that scheme, I’m just
wondering whether you could provide us with any clarification about
new contracts under the Glastir scheme. Because, although
we’re still in this window now, up to 2020, the Glastir
planting schemes normally last for 10 years, so are there going to
be any new contracts that will be brought out for Glastir schemes
signed between now and 2020?
|
|
[97]
Lesley Griffiths:
I know there was some concern, because
straight after the referendum, I thought it was sensible to have a
pause, so we had a pause, but that’s finished now and
we’re back on now we’ve had that assurance about the
funding. You’re quite right. What we’re doing is: any
agreements that are currently submitted with the department in the
normal course of business will be formally signed by January of
next year and will be honoured. So, that will be fine, as long as
they’re done by January 2017. But I think you’re right
about Glastir; it’s really important. I read your piece
yesterday in the Western Mail about your visit to a farm and
certainly, from the visits I’ve had, the Glastir scheme has
been very welcome and there’s been fantastic work done in
relation to land management from an environmental point of view,
following the scheme coming in.
|
|
[98]
Vikki Howells: Yes, it’s so important that we continue that
good work, really, isn’t it?
|
|
[99]
Lesley Griffiths:
Yes. I went to a farm, actually, where
the farm next door didn’t have hedges and it just looked so
odd to me. The farmer was telling me about the work he’d done
to his hedges through the Glastir scheme and it just looked
completely odd when you saw that.
|
|
[100]
Mr Slade: Can I just add, Minister, on the Glastir
point—? It’s very interesting. These are multi-annual
schemes, which, as you’ve described, have a long lead-in time
and a long tail-off at the back of them. There is a real issue for
us and for the UK as well in relation to schemes that operate
elsewhere about what happens in this intervening period. So, we
have a promise or an assurance up to the autumn statement, and, as
the Minister said, we’re interpreting that promise to include
the one January contract, because effectively, they’re being
worked up at the moment and it would be a bit of a breach of faith
to move away from those at this stage. But what happens to Glastir
contracts coming to an end at the end of next year and the year
after, before we get to life beyond 2020? I think that is a big
issue that we’re going to have to address collectively in
order to ensure that good work done through agri-environment
schemes is not lost, and as we develop new arrangements to reflect
the value of our natural environment and our natural
resources.
|
|
[101]
Mark Reckless: Thank you. Can I ask whether either Jayne or Sian
have any contribution to make on the post-Brexit agriculture, rural
development and food area?
|
|
[102]
Jayne Bryant: Yes. I think you covered it in your answer to Jenny
on the food and drink, because I think there are lots of exciting
projects that are going on and there are so many opportunities
around at the moment to promote Welsh produce. But, I just
wondered, perhaps, whether you could elaborate on a few of the
things that you’re doing to promote and develop things
locally and internationally in the food and drink
industry.
|
|
[103]
Lesley Griffiths:
Certainly. I’m off to Paris for a
day in October, where there’s a big food—what’s
the right word? Is it a ‘trade mission’? I don’t
know what you’d call it.
|
|
[104]
Mr Slade: It’s a trade fair—SIAL.
|
|
[105]
Lesley Griffiths:
A trade fair. Yes, SIAL.
|
|
[106]
David Melding: Do you need an assistant?
[Laughter.]
|
|
[107]
Lesley Griffiths:
I’ve got plenty of offers, thank
you, David. So, there’s a big event there that we’ll be
doing. I’ll be going along to that. We support food
festivals; I think it’s Abergavenny Food Festival this
weekend. We support food festivals right across Wales; I think
that’s really important. I think food festivals have gained a
great deal—you know, they’re certainly much better
attended than they were several years ago. I know we’ve got
Llangollen food festival next month up in my area—
|
|
[108]
Jayne Bryant: Newport’s coming up as well.
|
|
[109]
Lesley Griffiths:
You’ve got Newport. So, we support
food festivals. The First Minister’s made it very clear that
we need to go out and sell Wales—or continue to sell Wales,
we always have done—and certainly, we’ll be looking for
opportunities. I think there’s a trade fair for food coming
up in Dubai. I think, in fact, Rebecca Evans went to it also. But,
we do need to be looking for new food markets. I also think
there is more to be done here in the UK. On a regional level, I
think we need to be making sure that the north-west of England, or
the north-east of England, know about Welsh produce much more. So,
I think there’s some really good opportunities there.
|
|
[110] Jayne
Bryant: Yes, definitely. Just on another subject, we talked
about animal transportation in terms of disease. What about all the
EU regulations around animal health, in terms of the quality of how
they’re kept, and regulations around that? I’m just
concerned that we should make sure that they’re still in
place, or perhaps where needs be, look to strengthen those.
|
|
[111] Lesley
Griffiths: Yes, absolutely. Everything’s still in place.
While we’re members of the EU—and, as I say, that will
probably take us up to 2019, realistically—I’ve said
this to farmers, alongside everything else: ‘You have your
obligations; they are still there until we exit the EU.’ And
I mentioned—I think it was in my answer to Jenny—that,
looking at all the regulations, all the legislation, it could be
that we will actually strengthen some of these when we look into
them. So, that’s one area that we’ll certainly be
looking at.
|
|
[112] Ms
Glossop: I might add that we’ve got our own animal health
and welfare framework, and that is quite separate from any
discussions about Brexit. It seeks to make sure that animals in
Wales have a good quality of life, that they’re healthy, and
that the food that’s produced from them is of good quality
and safe to eat. And none of that changes; that’s our vision.
