That leads us to the next item, which is the Plaid Cymru debate on climate change. I call on Simon Thomas to move the motion.

Motion NDM6129 Rhun ap Iorwerth

To propose that the National Assembly for Wales;

1. Endorses the Paris Agreement of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change as a step on the path to a zero-carbon Wales.

2. Calls on the Cabinet Secretary for Environment and Rural Affairs to take this message to the Marrakesh Climate Change Conference in November 2016.

Motion moved.

Diolch yn fawr, Lywydd. I’m very pleased to bring a Plaid Cymru debate to the Assembly today, which I genuinely hope everyone in the Assembly will support, because the purpose of the debate is to endorse, from Wales, the international agreement on climate change reached in Paris last year just before Christmas. We do that in advance of the international assumption of the agreement on 4 November and the fact that the agreement will be discussed in the Conference of the Parties in Marrakesh later on this month. I understand the Cabinet Secretary is attending that. I want to empower her and I want her to take a strong message from Wales that we’re part of the international fight to tackle climate change and we want to play our role, and that we want to do more than play our role—we want to lead in as many aspects as we can as a nation.

I want Wales to become a ‘zero hero’, as they say, a hero for zero carbon, working on a trajectory that takes us away from using carbon for our energy and using alternative sources. I do that with a very personal interest as well because, very recently, I visited Pen y Cymoedd in my friend’s constituency, Vikki Howells’s constituency, and my own home valley of Aberdare and Cwm Cynon.

Pen y Cymoedd is the large, renewable energy windfarm that’s just been constructed across the Heads of the Valleys, stretching from Ogmore almost, over towards Merthyr Tydfil. Seventy-odd turbines have been erected above Tower colliery. You pass Tower colliery in order to get to Pen y Cymoedd. My great uncle worked in Tower colliery. In fact, in the 1950s, he was the leader of the gang that broke through from Aberdare to the Rhondda. They didn’t talk too much about that; there wasn’t a great Valleys rivalry in those days. But, he broke through from Tower colliery and led the gang that broke through to unite the pits underneath that mountain. And that mountain is closed for coal now, but it’s open for wind, it’s open for renewables, it’s open for a new future.

And this debate is really about embracing the future. We’re not looking back to the past. In the same valley is the opencast at Bryn Pica where my father worked. I don’t want to go back to that past, I want to go back to an energy future in the Valleys and the rest of Wales that really is safe and sustainable, gives high-quality jobs for our young people, and is healthy—and is healthy. When those seventy-odd turbines at Pen y Cymoedd are redundant, or may need to be repowered, or even come down because we’ve moved on, they will leave nothing but peat behind them. They won’t leave coal slags to bury villages, and they won’t leave pollution to destroy our rivers. So, this is why we must embrace a real revolution of zero carbon and a real energy revolution in Wales. And that’s why Paris is so important. When you get a situation where China—China, we’re told, is the great carbon polluter and is not doing anything about renewables, but China’s overtaken the European Union on renewables, I have to tell you—is complaining that Trump will be pulling out of the Paris agreement, the world has changed. The world has changed and we must change with that and, more than that, we must lead that change here in Wales.

So we have set forward this debate today, hoping that the whole Assembly will join with us to send that message. It’s also an opportunity to review what the Government has set out for itself and what the Government is likely to achieve in the near future, because there are very good and positive ambitious targets that this Government has set out, both in terms of policy and in terms of legislation. So, for a start, we have a 3 per cent reduction in our own basket of domestic greenhouse gas reductions to do year on year from 2011. We’re trying to aim for a 40 per cent reduction in gross greenhouse gas emissions by 2020 against the 1990 baseline, a commitment that the Ministers have confirmed to me is still a commitment for this Government, although it’s not in the programme for government. And we passed the Environment (Wales) Act 2016 in the previous Assembly, which set out a new approach to tackling and measuring climate change, including the long-term goal, by 2050, of reaching 80 per cent lower than the baseline of greenhouse gas emissions, and that’s really where you start to get into zero-carbon territory and really where we start to see some real changes in Wales.

So, we want to understand what the Government is likely to do under the Environment (Wales) Act and also under the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015, which, of course, has seven well-being goals and several of them—three of them, in fact—all relate specifically to climate change. So, the context is, if anyone doubts that we should endorse an international agreement because we’re not an international nation state parliament, I accept that, but our legislation has already moved us almost there, so why should we not now state internationally that we want to join with other nations in doing that? There is, however, a weakness, and it would be remiss not to use a debate like this to highlight some of the weaknesses within the Government’s own framework.

There is a move under the environment Act for carbon budgets and interim targets, but they won’t be published until 2018, so we are losing already some of the initial impetus and movement forward that we should be having. The Welsh Labour Government has produced a programme for government, but it produced a programme for government and a draft budget before publishing its future generations Act aims, so really that is the cart before the horse—that’s talking about what you’re spending before you’ve decided what you should be spending the money on, and that is the wrong way around, and it’s a lost opportunity in this budget cycle that I hope the Government will correct in the next budget cycle.

And, unfortunately, the UK Energy and Climate Change Committee that’s examining—[Interruption.] Just in a second, if I may; I’ll just finish this point. The UK committee on climate change examining the Government’s programme for carbon reduction says that we are not going to meet our 2050 target unless we have more rigorous and more intense action. I’ll give way to Mark Reckless.

The Member says that we should know how much the Government is spending. He will recall, as do I, that before the election great play was made by the Labour Government of the £70-odd million they’d be spending every year on climate change projects. Indeed, the previous Cabinet Secretary criticised quite strongly those who thought this money might, in any sense, be better spent elsewhere, yet we learned today on our committee that, actually, over the next two years, there is going to be a 35 per cent reduction in this budget to £49 million, and the largest areas are the ones that were reclassified into this budget to give the impression of action against climate change, but were actually the flood protection, which is going down by some 45 per cent, and the fuel poverty programme to help with insulation for the poorest people in our society, which is going down by 28 per cent. What does he think that says about this Government’s actual commitment?