That’s a 10-year framework and we’ve recently published
the implementation plan for the coming year, so the vision for
raising standards of health and welfare in Wales for our livestock
and all our animals remains; that’s the solid foundation
stone of everything that we do.
|
|
[113] Jayne
Bryant: Thank you.
|
|
[114] Mark
Reckless: Can I bring in Jenny, followed by Huw?
|
|
[115] Jenny
Rathbone: I just want to pick up on this point about promoting
Welsh food locally, because the British diet is a bit of a public
health disaster. In the context of all the unknowns around Brexit,
how are we going to continue to promote good food for all, in terms
of getting everybody to eat proper food, as opposed to processed
rubbish coming from goodness knows where?
|
|
[116] Lesley
Griffiths: I think food festivals do that, and I think
there’ll probably be more opportunities from a procurement
point of view. I remember when I was health Minister I did some
work around hospital food in relation to—. Each hospital had
different menus, which wasn’t, to me, from a financial point
of view, sensible. So, we did a big piece of work where we had
all-Wales hospital ‘menus’, for want of a better word.
And, at the time, we couldn’t use Welsh lamb because of
procurement rules. So, again, that’s an opportunity maybe to
look at procurement, to make sure that more people in Wales know
about Welsh food through our public sector. And, again, through the
national procurement service, which I think all public bodies are
now signed up to in Wales, we can perhaps do some further work
around that too.
|
|
[117] Jenny
Rathbone: But, also, there’s our obligation; if
we’re going to have fresh food produced locally in our
hospitals, then we need to ensure that our agriculture industry is
there to provide that.
|
|
[118] Lesley
Griffiths: Absolutely. That’s why we know they’ll
need our support still.
|
|
[119] Huw
Irranca-Davies: It’s actually pre-empted the question I
was going to ask, because one of the big criticisms
previously—this will be music to your ears, Chair—in
this new freedom that we may have post European CAP policy and so
on and forth, is the issue around procurement. And I have to say
that a lot of the mythology around procurement is a load of
baloney. A good piece of work the Welsh Assembly did previously
with Professor Dermot Cahill in Bangor showed that to be the case.
It was simply an issue of how good was the procurement expertise
that could devise the right packages to put them into hospitals and
so on. However, we now have no excuse. So, is it your intention to
look at this? Because if you look, for example, even within
European rules, some of the things that the Italians have done in
terms of food procurement is quite radical and quite revolutionary,
in that the menu in a school will be local, fresh produce.
It’s only when you can’t fill it with local fresh
produce it becomes something else, and they’re taught about
how to use that local produce. So, could this be music to your
ears, Chairman. Could this be an opportunity where we look afresh
at this in order to get Welsh black beef off the hills of Ogmore
straight into Bridgend College, so that we get—? ‘Let
them eat scallops’ should be our motive. [Laughter.]
From Ceredigion.
|
|
[120] Lesley
Griffiths: I don’t know about your boys, but my girls
wouldn’t have eaten scallops when they were in school.
[Laughter.] I think it is an opportunity, absolutely, and
it’s something that the food and drink industry board are
already looking at. As I said, I remember, when I was health
Minister, being very frustrated that we couldn’t use Welsh
lamb. So, I think it is one of the big opportunities that’s
come forward and something that we will certainly be looking
at.
|
|
12:00
|
|
[121] Mark
Reckless: Can we move on to other aspects of the
Minister’s portfolio? Sian, did you have anything on this
broad area or are you happy to move on?
|
|
[122]
Sian Gwenllian:
Fe wnaf jest grynhoi ychydig o
sylwadau, os caf, ar y diwedd fel hyn felly, achos rwy’n
meddwl ein bod wedi mynd i sawl maes pwysig ac rwy’n meddwl
ein bod wedi cyfro’r meysydd sydd angen y blaenoriaeth mewn
ffordd.
|
Sian
Gwenllian: I’ll summarise a few comments, if I may, at
the end like this, because I think we have covered a number of
important areas and areas that require priority.
|
|
[123]
Ond rwy’n mynd yn ôl at y
pwynt yr oedd Simon yn gwneud ar y cychwyn. Rwy’n meddwl ei
bod yn ofnadwy o bwysig rŵan fod yna eglurder ynglŷn
â pha fodel masnachu rydym yn sôn amdano wrth symud
ymlaen, achos mae pob dim yn deillio o hwnnw wedyn, onid ydy? Tan
ein bod yn gwybod pa fodel rydym yn mynd i fod yn gweithredu oddi
tano neu’n gwthio amdano, mae’n anodd datblygu ym maes
amaethyddiaeth, a meysydd eraill. Mae’n anodd symud ymlaen
heb wybod yn union beth ydy’r model. Buaswn i’n meddwl
bod hynny’n flaenoriaeth efallai i chi bwysleisio ar y
Cabinet ein bod yn cyrraedd at y sefyllfa yna cyn gynted â
phosibl.
|
But I want to
return to the point that Simon made at the beginning. I think
it’s extremely important that there is clarity regarding what
trading model we’re talking about in moving forward, because
everything stems from that then, doesn’t it? Until we know
what model we’re going to be operating or pushing for,
it’s very difficult to develop in the agriculture sector, and
other sectors. It’s difficult to move on without knowing what
the model is. I’d suspect that is a priority perhaps for you
to emphasise to the Cabinet that we reach that situation as soon as
possible.
|
|
[124]
Buaswn i hefyd yn meddwl mai’r
flaenoriaeth y mae ein ffermwyr ni yn sicr yn poeni amdani
ydy’r CAP ac arian Glastir. Rwy’n meddwl ei bod y
bwysig ofnadwy felly ein bod yn rhoi blaenoriaeth i’r ddau
faes yna hefyd fel bod y sicrwydd yna yn dechrau datblygu, achos
mae’n gyfnod hynod o ansicr i bawb a gorau po gyntaf y cawn
ni eglurder a hyder bod yna gamau breision yn cael eu cymryd.