I did think for a second that a statement had wandered into a speech, but there we are. The Member’s right, of course, and we had the evidence this morning in the committee. The commitment has been reduced, and I think the Government has a real question to answer. My colleagues will address the energy efficiency point, in particular, during this debate, because I think there’s a challenge there for this Government to walk the talk, as it were.

I would have to say to the Member, however, that even a reduction from £70-odd million to £50 million is better than wiping out the budget altogether, which I think was in his manifesto commitments, so—.We have to say that, I think. But the rest of my speech will be concentrating on the Government’s faults in this regard.

I think we are really missing a huge opportunity here to also move ahead on renewable energy. I know that some people are sceptical here that renewable energy can possibly answer our problems, but renewable energy is just short-circuiting the several billion years it takes to create gas and coal. We have plants that can use chlorophyll to take the energy of the sun and turn it into carbon. We don’t need that anymore; our technology has moved on. We take the energy of the sun directly in solar and in wind, because wind is solar energy, and we take it and we use it directly for our own purposes. All we need is storage—storage is the missing gap—but there is immense work being done in places as far afield as Lampeter and Trefforest to develop really innovative storage solutions for renewable energy.

So, let’s take that as our opportunity, and let’s also embrace some huge challenges but important infrastructure projects like the tidal lagoon in Swansea bay, which really now must get the support of the Westminster Government and must go ahead, both in terms of infrastructure spending and skills, but also as a signal change of the approach that we’re going to take towards energy for the future. I know that the Government is supporting that, but I very much hope that the Government will be supportive in a practical way, and look at ways that it can actually support the supply chain around it, look at ways that it can really send a signal to Westminster that we’re ready to go for the tidal lagoon, and that Wales has the skills and the people and the job creation and the ambition to see that happen here.

As has already been mentioned—because my final comments were on the cuts to the capital allocation, but Mark Reckless has already mentioned those, so I’ll just conclude by saying at this stage that I’m looking forward to this debate because I really think this is something that should unite us. I really think this is something where we can argue about the detail of what should be doing to tackle climate change, but the idea is that Wales, with an honourable tradition of energy production, with a very strong skills tradition of using our natural resources for energy needs, and a very honourable tradition as well of international co-operation and collaboration, can really send a strong signal. It will be heard in Marrakesh—yes, even Wales’s voice will be heard in Marrakesh. I know the Minister would want to do that anyway, but, by coming together as an Assembly, we can make our voice heard. I also hope that the Assembly itself can be represented in Marrakesh, because I think it’s important that parliaments go to international collaborative events as well. I know that other parliaments will be there, and I hope that we will rise to that occasion.

I’d like to thank Simon Thomas for bringing this important debate forward. He is right that there is much common ground on this issue. The Paris agreement, which was 23 years in the making, is an unprecedented show of global unity on one of the most pressing issues that we face. And it is our best chance, even if it doesn’t go quite far enough, of addressing irreversible and catastrophic climate change. I also agree with him that the Government isn’t doing enough, and that there are some policies that are taking us in the wrong direction.

The most pressing example, I think, is the policy announced in the draft budget for subsidised free car parking in town centres—£3 million inserted at Plaid Cymru’s insistence on a one-off policy, for which there is no evidence, to increase car dependency. So, I think there are some issues here of double standards. And I think it’s a challenge for us all—it’s a challenge for all people in modern politics. We recognise that this is a long-term challenge, we understand the short-term pressures to take us on different paths, but we do have to have the courage of our convictions to resist that. I was deeply disappointed and very frustrated that the draft budget has included this policy, which we as a National Assembly just a few weeks ago voted against. We’ve got to resist this pork barrel politics that’s going to hit us in this Assembly without a majority, and there is a temptation to get headlines in local newspapers. But, actually, we need to be looking beyond that.

Another example is the feasibility study that Simon Thomas has been pushing for, for the Aberystwyth to Carmarthen railway line. Again, I think all of us who have done that journey would love to see that, but the truth is the cost of that feasibility study could double the number of buses covering the same route now. We could take action now. [Interruption.] Within a finite budget, Simon Thomas, it is one or the other at the moment. You negotiated something on car parking that took us in the wrong direction, and then the feasibility study into Carmarthen to Aberystwyth is taking resources away from something that could be done to tackle climate change now in the short term. I think we should—[Interruption.] I will take an intervention.

I’m just curious as to how you influence the budget, as a backbench Labour Assembly Member, if you’re so annoyed at how Plaid Cymru influenced that budget?

Well, I’m sure Ministers are listening very carefully to me now—this is how I influence the budget. I don’t have the power that a minority party has when it comes to passing the budget. But there’s a serious point here. I think we can unite around this and I would certainly agree that we should be pushing the Welsh Government for as assertive action as possible to make sure we deliver all our rhetoric on the need to address the challenges that face future generations. So, let us focus on what we can agree on.

Simon Thomas has mentioned the Swansea bay tidal lagoon, which I think has cross-party support, he’s also mentioned energy efficiency in housing, on which again, I would warmly welcome the Welsh Government doing more. Much work has been done with the Nest and the Arbed scheme and I’d like us to go beyond that. Why not take advantage of the low interest rate to invest in a more ambitious scheme? For a cost of around £3 billion, we could create 9,000 jobs on an ambitious scheme that could take significant carbon out of the environment, generate local skills, huge health benefits—and, if that was done on a UK-level, it could reduce 23 metric tonnes of carbon from the atmosphere. So, we need to be imaginative. I think we need to think long term, we need to resist short-term pressures and follow the evidence of what works. I think, that way, we will honour the spirit of the Paris climate change agreement.

There’s much we can agree on, but Simon Thomas is right—there are mistakes being made currently—but I think Plaid Cymru needs to take its responsibility for their role in that too.

I’m going to concentrate on renewables, but I firstly just wanted to pick up on something Simon Thomas said about the windfarms and then the mines being closed in Aberdare. He would be mindful to know, though, that there’s still opencast mining happening at Tower, and that’s something that I want to try and pull away from here in Wales, which is why I think focusing on renewables is so important to Wales.

In 2011, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change stated that close to 80 per cent of the world’s energy supply could be met by renewables by mid century if backed by the right enabling public policies, and, in doing so, could represent a cut of around a third in greenhouse gas emissions. So, it remains our aspiration to produce as much electricity as is consumed in Wales from renewables by 2035.

We all know that we do have such a big potential environmentally, economically and socially to reap the benefits of our natural resources. While I do support what is coming through in relation to having powers up to 350 MW, it’ll be no surprise for people here today to know that Plaid Cymru wants to see all of the powers over our natural resources devolved to this institution so that we can harness our powers and all of our potential. It was one of my gravest problems that water was reserved in the initial Government of Wales Act to Westminster, when water is a key natural resource for us and should be something that we can own and we can shape here in Wales.

I also don’t buy the argument that it isn’t possible for us here in Wales to change the landscape regardless of some of those powers not being within our grasp. The Fourth Assembly’s Environment and Sustainability Committee said in its report, ‘A Smarter Energy Future for Wales’, that it recommended setting up an umbrella not-for-profit energy service company, under which local authorities, city regions or communities can offer energy supply locally, and amending planning policy so that it prioritises local and community renewable energy projects. These are things that we have said time and again would help shape our own future here in Wales, which is why, as a Member who represents the Swansea valley, it’s great to see that there are developments there, such as Awel Aman Tawe, which are developing these smaller scale developments. But we have to see much more investment in this, because, as an idealist, I’d like to see a situation where we don’t have multinational corporations running our windfarms and taking profits away from Wales. I want to see a Wales in the future where we are running it as a nation. We need to look at countries like Denmark and other such countries in the Nordic—being vaguely obsessed with the Nordic countries for various reasons, I think we should look at what they’re doing on the environmental agenda. When you look at windfarms, they’re everywhere and it normalises how people see them and view them, and they have that very laid back approach to its development, whereas we always seem to have an issue with such developments.

Awel Aman Tawe have set up a solar PV co-operative, Egni, which develops solar PV energy on community buildings. I know that our councillors in Wrexham, for example, put efforts in place to put solar panels on all of their social housing—and I’m sure the Minister will know about that—so that, then, they not only could help those directly in those houses, but helped Wales and those social enterprises in that particular sector. It is also in the process of setting up a community windfarm consisting of two turbines in the upper Amman and Swansea valleys, and all profits from the scheme will go into the local regeneration process. They are trying to get this through, and despite local people supporting it, it still hasn’t gone through the planning stages. So, it’s all about working with community groups and schools to make sure that they understand the importance of renewable energy.

With the right infrastructure in place, including changes to the planning system, these schemes could be enabled much more so throughout Wales. I believe that there were 104 community energy schemes in Wales and there were much more—sorry to compare with Scotland again—but there were more than 11,940 individual renewable energy installations in Scotland. So, I’d like to know why we are falling behind Scotland when we’re able, surely, to be able to put much more investment into this area. Diolch yn fawr.

I’m very happy to support this motion, as is the Welsh Conservative party. Can I thank Plaid Cymru for tabling it this afternoon?

The Paris agreement, as we’ve noted, is very important. It will ensure, we hope, that we keep the temperature increase below 2 degrees centigrade and aim for a reduction of 1.5 degrees—that’s very, very ambitious and many people feel that those sorts of increases are already locked in. So, it does call for emissions to peak as soon as possible and rapid reductions thereafter. It’s very important that, as a devolved administration, as the legislature here, we examine the Executive’s priorities and commitments and what they’re identifying in their draft budget and ask these sorts of questions about how we’re going to be doing our bit to ensure that sort of progress is delivered.

I’d like to concentrate on things that affect particularly in Wales. Obviously, it’s an international agreement and there’s a lot of stuff about the partnership we lead with the developing world, which I think is very apposite—but perhaps for another day. We need partnerships with active citizens and NGOs. I really think this is crucial to the whole debate. Without citizens agreeing with the choices and urging us to make some of the choices—like, perhaps, not always having car parks in city centres and improving public transport and active travel in all sorts of ways—and also the NGOs playing that scrutiny role and coming up with best practice and developing new ideas as well. That’s clearly very, very important.

I notice that the Paris agreement does refer to cities having a key role to play in reducing emissions. I think we need a revolution in urban design, frankly, and how we live in our cities. We can turn that to our great advantage, and it does mean that we put people, particularly children, first and not motorised transport and other technologies like air conditioning, even in a climate like ours, in all sorts of buildings now. These things have to be revisited and challenged.

I was very pleased that Theresa May used her maiden speech at the UN to promise the UK’s ratification of the Paris agreement by the end of the year, and other Governments have moved ahead as well, with even more pace in some cases, so that, I do believe, the Paris agreement will become formal in terms of its enforcement on Friday. So, I think we should remember that on Friday. Key to what the states parties are promising is to have nationally determined contributions, or NDCs, and that they get reviewed every five years to make them more ambitious. I think it’s going to be very important that the devolved administrations are part of that process, and if the Minister’s got any information on that and how we will be participating in the UK’s NDC, I’d very much like to hear it.