Felly, rwy’n dymuno pob lwc ichi yn eich gwaith yn y maes
yma. Nid yw’n waith hawdd.
|
I’d also
think that the priority that our farmers certainly are concerned
about is the CAP and Glastir funding. I think it’s extremely
important that we prioritise those two areas as well, so those
assurances start to develop, because it is an extremely uncertain
time for everybody and the sooner the better that we get clarity
and confidence that significant steps are being taken. I wish you
luck in this area. It’s not an easy task.
|
|
[125]
Lesley Griffiths:
Diolch, Sian. I think you’re right,
it is a very uncertain time. That’s why we thought it was so
important to bring all aspects of the portfolio from different
sectors together in the stakeholder groups that we did. From that,
they wanted the workshops. It was the individuals at the meetings
who wanted the workshops. So we’ve done a huge amount of work
over the summer to listen to what they were saying, what their
priorities were, and I think Matthew clarified that for
us.
|
|
[126]
In relation to the trading model, I
absolutely hear what you say and it’s something I’ve
raised and I will continue to raise. I’m sure we’ll get
that clarity very soon. I hope I’ve given you reassurance in
relation to both CAP and Glastir.
|
|
[127]
Mark Reckless: Cabinet Secretary, can I just ask: in terms of the
understanding I think I, and potentially we, had of what the First
Minister said yesterday, do you accept that we are now leaving the
customs union, we are now leaving the single market, in that
we’re not going to have an European economic area-type
relationship, but, nonetheless, we’re looking to have free
trade and one of the aspects where we’ll want to ensure there
are no tariffs is agriculture? Is that your focus or are you still
looking at potential single-market membership?
|
|
[128]
Lesley Griffiths:
The First Minister stated yesterday that
there are a couple of models that we can look at, and obviously
that information will come forward from him. But I think it’s
really important that we have these early discussions ready for
when we sit around. I think what that really does show is that
it’s really important that we are around that table, not just
for these negotiations, but for the trade negotiations that are
going to come forward also.
|
|
[129]
Mark Reckless: And, in agriculture specifically, would you like to
see continued tariff-free access to the European market for
agricultural and food products, and is that something you’d
also like to see extended to third countries beyond the
EU?
|
|
[130]
Lesley Griffiths:
I certainly would like to see it for the
EU and I think that’s what the agricultural sector wants
also.
|
|
[131]
Mark Reckless: Thank you. Moving on to other aspects of your
portfolio, I wonder if I might lead off on climate change. I just
wonder, Cabinet Secretary, what your perspective is as to why Wales
has not been more relatively successful in reducing carbon dioxide
emissions, given the substantial reduction in heavy industry and
emissions associated with that.
|
|
[132]
Lesley Griffiths:
We’ve done a great deal of work in
this area. I think what the environment Act did was help us in this
area. So, we have to have reports published so that we can monitor
it much more carefully. My predecessor went to Paris last year to
the Conference of the Parties in December, and I think we had a
really good story—. Did you go, Matthew, to that?
|
|
[133]
Mr Quinn: I didn’t go personally, no.
|
|
[134]
Lesley Griffiths:
I think we had a really good story to
tell, coming out of that.
|
|
[135] Mr Quinn:
We were one of the regions invited to meet the secretary general
specifically to commend us on the action we’d taken to lead
the work.
|
|
[136]
Lesley Griffiths:
Absolutely. So, what I want to do is now
implement the priorities in the Environment (Wales) Act 2016 that
relate to climate change. I think it’s really important that
I work with Cabinet colleagues to ensure that all the policies and
proposals that have been developed within our portfolios do deliver
that low-carbon future. We’ve just had the publication of the
latest climate change risk assessment evidence report from the UK
Committee on Climate Change. I’m going to review those risks
in light of the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015
and the environment Act because obviously that’s increased
the legislative requirements.
|
|
[137]
I suppose my big concern, and you’d
expect me to say this coming from the portfolio that I had, is the
effect of climate change on our vulnerable people and communities,
particularly. So, that’s where I will be having a
focus.
|
|
[138]
Mark Reckless: I think probably all members of the committee would
want to see a continuation of heavy steelmaking at Port Talbot. I
just wonder what input you have and what consideration is given as
to the likely impact on carbon dioxide emissions of the
continuation of steelmaking there potentially, were that to go to
an arc furnace regime rather than what we have now, and also what
the First Minister said yesterday about his work to try and ensure
cheaper energy. Are you concerned of any potential impacts of that
on higher carbon dioxide emissions?
|
|
[139]
Lesley Griffiths:
That’s not something I’ve had
any discussions about. I don’t know if there’s been a
discussion at official level.
|
|
[140]
Mr Quinn: Clearly, Tata and Aberthaw are our two big emitters.
As departments we’ve worked closely together over the years
to support those companies to make investments to increase the
efficiency of their operations over the years. There’s
somebody seconded into the Tata team from my team on the
environmental side, but I’ll hand over perhaps to Prys to say
a little bit more about where we are.
|
|
[141]
Mr Davies: Absolutely. I think, in terms of the Minister’s
priorities, she’s emphasised implementing the environment Act
provisions, whereby we’ll have to set interim targets for
production up to 2050 as well as carbon budgets. I think, as part
of that process of setting our pathway towards 2050 and 80 per cent
emissions reductions, that is something that we’re going to
have to look at in particular, given the particular structure and
nature of the Welsh economy. We need to think about how we ensure a
steel business that is sustainable, going forward, with reduced
emissions, because all countries across the globe are committed to
similar emission-reduction commitments. So, in many ways,
it’s a question of business competitiveness—
|
|
[142]
Mark Reckless: Are they all committed to 80 per cent or similar?
Surely, our number is rather higher than most.
|
|
[143]
Mr Davies: That 80 per cent is modelled closely on the 2 per
cent cap discussed in Paris in terms of increasing temperature and
keeping that—
|
|
[144]
Mark Reckless: But the international commitment is to the 2 per cent
or at least referenced, then you’re inferring from that what
that might require for overall emissions.
|
|
[145]
Mr Davies: Yes, but, at the end of the day, we have a position
whereby countries across the world will be moving in this direction
and, if we want to ensure that we have a sustainable steel industry
going forward, it’s a question of business competitiveness
and we need to support and facilitate that transition.
|
|
[146]
Mark Reckless: David, you have a question on climate change as
well.
|
|
[147]
David Melding: Just one specific: in 2010, Welsh Government
committed to a 40 per cent reduction—at least 40 per cent,
actually, because what was stated was by 2020—of greenhouse
gas emissions. The environment Act has introduced this statutory
target of 80 per cent by 2050 and then interim targets for 2020,
which leads me to think, ‘Well, it’s not going to be
the 40 per cent’, and for 2030 and 2040. So, where are we
with the ‘40 per cent at least’ commitment, Minister?