Can I just conclude by reminding everyone how serious the current situation is? There are now levels of carbon dioxide amounting to 400 parts per million in the atmosphere: that’s 40 per cent higher than pre-industrial levels. This is measurable. This is something that cannot be refuted. There are people that question the effect of that increase on the atmosphere, of course, though I have to say, it’s overwhelmingly plausible now that that is the main contributor to the rapid increase in temperature that we’ve seen. In the last four years, more than a trillion tons of ice have been lost from the Iceland ice sheet. That would fill 400 million Olympic swimming pools. There is also now a clear danger of feedback loops developing that will accelerate the loss of ice from the Arctic. Meltwater, for example, can penetrate to the bedrock, lubricate the base and quicken the movement of glaciers. This has been called by one person ‘meltwater cannibalism’, and it is really quite a shocking thought. At the end of the last ice age, Llywydd, sea levels rose by more than a foot a decade. We don’t have as much ice as they had then, but the consequences of Arctic ice going, some of which—a fair bit in Greenland is obviously on land, and a lot of ice is on land in the Antarctic—and whilst floating ice won’t actually affect sea levels, this will, and we could be facing the rapid need to adapt to what is already locked into the system. But we should now be doing as much as possible to prevent any worse damage than is now inevitable.

Climate change, of course, is a global threat and requires a global response. International co-operation, each nation doing its part, will be essential to mitigate the threat that climate change poses, and to react to the effects of our warming world. The Paris agreement, as has been mentioned, will enter into force in two days’ time on 4 November. After being agreed in December 2015, it was ratified remarkably quickly for an international treaty, hopefully a precedent for other treaties that might be on the horizon in the not-too-distant future. It suggests that there is a growing recognition of the desperate need to do something before irreparable damage is done to our planet. It was an unexpected outcome of the conference that the emissions goal was increased beyond was previously agreed. While keeping temperatures well below 2 degrees above pre-industrial levels and pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial levels had already been decided, the agreement also now sets an aim for emissions to peak as soon as possible and for emissions from human activity and absorption by carbon sinks to balance sometime in the second half of the century.

We need to see the Welsh Government match this increasing global ambition. Every country, no matter its size, can play a meaningful role in reducing emissions, but we will need a new, radical approach. Indeed, I echo David Melding’s call for a revolution. We have seen Wales fall behind other countries, as my colleague Bethan Jenkins has mentioned. In Scotland, there has been real progress and, as a devolved country, it should act as an inspiration to us here. It’s not good enough that emissions have fallen by just 18 per cent in Wales since 1990, while sea ice shrinks and sea levels rise.

The well-being of future generations Act commits Wales to being a nation that, when doing anything to improve the economic, social, environmental and cultural well-being of Wales, takes into account of whether doing such a thing may make a positive contribution to global well-being. This must become more than a pleasant aspiration on paper. It must result in real action being taken, and urgently. The Welsh Government should start by endorsing the Paris agreement before attending the Marrakesh climate change conference later this month. This would signal that Wales takes seriously its responsibility for working to tackle climate change alongside our neighbours and as part of the global community.

The UK’s vote to leave the European Union will make things harder. Collaboration with the rest of the continent could be endangered at a time when it is needed more than ever, but it also presents Wales with an opportunity to set a distinct and more ambitious path. Given the current political atmosphere in England, it would not be surprising if we saw environmental legislation being watered down once the UK leaves the European Union. As responsibility for the environment is already devolved, Wales can be more radical and remain steadfast in our commitment to reducing emissions. On this point—I’m feeling in a very optimistic mood today—I hope that the Cabinet Secretary will today indicate whether or not her Government is prepared to take the opportunity that is coming in the coming years for Wales to take its place at every global conference and international organisation as a member in its own right, as a sub-state nation, when it comes to climate change and the environment—that we will actively seek membership for our country in global organisations where, perhaps, the European Union has represented us in the past, and to ensure that the United Kingdom does not speak for us once we have left the European Union.

Of course, the impact of leaving the EU is more than just political. EU funding that currently backs environmental projects will be lost. Programmes like Glastir, the sustainable land management scheme, will need to find alternative funding to replace the support from the EU agricultural fund for rural development. We cannot let climate change initiatives like this disappear when the funding from Europe dries up. The consequences of failing to act will be grave. There will be a huge impact upon human lives across the world. As the global temperature increases, the inhabitable areas of the world will change, causing food insecurity and leading to even more population displacement than we see now. Climate change is already an international crisis, and can only get worse if we do not act. Wales must play its own part, far bigger than the size of our population, in global efforts to prevent this disaster from happening.

‘The Arctic ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot, according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consulafft, at Bergen, Norway.

‘Reports from fishermen, seal hunters and explorers all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes. Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm. Great masses of ice are being replaced by moraines of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared.

‘Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and smelts which have never before ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds. Within a few years it is predicted that due to the ice melt the sea will rise and make most coastal cities uninhabitable.’

I must apologise, because I neglected to mention that this report was from 2 November 1922, as reported in the ‘Washington Post’. Yes, you all saw it coming, didn’t you? But it doesn’t make this statement any less powerful and, hopefully, thought-provoking. I brought it to your attention, this article, because I want the Members of this Assembly to critically examine the data upon which the so-called climate change debate is based. It is often quoted that the overwhelming opinion of the scientific establishment is in agreement that climate is warming due to man’s activity. What is not divulged is that the vast majority of this scientific body are not climatologists at all and that amongst true climatologists, the percentage of believers falls dramatically.

There is also a great deal of evidence to prove that anti-global-warming scientists do not get funding and their work is rarely published, whilst anyone who puts the appendage ‘due to global warming’ at the end of their work invariably gets into print. There can be no doubt that there are huge vested interests, both in the scientific and the commercial world, in promoting this global warming agenda—to say nothing of the political agenda. However, a true appraisal of the scientific data shows empirical knowledge based over a tiny historical period. Facts about the longer historical evidence are fastidiously ignored, as is evidenced by the article I have just presented.

It takes just a glance at climatic history, with unbiased perspective, to see that climate change is, in fact, cyclical. In Roman Britain, grapes were grown as far north as Newcastle, whilst, in Victorian times, the Thames froze over regularly. We are told time and time again that the ice in the Arctic is melting to critical levels. Yet, even a cursory look at the history shows this happens on a regular basis. In 1962, for instance, two American submarines met at the North Pole, crushing up through the ice, which was said to be just 2 ft thick. Submarines have been able to repeat this exercise on many occasions since. Incidentally, this would not be able to be achieved at this present time.

Looked at objectively, there is a huge amount of scientific evidence to prove the cyclical pattern of world climate, a great deal of it far more dramatic than that which we are experiencing at the present time. I leave you with one last observation: there has been no discernible temperature rise for the last 15 years—a rather embarrassing admission by no less a body than the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Global warming proponents put this down to a short hiatus, and I quote one article here—just a pause in this global warming cycle.

I put this paper to you for just one reason: it’s to let you know that you cannot accept, without questioning, scientific evidence that’s put before you by interested bodies. I ask you just to look at this—I will agree with all of you, and all Simon has said, and all Bethan said, with regard to us having renewables. I am a great believer in renewables. I think, in fact, that Wales should look at water-generated energy, rather than a wind-generated energy—after all, we’re one of the wettest places on earth. So, this is not to say that we shouldn’t carry on with this business, it’s simply to make you question the reasons we are doing it. Thank you.

I think we should all question the reasons we are doing this. And if we’re not to listen to interested bodies, are we to listen to disinterested bodies, then, or how are we supposed to proceed? I have to say that a bit of critical examination, which you are right to highlight as being needed in any discussion of this kind—it works both ways, really, as well as being objective and unbiased as well. So, you know, it’s right that all views are heard, but I have to say that the overwhelming—the absolute overwhelming—evidence is there, and that you cannot deny, that climate change is a reality, no matter what the ‘Washington Post’ said in 1922, with all due respect. And it’s something that we can’t get away from, and it’s something, certainly, that we won’t bury our heads in the sand about.

A’r hyn rwyf i eisiau ei wneud yn fy nghyfraniad i y prynhawn yma yw atgoffa Aelodau, fel rwyf wedi gwneud yn flaenorol yn y Siambr yma, o’r gwaith a wnaeth Pwyllgor Amgylchedd a Chynaliadwyedd y Cynulliad diwethaf. Un o’r gweithredoedd olaf gan y pwyllgor, a dweud y gwir, oedd cyhoeddi ei adroddiad ar ddyfodol ynni craffach i Gymru. Mi oedd yna lu o argymhellion, wrth gwrs, yn yr adroddiad yna, ac mae rhywun yn poeni weithiau bod rhai o’r adroddiadau yma yn mynd ar goll rhwng Cynulliadau. Ac nid wyf yn ymddiheuro am y ffaith fy mod i’n atgoffa Aelodau o fodolaeth yr adroddiad yna, ac, yn sicr, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet hefyd, oherwydd mae rhywun yn teimlo bod nifer o’r argymhellion yna yn mynd ar goll braidd, lle bod ganddyn nhw, rwy’n teimlo, gyfraniad pwysig i’w wneud, yn enwedig, efallai, o ran prif ffocws fy nghyfraniad i, o safbwynt arbed ynni, a sicrhau ein bod ni’n lleihau’r galw sydd yna am ynni, a’n bod ni’n helpu pobl i ddefnyddio ynni yn fwy effeithlon. Er enghraifft, mae’r Almaen, fel rŷm ni’n gwybod, wedi ymrwymo erbyn 2050 i sicrhau bod 80 y cant o’i hynni yn dod o ffynonellau adnewyddadwy, ac mae hefyd wedi ymrwymo ei bod hi’n torri ei defnydd ynni mewn adeiladau gan 80 y cant hefyd. Mae un agwedd yn mynd law yn llaw â’r agwedd arall, a hynny yn ei dro, wrth gwrs, yn ôl cynlluniau’r Almaen, yn mynd i greu miliynau o swyddi a chyfrannu yn adeiladol at ei GDP hefyd.

Nawr, rŷm ni’n gwybod bod aelwydydd yn y Deyrnas Unedig yn gwario rhyw 80 y cant o’u costau ynni yn gwresogi ystafelloedd a dŵr yn y cartref. Felly, fel rŷm ni’n gwybod, mae angen inni wneud yn siŵr bod cartrefi mor effeithiol ag sy’n bosib o ran ynni i gadw gwres, ac felly, wrth gwrs, i leihau costau, yn ogystal â’r manteision eraill. Rwyf wedi sôn, wrth gwrs, ddegau o weithiau ynglŷn â’r gyfarwyddeb perfformiad ynni adeiladau sydd wedi dod o gyfeiriad yr Undeb Ewropeaidd—y nod yma sydd gennym ni, sy’n dal i fod ar hyn o bryd, am y tro beth bynnag, i fod yn agos at sero o ran allyriadau erbyn diwedd 2020. Ac mi oedd penderfyniad Llywodraeth Cymru yn y Cynulliad diwethaf, wrth gwrs, i ymgynghori ar gyrraedd safonau perfformiad ynni sy’n 25 y cant neu 40 y cant yn fwy effeithlon na safon 2010, ac wedyn dim ond mynd am 8 y cant fel canlyniad, yn siomedig.