Is that gone or is it still active?
|
|
[148]
Lesley Griffiths:
Prys?
|
|
[149]
Mr Davies: I’m happy to pick that up, absolutely. Those
two commitments are still active as set out in the existing climate
change strategy that we have. There are actually two targets set
out in that strategy: first, a 3 per cent reduction year-on-year
target for areas of devolved responsibilities. So, to go back to
the Chair’s original point on this matter, actually
we’re ahead of the curve in terms of emission reductions in
areas of devolved responsibilities. The 40 per cent is based on an
all-Wales devolved and non-devolved perspective and we are not on
trajectory there, but some of the levers are not within our gift
and control.
|
|
[150] David Melding: So, the interim target under the environment
Act would remain for 2020 at 40 per cent at least.
|
|
[151] Mr
Davies: Yes, but we will need to think through the process in
establishing the regulations around the interim targets and the
regulations what the particular target for 2020 will be. So, yes,
it’ll remain for the time being as we develop more detailed
modelling around the appropriate pathways.
|
|
[152] David
Melding: Yes, but, if you’ve got a problem with the
modelling, that would apply—because ‘not all the levers
are devolved’, that applies to the 2050 target as well,
doesn’t it?
|
|
[153] Mr
Davies: Well, the modelling depends on what we count in within
the scope of the carbon budgets and the targets that we apply. They
might not necessarily be absolutely the same as what we’re
currently counting, and that is something that we will be working
on.
|
|
[154] David
Melding: I think our researchers will have to look at this
very, very carefully.
|
|
[155] Mark
Reckless: But do we expect to hit that 40 per cent target, and,
if not, would it not be more appropriate to have a target that you
could stretch policy, potentially, to achieving?
|
|
[156] Mr
Davies: I think that’s something that we can look at as
we develop our modelling and prepare the various pathways towards
decarbonisation. We need to think, in preparing those pathways and
the budgets, what the most appropriate model is, not just simply
from an environmental perspective, but, given the well-being of
future generations Act, what the social and economic impacts on
various sectors might be as well.
|
|
[157] Mr Quinn:
We have a very powerful new piece of legislation here. I think
that, in particular, what we’ll see more of is the modelling
of the individual sector pathways, so that you’ve got much
more of a sense of what can happen quickly in some areas and more
slowly in others.
|
|
[158] Mark
Reckless: I see Simon, Sian and Jenny indicate. I wonder: could
I ask are any of the three of you following up on the climate
change or—?
|
|
[159] Jenny
Rathbone: Climate change.
|
|
[160] Mark
Reckless: Climate change. So, perhaps, Jenny, Sian, Simon.
|
|
[161] Jenny
Rathbone: Okay. Specifically, you mention in your paper that
you want to see an increase in the role for local generation and
supply. How do you think you’re going to manage to do that,
given that the Wales Bill, as currently drafted, is not giving us
devolution of generation, supply, storage and all these important
issues? That’s one. Secondly, obviously, one of the main
sources of carbon emissions is from agriculture. How are we going
to this tackle that in the context of all the other uncertainties
around agriculture that we’ve already discussed?
|
|
[162] Lesley
Griffiths: In relation to the Wales Bill, obviously, we very
much welcome the proposals that they’ve put forward to
devolve planning consents for energy developments under 350 MW. I
think there are a number of outstanding issues, shall we say, that
are having to be continued to be had with the UK Government, so
that’s something that we can take forward.
|
|
[163] In relation to
agriculture, I think, again, that’s something that we need to
ensure that the sector recognises that this is an issue, and I
think it’s about balancing—you know, having that
resilient, sustainable sector alongside the environmental
requirements. We talked about EU directives before; I think
that’s one aspect where we can look to strengthen, if needs
be, if we think there are difficulties with reaching our targets. I
don’t know if—. Those are discussions I presume that
officials have as well in relation to—.
|
|
[164] Jenny
Rathbone: Well, we’re talking about a third of emissions,
I think.
|
|
[165] Mr Slade:
Yes. This is a big issue for the agriculture strategic partnership
group, which brings together the sector with Government and other
partners to drive things forward. I don’t see any point in us
moving forward on any of this stuff, including the post-Brexit
work, unless we’re linking it all together. It’s back
to Prys’s point about a decarbonisation programme, although,
in the case of agriculture, it’s not so much about carbon;
it’s about other things that the sector is putting out. And
it’s got to be part of an integrated solution under the
well-being and future generations Act to the future of agriculture
in our rural areas. We recognise it’s an issue within the
Government system. So, I’ve got a small
team—they’ll probably complain at the term I’ve
used, because it’s one and a half people—but
we’ve got somebody pulled out of the day job, if you like, in
order to focus in on this with the partnership group and support
Prys and colleagues on tackling this particular element of the
climate change problem.
|
|
[166] Dr
Glossop: Could I just add there another way of linking together
all the worlds that sit with this Cabinet Secretary? Improving the
health status of our cattle herd and our sheep flock will improve
the efficiency. So, we can actually, technically, keep fewer
animals to produce the same amount of milk or meat. So,
that’s just an example of where, in our framework for animal
health and welfare, one of the objectives is to support Wales
having a good-quality environment. So, we have to see this in the
round. We can’t see it as separate pieces.
|
|
12:15
|
|
[167] Mr Quinn:
There are also opportunities in this area of agriculture, in terms
of carbon in soil and carbon in trees. We are supporting, as I
mentioned, payment for ecosystem services; that’s an evolving
market. A lot of this is actually beneficial on farm as well, so
whether it’s renewables on farm that you put in, or using
your waste materials. So, a lot of this makes sense. It’s
just making it easier for people to do it.
|
|
[168] Mr Slade:
And it is a core part of the rural development programme too.
|
|
[169] Mark
Reckless: Thank you. Sian.
|
|
[170]
Sian Gwenllian:
Rwyf am fynd yn ôl at y targed
hwn o 40 y cant, yr oeddem ni’n ei drafod ychydig eiliadau yn
ôl. Rwy’n meddwl ei bod hi’n bwysig ofnadwy cadw
at y targed. Nid wyf yn meddwl mai rholio’r targed yn
ôl a’i wneud yn llai oherwydd nad ydym yn medru ei
gyrraedd yw’r ateb. Yn hytrach, yr ateb yw canfod pam nad
ydym yn gallu ei gyrraedd a beth yn union yw’r rhwystrau, a
drilio i lawr i ddeall beth yw’r rhwystrau hynny a beth y
medrwn ei wneud i symud rhai o’r rhwystrau hynny. Rwy’n
derbyn bod rhai pethau y tu hwnt i’n gallu ni yng Nghymru;
mae pethau na fedrwn eu rheoli. Ond, o ran y pethau sydd o fewn ein
gallu i reoli, beth fedrwn ni ei wneud, a beth y dylwn ni fod yn
edrych arnynt yn benodol rŵan er mwyn gwneud yn siŵr ein
bod yn fwy cyson o ran cyrraedd y targed?
|
Sian
Gwenllian: I want to return to the target of 40 per cent, which
we discussed a little earlier. I do believe that it’s very
important that we adhere to that target. I don’t think that
there should be any rolling back of that target because we
can’t reach it. I think the answer is to find out why we
might not be able to reach that target and what the barriers
exactly are, and to drill down to understand what those barriers
might be and what we might do to overcome some of those barriers. I
accept that some things might, perhaps, be outwith our control, and
that we might not be able to control them. But, in terms of those
things that we can manage and control, what can we do, and what
should we be looking at specifically now to ensure that we are more
consistent in reaching that target?
|
|
[171]
Mr Davies: Cyn imi ddod yn ôl ar y pwynt
hwnnw’n benodol, ar gyfer pob cylch o’r broses cyllideb
garbon, bydd disgwyl inni sefydlu a chyhoeddi dogfen yn
amlinellu’r polisïau a’r rhaglenni a fydd yn ein
galluogi ni i gwrdd â’r gyllideb yna. Bydd y
rhieni’n cynnwys pethau sydd wedi’u datganoli, ond
hefyd meysydd lle’r ydym yn disgwyl i eraill—er
enghraifft, Llywodraeth y Deyrnas Gyfunol—gyfrannu tuag at y
broses lle nad oes gennym y teclynnau priodol. Felly, byddwn yn
amlinellu mewn mwy o fanylder, ym mhob rhan o’r cylch
cyllideb garbon, beth yn union yr ydym ni am ei wneud ond beth yr
ydym yn disgwyl i eraill i wneud i’n galluogi ni i gwrdd
â’r gyllideb honno.
|
Mr
Davies: Before I come back on that point specifically, for
every cycle of the carbon emissions process, we will be expected to
publish a document outlining the policies and the programmes that
will enable us to meet that budget. Those will include things that
have been devolved and also areas where we expect others—for
example, the UK Government—to contribute to the process where
we don’t have the right instruments. So, we will be outlining
in more detail, in every part of the carbon budget cycle, what we
are expected to do and what we expect others to do in order for us
to reach that budget.
|
|
[172]
Sian Gwenllian:
Ie, ond beth yr ydych chi’n eu
gweld fel y rhwystrau penodol, felly? Ym mha ran o’r cylch
hwnnw y mae’r rhwystr?
|
Sian
Gwenllian: Yes, but what do you believe are the specific
barriers? In what part of the cycle do the barriers arise?
|
|
[173]
Mr Davies: Ar hyn o bryd, mae sawl elfen benodol. Os ydych
yn edrych ar y targed o 40 y cant, a pham nad ydym yn cwrdd
â’r targed hwnnw, mae’n gallu amrywio’n
sylweddol tuag at bethau penodol, er enghraifft, ein bod yn cael
gaeaf oer. Rydym wedi cael dau aeaf oer, ac mae hynny wedi
amharu’n sylweddol ar y targed. Hefyd, rydym wedi adeiladu
blast furnace newydd yng ngwaith Tata ym Mhort Talbot, ac
mae hynny’n golygu bod cynnydd sylweddol wedi bod mewn un
flwyddyn yn yr allyriadau. Felly, mae ystod o resymau pam nad ydym
yn eu cwrdd. Mae rhai ohonynt yn faterion datganoledig, ac mae rhai
ohonynt y tu allan i’n cyfrifoldeb ni.
|
Mr
Davies: At the moment, there are a number of specific elements.
If you look at the 40 per cent target, and why we’re not
meeting that target, it can vary significantly in respect of
specific things, for example, that we have a very cold winter. We
have had a few of those and that has affected the target. Also,
we’ve built a new blast furnace in Port Talbot, and that
means that there has been an increase in one year in the emissions.
So, there is a range of reasons why we are not meeting those. Some
of those are devolved issues, and others are outside our
responsibility.
|
|
[174]
Lesley Griffiths:
I will be meeting all my Cabinet
colleagues before Christmas to talk about carbon budgets within
their portfolios. I think that it is really important, if we are
going to tackle this issue of climate change. I need to know what
they are doing to embed this into their own portfolios. I think I
should start with the Cabinet Secretary for Economy and
Infrastructure.
|
|
[175]
Simon Thomas: And the M4.
|
|
[176]
Mark Reckless: Simon, you also, I think, had a question on this
area.
|
|
[177]
Simon Thomas: Sian asked my question; that’s fine.