Er bod newid, wrth gwrs, yn mynd i fod o safbwynt yr ymrwymiadau Ewropeaidd, am wn i, rŷm ni’n gorfod cwrdd â nhw, byddwn i’n awyddus i weld mai cychwyn y daith yw cyrraedd y nod honno, ac nid diwedd taith yn y pen draw. Oherwydd mae’r drefn bresennol o barhau i adeiladu tai sydd ddim yn ddigon ynni effeithlon yn cloi’r aneffeithlonrwydd yna i mewn am oes y tai yna, ac felly’n golygu nad ŷm ni’n cyflawni’r lefel o effeithlonrwydd ynni y byddem ni gyd eisiau ei gweld tra bo’r tai yna’n bodoli, heb, wrth gwrs, fynd i gost ychwanegol o retroffitio’r tai yna. Felly, mae’n yn agwedd gwbl allweddol o’r gwaith, a’r retroffitio hefyd, gan fod nifer o dai sydd gennym ni nawr yn rhai a fydd yn dal yma mewn 50 mlynedd, wrth gwrs. Mae Arbed a Nyth, fel rŷm ni wedi clywed, yn gwneud cyfraniad, ond cyfraniad pitw yw hynny, wrth gwrs, er mor bwysig yw e, yng nghyd-destun maint yr her sydd yn ein hwynebu ni. Mi oedd Plaid Cymru, wrth gwrs, am fuddsoddi biliynau o bunnau dros y ddau ddegawd nesaf i gwrdd â’r her yna, drwy’r comisiwn isadeiledd cenedlaethol i Gymru, ac rwyf yn teimlo bod yn rhaid inni godi’n gêm yn y maes yma.

Fe glywsom gyfeiriad at Ddeddf Llesiant Cenedlaethau’r Dyfodol (Cymru) 2015. Wel, wrth gwrs, rŷm ni’n sôn fan hyn nid yn unig am fanteision amgylcheddol o safbwynt lleihau allyriadau carbon, ond hefyd y manteision economaidd sylweddol o safbwynt creu swyddi, a hefyd rhai cymdeithasol o safbwynt mynd i’r afael â thlodi tanwydd. Felly, os ydym ni o ddifri ynglŷn â chyrraedd datblygu cynaliadwy yng Nghymru, ac os ydym ni o ddifri ynglŷn â chyflawni’r ymrwymiadau rŷm ni’n awyddus i’w cwrdd â nhw o safbwynt cytundeb Paris, yna mae’n rhaid inni gychwyn wrth ein traed a sicrhau ein bod ni’n lleihau’r defnydd o ynni rŷm ni’n ei ddefnyddio yng Nghymru, a gwneud hynny yn bennaf, wrth gwrs, drwy’r stoc dai.

I don’t want to fight climate change battles with climate change sceptics and climate change deniers again. I would simply say, for those who are interested in looking at where the science is on this—a very good lecture was given by Lord Stern at the Royal Society on 28 October this month on the criticality of the next 10 years, and, by the way, the challenges and the opportunities that come from that as well if we respond to it in the right way. So, I’m not going to go fighting over past battles that have frankly been put to bed.

We are in an unprecedented period of climate change, and unless we take action, and in a speedy way—. Lord Stern originally said, way back in the Stern report, that we have to take immediate action, we have to invest in the right measures, and invest in it heavily to drive forward change in mitigation and adaptation. He is now saying that we are behind the curve again. We’ve got to really speed it up. And, in fact, Lord Deben’s report that was produced last year, from the climate change commission, which was presented in the House of Commons, said exactly the same—there is now an even greater urgency to move on. And we can do it, and we all have a role, as individuals, as families, as communities, and as Government at all levels. And it was great to see last Saturday—I couldn’t go and join them because I had other meetings—that Surfers against Sewage—who wouldn’t be against sewage, frankly—together with Stop Climate Chaos were down on the beaches at Porthcawl clearing the beaches, but also—. There were 50-odd people there apparently—the youngest one was literally a baby in arms, and, of course, some people who were in more advanced years—cleaning the beach, but also talking together about what they could do locally in terms of initiatives to make the planet better and to develop community energy schemes and so on.

I was there back in 2009 when the Cumbria floods happened—when they hit. I was actually standing in the Met Office. Hilary Benn, Secretary of State at the time, had brought together, in a great innovation, the Met Office and the Environment Agency in a flood forecasting centre in London. I was there looking at the panels as we were able to say, with around about 36 hours’ advanced notice, the scale of what was going to hit us, and it did hit. As we know, the cost to Cumbria was not far short of £300 million damage, economically, to the local area. Bridges were swept away and rivers changed their courses overnight. Bill Barker, a local policeman, lost his life on a bridge that was swept away in the floods. And there was more besides: the devastation to hundreds, if not thousands of people, who weren’t out of their houses temporarily, but for months, and in some cases, actually, for years to come as well. Since then, we’ve seen more and more and more.

There can be nothing controversial now about saying that the frequency and the intensity of traumatic weather incidents here and abroad is recognised by everybody as being more severe, more frequent, more devastating for lives. And whilst it hits us in this country—. And I was there, by the way, as well when we produced the maps that were showing the scare stories in the newspapers of the land that showed the potential, over the next 50 to 100 years, of coastal inundation, and we saw what the effects of that would be in places like East Anglia and the Fenland. But we also produced the action plans and the toolkit that would say what we could do to actually avoid this happening in its entirety—to work with nature where we had to and to defend where we had to as well. There are ways out of these situations if we choose to actually do it. But it is pressing and it is urgent.

It was great that the Welsh Government was represented there last year at COP21 in Paris, and they were not only part of the negotiations that were going on but also the ratification of what would be done by policy makers, then, in the regions and in the nations here on the ground. I was there as part of the global alliance of legislatures, looking at the practical implementation of what flowed from COP21. And COP21 was significant—we had, for the first time, the big, global players that we needed to be there. There was agreement that that wasn’t the end of it—that was only the start of it. We then needed to ratchet it up.