[Laughter.]
|
|
[178]
Mark Reckless: I will move to Vikki, then.
|
|
[179]
Vikki Howells: It’s not related to climate change,
Chair.
|
|
[180]
Mark Reckless: No problem. We can move on.
|
|
[181]
Vikki Howells: Obviously, this is recycling week, so I thought it
would be quite remiss of us as a committee if we didn’t ask
you a question related to recycling. The published recycling rates
for 2015-16 show that Welsh councils are hitting their targets; in
fact, some—like my own, RCT—are actually exceeding
them, which is great news. But some authorities have decreased
their rates slightly, so I was wondering what consideration the
Welsh Government has given as to why this was the case, and also
how we can try and roll out best practice from those councils that
are performing well to those that might benefit from a helping
hand.
|
|
[182] Lesley Griffiths: I think you are absolutely right. It is recycle week,
and we are having a focus on unusual suspects. So, people perhaps
don’t think they can throw the bleach bottle—an empty
one, obviously—into the plastic recycling. So, it’s
about looking outside the kitchen. I think that has been a really
good focus. It would be great if
colleagues could do press releases and get out there.
You’re right; we think we’ve got a really good story to
tell in Wales on recycling. If we were done on an individual
country, we’d be fourth in Europe, which I think is really
good. Some local authorities are better than others. You asked
about best practice: I actually visited Conwy to see what they do,
because their targets are excellent and they use the blueprint for
their recycling—the blueprint collection. I think, whilst
we’ve got a good story to tell, what local authorities need
to do is share that best practice but also look at—. They
reckon, in the black waste bin or bag, 50 per cent of that could be
recycled. So, I think we need to do a bit more work to find out
what that 50 per cent is and how we can get that recycled. Maybe
that’s public awareness. The issue around best
practice—and I’ve met with Andrew Morgan, the leader of
RCT, to discuss this—is that people think it doesn’t
travel very well. Well, I disagree. I think it should be out there
and something you can steal. Some local authorities do it
differently. So, maybe they need to look, if they’re doing it
differently, at whether they can then show that it’s better.
I know there’s been a bit of concern from colleagues that we
haven’t fined local authorities that haven’t met their
targets. I’m now looking to see what we could do. Maybe that
wouldn’t be the tool to make them better. I don’t know.
We need to look at what we could do to encourage them. We do
support local authorities very well in relation to them meeting
their recycling targets.
|
|
[183] Simon
Thomas: Just briefly on this. Local authorities are dealing
with waste. How do we stop the waste in the first place? I live in
Ceredigion. It’s the highest-rated local authority for
recycling, so I’ll give a plug there. I am utterly
frustrated, as somebody who wants to recycle. Time and time again I
go into a shop, buy something—I’ve got no choice;
it’s pre-packaged—and that packaging is not recyclable.
How is it still possible to sell something in a shop in Wales that
isn’t recyclable? If we want to close this gap, we have to
stop that. If there’s one benefit of coming out of the EU, it
must be that we can have our own rules about these matters as well.
Is that something that you’d like to see achieved in
Wales?
|
|
[184] Lesley
Griffiths: I mentioned that packaging and labelling are two
areas that I would like to look at very closely. As you say,
it’s very frustrating. Sometimes, when you receive something
from online shopping, say, in a very large box and it’s a
very little item, it’s so frustrating even though you can
recycle that.
|
|
[185] Simon
Thomas: It’s still waste.
|
|
[186] Lesley
Griffiths: It’s still waste. To go back to what I was
saying about the 50 per cent in the black bag, how can we encourage
the public to look at that waste that they still throw into the
black bin bag? Somebody raised a question yesterday in the
Chamber—it was Darren Millar—about the four-weekly
collection for black bags. If you’re recycling properly, your
black bin perhaps isn’t going to be full and doesn’t
need emptying as frequently. So, I think we need to look at—.
That’s probably more about continuing education with the
public. When I was in school I knew nothing about recycling, but
when my children went through school—and I think that’s
where it started; I think it started with younger people. Very
political. Young people say they’re not political. I always
give them recycling as an example, because I think it started in
schools and with young people then going home to speak to their
family.
|
|
[187] Simon
Thomas: And probably with Blue Peter as well.
|
|
[188] Lesley
Griffiths: Blue Peter?
|
|
[189] Simon
Thomas: Blue Peter, yes. The point is that these young
people are now working in these companies that are still producing
packaging that is not recyclable. As a long-term thing, we have to
stop it.
|
|
[190] Mr Slade:
And there’s commercial potential and innovation in all this
to assist in economic terms. So, IBERS—again,
Ceredigion—is doing a great deal of important work around
grass-based packaging, and they’re plugged in, I think,
through our food and drink action plans—the work about the
circular economy within the food and drink sector. So, there are
lots of opportunities here from a kind of commercial and economic
perspective too.
|
|
[191] Lesley
Griffiths: Yes, absolutely.
|
|
[192] Mark
Reckless: Simon, did you have another area where you wanted
question?
|
|
[193] Simon
Thomas: Yes, a different area.
|
|
[194] Mark
Reckless: Well, shall we take your question now?
|
|
[195]
Simon Thomas:
I symud ymlaen, felly, at rywbeth
cwbl wahanol, sef moroedd Cymru. Rwy’n meddwl ein bod ni i
gyd, gobeithio, o’r farn bod moroedd Cymru yn hollbwysig yn
amgylcheddol, ond hefyd ar gyfer twristiaeth a datblygu’r
economi, yn ogystal. A fedrwch chi esbonio pam nad oes gennym ni
gynllun morol cenedlaethol eto yng Nghymru?
|
Simon Thomas: Moving on, therefore, to something entirely
different, which is the marine environment in Wales. I hope that we
are all of the opinion that those environments are vitally
important in terms of the environment and to develop the economy
and tourism as well. Can you talk about why we don’t have a
current marine plan yet?
|
|
[196]
Lesley Griffiths:
Well, it’s being brought
forward.
|
|
[197]
Simon Thomas: It’s been ‘being brought forward’
for a long, long time.