That, I think, is where we need to look here at Wales. How do we ratchet it up? How ambitious are we going to be? In my final comments, let me say: we can do this—we can do this. How intent are we at keeping fossil fuels in the ground? How intent are we at driving community energy and clean, green energy, and at building green jobs around that, using energy efficiency as national infrastructure to boost economic growth, and using renewables, including the tidal lagoon? It’s absolutely scandalous that we’re not using the second-highest tidal drop in the world right on our doorstep here. What more can we do with liquefied petroleum gas and with getting rid of petrol and diesel and moving to LPG and electric transport? A development of a south Wales and north Wales integrated, low-cost public transport—decarbonised system or low-carbon system; incentivising carbon reduction in the higher-intensive industries, including down the road here in the steel industry; not just zero-carbon homes, but energy-positive homes, like the SOLCER house; and recognising and explicitly rewarding public and environmental goods, including climate change adaptation and flood alleviation in our rural and agricultural policies—all that and so much more. We have led the way in Wales before. We can do it again, and we can do even more. And I think there’s a will in this Chamber today to urge the Minister to be bold and all her colleagues as well.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Environment and Rural Affairs, Lesley Griffiths.

Diolch, Lywydd. I’m really pleased that Plaid Cymru have brought forward this debate on climate change today, especially in the run-up to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, COP22, in Marrakesh, where I will be attending to participate in discussions on this global challenge.

As we’ve heard, last year, my colleague Carl Sargeant, in his role as Minister for Natural Resources at the time, was present in Paris at COP21 and worked with other key partners to add to the momentum for a global deal. This included a private meeting with the UN Secretary General, Ban Ki-Moon, along with a small group of other state and regional governments, who are acknowledged as global leaders, where he discussed our collective impact to deliver climate action. So, although we cannot formally ratify the agreement ourselves, the Welsh Government has, of course, welcomed the commitment by the UK Government to do so.

So, 2015 was a momentous year, where we saw the adoption of the UN sustainable development goals and the agreement on a binding international framework for tackling climate change at the Conference of the Parties 21, where a new international agreement was signed by 195 national Governments. This not only sets the context for tackling the causes and consequences of climate change, but it also sets the context for the decarbonisation of the global economy.

In terms of today’s motion and point 1, the Welsh Government supports the motion and endorses the Paris agreement. Our Environment (Wales) Act 2016 provides us with the legislation to enable us to play our global part and deliver on this important agreement. The Paris agreement locks in a long-term objective to avoid catastrophic climate change and sets a long-term goal for net zero emissions in the second half of this century, which all countries will work together to achieve.

Colleagues will be aware that our environment Act received Royal Assent this year and was purposely designed with the international context in mind. The Act requires us to reduce our emissions by at least 80 per cent by 2050, but more importantly, there are also provisions in the Act to increase this target in the future, allowing us to keep up to date with advances in technology, international policy and the latest scientific evidence. So, our aim for at least an 80 per cent target reduction by 2050 is in line with wider UK and EU obligations.

Wales, along with the UK, is part of a leading group of countries taking legislative action to tackle climate change. Similarly, the environment Act requires us to set interim targets for 2020, 2030 and 2040, with a series of five-yearly carbon budgets to review our progress and ensure that we’re on track to meet our targets. We’re also required to set the interim targets and the first two carbon budgets by the end of 2018, taking into account a number of areas, such as science, technology and the most recent ‘Future Trends’ report, to name a few, which will take time to complete all of the analysis. By setting interim targets and carbon budgets, we can ensure ongoing and progressive reduction, based on evidence, technology and lead-in time. We’ll also need to take advice from the advisory body on what levels to set the budgets, ensuring that we are robust.

The Paris agreement put in place a global mechanism for countries to have national decarbonisation plans, to reduce emissions and revisit these every five years from 2020, with a view to raising ambition in the future. This is similar and very much in line with our environment Act framework, which requires a report to be published at each five-yearly budgetary period, setting out proposals and policies for meeting the carbon budget, including the areas of responsibility for each Welsh Government Minister’s portfolio. These policies and proposals will form our delivery plan, providing transparency and accountability, designed to help deliver emission savings and provide certainty to drive investment for a low-carbon economy.

Last year at COP21 the Welsh Government became a founding signatory of the RegionsAdapt initiative, which focuses on the adaptation actions we can deliver as state and regional Governments. These examples underline that partnership working at state and regional level can deliver action on a global scale, contrary to the myth that our action in Wales has no impact globally. More widely, the agreement continues the commitment to help developing countries, especially the poorest and most vulnerable. Members will be aware of our Wales for Africa programme, which celebrates its 10-year anniversary this year. Over the past five years, over 4.2 million trees have been planted in Mbale, Uganda. The project, which is part of Size of Wales, focuses on poverty alleviation and climate change adaptation and mitigation. As part of the celebration, I’m aware that my colleague the Cabinet Secretary for health was in Uganda last week. I think it’s very apparent that, as a result of this project, dozens of community-based tree nurseries promoting agri-forestry across the Mbale region have been created, and that has raised awareness of climate change to thousands of people, both in Uganda but also here at home.

Turning to point 2 of the motion, we again support this. I will not only be taking a message to Marrakesh about how, here in Wales, we endorse the agreement, but also about how, here in Wales, we already have legislation in place to deliver on this important long-term goal. I will also, in Marrakesh, be able to highlight our very pioneering legislation that’s already gaining international recognition, along with our action on waste, natural resource management and our Wales for Africa programme. As part of my visit, and as the vice-president of the international Network of Regional Governments for Sustainable Development, I’ll be taking an active part in a number of events and meetings highlighting the significant impact we are making, but also I will use the opportunity to learn from others.

Another important message I think I need to give is that we need to deliver on this commitment, not only for legislative reasons, but more importantly the case for action on climate change is very clear, and is a case that’s fundamental to our prosperity, our resilience and the health of our society, framing all aspects of our future.

If I can just turn to a couple of points that have been raised by Members, I heard what Mark Reckless said about the £70 million, and I had scrutiny before committee this morning. I think it was very good that Simon Thomas helpfully reminded us that UKIP wanted to remove the climate change budget completely. Climate change actions and policies are absolutely cross-government, so that £70 million will be across all portfolio activities, not just my own. But I hope that I did reassure committee members this morning about that.