|
|
[198] Lesley
Griffiths: I know. But you’ll appreciate that I am quite
new in portfolio. I had a meeting, actually, this week. Marine
planning is a relatively new concept, but I think it’s really
important that we do have that policy because people are planning
activities in Welsh waters, and I think it’s really important
that we have that document to be able to give people a very clear
direction. I have fed into the Hendry review, but I want the plan to take into account
the Hendry review. I’m meeting
Charles Hendry next week—I think it might be a week
today—to discuss tidal lagoons, for instance. So, I think I
will be publishing a draft plan; it probably will be now in the
summer of next year.
|
|
[199]
Simon
Thomas: Mae hynny’n siom i fi. Rwy’n deall y pwynt
ynglŷn â morlynnoedd, ond mae yna wastad rhywbeth i
gymryd i ystyriaeth. Rydych chi’n dweud bod hwn yn
concept newydd, ond mae’n deillio o Ddeddf nôl
yn 2009, ac mae rhai o’r problemau rydym ni’n eu
hwynebu yng Nghymru ar hyn o bryd—rydym wedi gweld datganiad
gan y Cwnsler Cyffredinol yn ddiweddar ynglŷn ag erlyn
pysgotwyr a oedd yn pysgota yn anghyfreithlon, er
enghraifft—yn deillio o’r ffaith nad oes cynllun, bod
yna anghysondeb rhwng beth y mae pysgotwyr yn moyn, beth y mae
amgylcheddwyr yn moyn, beth y mae rhai pobl yn teimlo sy’n
bwysig i’r amgylchedd, a’r angen i warchod
rhywogaethau, megis y llamidyddion, ac ati, sydd wedyn yn bwysig i
dwristiaeth, yn eu tro. Rwy’n derbyn nad ydych chi’n
mynd i’w frysio fe achos fy mod yn gofyn cwestiwn mewn
pwyllgor, ond beth, yn y cyfamser, ydych chi’n mynd i wneud i
sicrhau ein bod ni’n arwain ar y cynllun morol, achos
mae’r môr mor bwysig i gymaint o Gymru ac mor hanfodol
i fywyd Cymru hefyd, yn ei ffordd? Yn ategol i hynny, gan fod yr
hyn yr oeddem yn ceisio ei wneud—nad yw wedi ei gyflawni
eto—yn seiliedig ar ddeddfwriaeth Ewropeaidd, a oes yna oedi
pellach yn mynd i ddigwydd oherwydd y bleidlais i adael yr Undeb
Ewropeaidd? Rwy’n gobeithio eich bod chi’n gallu rhoi
cadarnhad bod y dyddiad yn yr haf yn un sy’n mynd i gael ei
gadw.
|
Simon
Thomas: I’m disappointed by that. I understand the point
about lagoons, but there is always something to consider in these
plans, isn’t there? You say that this is a new concept, but
it goes back to the 2009 legislation, and some of the problems that
we face in Wales at present—and there was the statement by
the Counsel General about the prosecution of fishermen who were
fishing illegally recently, for example—stem from the fact
that there’s no scheme, that there is inconsistency between
what fishermen want, what environmentalists want, what other people
think is important for the environment, and the need to safeguard
and protect species such as harbour porpoises, and so on, which are
very important for tourism, and so on. I accept the fact that
you’re not going to rush this because I’ve asked a
question in committee, but what are you going to do to ensure that
we do lead on a marine plan, because the seas are so important for
Wales and so vital to life in Wales in their way? In addition to
that, because what we were trying to do, which hasn’t been
achieved yet, was based on European legislation, is there going to
be further delay now because of the referendum result to leave the
European Union? I would hope that you would give us confirmation
that that date in the summer will be adhered to.
|
|
[200]
Lesley Griffiths:
Yes; Andrew was just saying that Brexit
is part of the problem here, and I think that it right. But, I am
really keen to maintain momentum and progress on the plan, despite
the uncertainties surrounding the EU transition. I would have liked
to have done it earlier. I haven’t read it from cover to
cover, but it is being drafted now. If we can go earlier than next
summer, then I will do that, but I think it is really important
that we do have that direction. Maybe after I’ve met Charles
Hendry next week—. I do want the outcome of his review to
feed into it, so it depends how quickly we can do that.
|
|
[201] Mark
Reckless: And for other Members who want to meet Charles
Hendry, I’m hosting a meeting with him next Tuesday morning
at 8.30 a.m. in Tŷ Hywel.
|
|
[202]
Lesley Griffiths:
Perhaps it’s Tuesday I’m
meeting him, then, not Wednesday.
|
|
[203]
Mark Reckless: I think it’s the same morning.
|
|
[204]
Mr Slade: Because competence is shared on some elements of the
plan, we’ll need to have UK Government Cabinet sign-off on
this as well. So, that’s part of the process. But, the
timetable that the Minister has outlined picks up the fact that
Brexit has intervened, and we need to think about some of the
elements of the plan for the longer term, because this is something
that is going, we hope, to transcend 2019, or whenever we actually
get to the point of leaving the EU.
|
|
[205]
Just to reassure you on fisheries, the
fisheries legislation is firmly in place through the common
fisheries policy for at least as long as we’re part of the
European Union. But, of the 5,000 legislative instruments that the
Minister mentioned earlier, 1,400 plus are in the fisheries and
marine area, and that is a massive piece of work for us to do,
whether on our own or even with London and colleagues elsewhere
around the UK.
|
|
[206]
David Melding: But they remain in force until you change
them.
|
|
[207] Lesley Griffiths: Yes.
|
|
[208]
Mr Slade: They do, but it’s thinking about what happens,
particularly for direct regulation, where we operate on instruments
that come straight from Brussels that we don’t transpose;
when we’re out of the European Union, they fall, and we need
to be ready for that moment.
|
|
[209]
Mark Reckless: If I could go to Jenny and then Huw for quick
interventions, and then Jayne will finish the
questioning.
|
|
[210]
Jenny Rathbone:
Just on enforcement, surely that’s
the biggest issue: whatever’s in your new plan, there are a
lot of outlaws out there who are clearly breaking the law.
Sometimes they’re getting pathetic fines, which don’t
act in any way as a disincentive to going on doing it. Also,
there’s the number of boats we have to police our coastal
waters.
|
|
[211] Lesley Griffiths: You are quite right,
enforcement’s very important. I’ve been out on the
enforcement boat. We are having some new boats. I think
that’s absolutely required. I don’t have powers over
the fines, but clearly, talking to the enforcement officers,
that’s something that does concern them.
|
|
[212]
Mark Reckless: Huw.
|
|
[213]
Huw Irranca-Davies:
I suddenly felt my age—and Simon
was absolutely right to raise this—because for the 2009 Act,
we sat for 13 weeks in committee, taking it through, the
England-and-Wales Bill. I really do understand that Brexit has now
knocked it back temporarily, and it is important to get it right,
but could I just urge the Cabinet Secretary to make sure that it is
right? What I mean by that is: this was never intended to be a pure
fisheries, or pure dredging, or pure oil and gas, or pure—.
It is meant to be the absolute balance in terms of spatial planning
for the marine environment.
|
|
12:30
|
|
[214] Huw
Irranca-Davies: As I look at some of
the difficult roll-out as well within England, sometimes
that balance has been right, sometimes it hasn’t quite been
right. So, when you do come up with the absolute right
solution—take a little bit of time, but get it absolutely
right. I think we are all looking forward to it—that balance
being the optimal balance for protecting the marine environment and
exploiting the resource in that marine environment as well in
different ways. It’s got to be right. We could lead if we get
this plan right. We could be leading England and leading Scotland,
but leading the world as well, by being the first nation to have
this in place and the right balance. So, please, take a little bit
of time, but get it right.
|
|
[215] Lesley
Griffiths: You see, you can’t please all the people all
the time, can you? [Laughter.]
|
|
[216] Simon
Thomas: I want a speedboat, and he’s happy to pedal.
[Laughter.]
|
|
[217] Mark
Reckless: I’m looking forward to our marine trip next
Thursday. If I could—Jayne, some questions from you to
close.
|
|
[218] Jayne
Bryant: As somebody who was radicalised by Blue Peter,
aged 10, about recycling, I do feel very strongly about it. I
recently spent a day with the RSPCA, going round with the animal
welfare officer there, and I was pleased to see the work that they
do around animal health, well-being and the information that they
provide people with. They work very closely with the local
authority. Last year the Deputy Minister commissioned a review into
responsible dog ownership in Wales, and I was just wondering: do we
have a timescale for that, for the implementation of the review?
Also, on a separate point, have you evaluated the reduction in the
Assembly’s competence in the Wales Bill around dogs and the
reduction in the Assembly’s competence on dangerous dogs and
dogs out of control?
|
|
[219] Lesley
Griffiths: Okay, in relation to the review—very grateful
to the RSPCA for doing that for us—and what I’ve asked
Christianne to do, I think it should be extended beyond just dogs.
I think it should be extended, so we're having a look at that.
I’ve also asked Christianne, since I came into
post—we’re having a look at all the codes of practice
relating to a variety of animals. So, I haven’t got a date as
yet, but that work is ongoing. In relation to competence, no, I
haven’t, but it’s something that I’ll be very
happy to look at and sent a note to the committee Chair.
|
|
[220] Jayne
Bryant: Can I just ask one quick question, sorry? The other one
about the range of exotic species, I’ve noticed—I did a
quick Google search just in my area about what you can buy on the
internet, you know, very cheaply, actually. There were eagle owls
and chameleons, and many snakes were available. I saw, I think it
was last week, there was a chameleon that was found in Cardiff Bay
that was in particularly bad condition that somebody had obviously
had and then let run freely, and it had to be put down, sadly. But
what is your assessment of the current situation and have you
looked at good practice, because I believe Scotland are looking
into this as well, and how we can move forward on it?
|
|
[221] Lesley
Griffiths: I know Christianne is in discussions with Scotland,
and England, actually, on this, so—.
|
|
[222] Dr
Glossop: Yes, and my colleague the chief veterinary officer for
Scotland, Sheila Voas, has got very strong views about the kind of
animals that make the right kind of pets. But this links in with a
bigger piece on responsible animal ownership. I think it’s
why it’s very wise for us not to just focus on dogs, because
if I could just—. As an example, the rabbit is the third most
popular pet in Wales, and they could potentially be the most abused
animals, because they’re bought, they’re at the bottom
of the garden in a hut and people forget them after Christmas or
whatever. So, this is about anyone who takes on the privilege of
owning an animal, whether it’s for food production, for
sport, for work or for companionship, understanding what’s
needed and making sure that they recognise their own
responsibilities. The Animal Welfare Act 2006 does cover all of
that, but, obviously, each species has very specific needs, and we
don’t want to hear stories like that of the chameleon found
in Cardiff Bay. That’s not right. But it’s equally not
right for an overweight Labrador to be huffing and puffing up a
hill. We need to get people educated, and we talked about it
starting at school. We’ve got quite an interest in engaging
young people in this process—
|
|
[223] David
Melding: We can lead the UK.
|
|
[224] Dr
Glossop: I think we do already. [Laughter.]
|
|
[225] Mark
Reckless: On which note, thank you. Can I remind Members that
we have an informal briefing from the RSPB, who are coming in to
tell us about their ‘State of Nature’ report, for no
more than 10 minutes, followed by a sandwich lunch for those who
would like to stay? May I thank the Minister and her team very much
indeed for what I thought was an enlightening session? I’m
glad we focused on a small number of areas from the very
comprehensive portfolio.
|
|
[226] Lesley
Griffiths: Thank you.
|
|
[227] Mark
Reckless: Thank you. I close the session.
|
|
Daeth y cyfarfod i ben am 12:34.
The
meeting ended at 12:34.
|