I have a very wide and diverse portfolio, and I think part of that, the renewable energy part of the portfolio, is very exciting, particularly in areas where we’re working with community energy projects. Just last week, I opened the Taff Bargoed hydro scheme, and I’ve also visited a community windfarm. It’s very good to see how these communities are coming together, and how we’re able to support them.

I absolutely agree with Lee Waters about the energy efficiency programmes Arbed and Nest. I also think it’s important that we know more about the condition of our houses and our housing stock, and I’m co-funding a survey with my colleague Carl Sargeant, the Cabinet Secretary for Communities and Children, in relation to obtaining that information.

I think the point Steffan Lewis made about whether we’ll be able to be a member in our own right post EU is a very good one. How good would that be, to be able to go and do that? So, that’s something we can look at. Llyr Gruffydd referred to the ‘Energy Wales: A low carbon transition’ report, and Welsh Government will be bringing forward a response to that before the Christmas break. Also, like Huw Irranca-Davies said, you don’t want to argue again regarding climate change. The scientific evidence is very, very clear. Climate change is happening. Greenhouse gas emissions from man are extremely likely to be the dominant cause. Human influence on our climate is very clear, and recent anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases are the highest in history.

So, in conclusion, I do welcome this debate today and I very much look forward to representing Welsh Government in Marrakesh at COP22.

I call upon Simon Thomas to reply to the debate.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. I’d like to thank everyone who took part, and begin by particularly thanking the Cabinet Secretary for her endorsement of today’s motion, and particularly the way she set out how our own legislation does in fact help us deliver our commitment within Paris, something that I set out at the beginning as well. I was particularly interested to hear what she said about the RegionsAdapt initiative and how we can play our role there. That’s exactly what I wanted to hear, and that’s exactly, I think, what we want to unite behind when we send a Minister to somewhere like Marrakesh. This is not a party political issue in that sense, which is why I was a bit disappointed with Lee Waters’ contribution, which seemed to be more designed to react to Plaid Cymru bringing this forward rather than the content of what we brought forward. But, there we are.

The rest of the contributions were varied and positive on the whole. I particularly want to start with David Melding’s contribution, because I thought he made a very important point: that this has gone beyond countries. It’s gone beyond state actors; this is now something that we all own. I think I’d particularly like to bring the attention of the Chamber to the fact that Paris before Christmas was followed by Paris in the springtime with the business and climate summit, where 6.5 million businesses were represented, which also agreed to bring forward their own business plans in line with the Paris objectives. This is reality. This isn’t arguing the toss about 1922 newspaper cuttings. This is what business is doing today, and this is what the voluntary sector, community NGOs and the wider sectors are doing, and that’s what we really want to work with. David Melding also reminded us that NASA figures now show that we’ve passed that very important threshold of 400 parts per million of carbon dioxide. The last time we had that threshold we had dinosaurs roaming the earth and no ice at either of the poles.

That brings me to UKIP’s contribution, to which I have to say: you know, you can take a 1922 newspaper clipping if you want and you can put that against 97 per cent of the scientific community who say that climate change is happening. Yes, it’s happened over millennia; yes, it’s happened for billions of years; but it’s happening now and it’s exacerbated by man’s effect on the environment. And that’s the thing we have to get into contact with. And, yes, there are vested interests, David Rowlands. Let me tell you about the vested interests: £26 million spent lobbying EU parliamentarians, just between October 2013 and March 2015, by oil and gas companies. That’s the vested interest that’s holding us back.

There’s no conspiracy here. A low-carbon future for Wales is good for our health, it’s good for our economy, it’s good for our environment, it’s good for the next generation, and it gives us more independence because we’re not reliant on importing oil and gas. What conspiracy is here to somehow say that climate change is being used to bash people? This is about the future. Sorry, you’re in the past. Stay there, because we don’t want to change the trajectory that we’re going on.

David J. Rowlands rose—

I cannot. I’ve answered your points in summing up and I now must sum up. [Interruption.] You’ve had five minutes. I’ve answered your points in summing up. I must make progress.

He is not taking an intervention and you are not heard.

I must make progress, because everyone has had their chance to be heard and now is my chance to respond to what they said.

I’d like to thank Bethan for particularly bringing attention to energy noir, as it were—the really positive side of energy in the Scandinavian countries. I’m glad to say I went to Denmark myself three weeks ago and thoroughly enjoyed it, crossing the bridge several times a day, but more importantly learning about community ownership. I visited an offshore windfarm there with several dozen turbines, but two of the turbines were owned by 10,000 individuals—two turbines owned by 10,000 people. Now, if they can organise it in Denmark, we can organise it here. Yes, we have community energy schemes; yes, we have Ynni Ogwen and things like that; but, we really must get to a deconstructed grid where you can really own your local energy and then contribute out with that. That’s where the future lies and that’s what they do in north-west Germany at the moment with a very exciting project there where they’re using wind energy in remote areas that don’t really produce for manufacturing—a lot like mid Wales—and then contribute it back to the rest of Germany. So, that’s really important.

Steffan Lewis made an important point about leaving the European Union and I think, to be fair, the Cabinet Secretary also responded to that point. Llyr Huws Gruffydd made a very important point to remind us of the National Assembly’s environment committee report, which I think is still valid reading, on a smarter energy future. It’s very much based on some international comparisons as well, particularly the Energiewende in the German context.

Finally, Huw Irranca-Davies, thank you for your experience dealing with the floods and being part of a Government that has had to deal with some of the challenges that come from there. You’re right to remind us of Nicholas Stern, who I think is a Welsh resident, and his hard work over the years, not only to persuade us that climate change is happening, but also to persuade us that we have a role in it, and more importantly to say that we created it, but we can solve it as well. This is about technology. This is about the future. This is about the way we organise our lives. No conspiracy, no going back to the past, just seize the future, and Wales could be at the forefront of that.

The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? The motion without amendment is therefore agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Motion agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.