6. 4. Statement by the Chair of the Climate Change, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee on the Committee's Inquiry into the Future of Agricultural and Rural Policies in Wales

Part of the debate – in the Senedd at 3:45 pm on 9 November 2016.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Mark Reckless Mark Reckless UKIP 3:45, 9 November 2016

I’m grateful to the Member for his contribution and for his work for his party and others in these areas. As he says, agriculture is the backbone of our rural economy, but we’re conscious not to define agriculture too narrowly. Both the scope and type of agriculture has changed and continues to change, but also the scope in different areas of Wales to diversify from traditional agriculture and attract income through other provision is very significant. Also, in our request to the Cabinet Secretary for the Welsh Government to commit to protect spending in these areas, we wouldn’t want to be overly restrictive in the precise definition and boundaries around those areas, because we recognise that those change over time.

The scope of our inquiry has developed and I think it’s been one of the big challenges for the committee to determine what the proper scope of this inquiry is. I was in Scotland a week or two ago and spoke to what they call the convenor of the equivalent rural affairs committee in Scotland, and they’ve chosen, at least so far, not to undertake such an inquiry and were interested that we were doing so and in the challenges that we faced. I think also, along with other committees, we are feeling our way in terms of relations with the external affairs committee, ably chaired by David Rees here, and in our links and discussions with the Welsh Government and UK Government, to the extent that we are able to seek those.

What we’ve decide to do is for me to make this statement today, setting out the absolute centrality of the findings. Because I think, as we’ve continued, it’s become clear to us that we could spend an awful lot of time working out precise policy proposals and great ideas of what we’d like to do in the future, but actually without clearer commitment and confidence on funding, that work might be wasted. So, we’re very keen to put that very clear statement that we expect that level of funding to continue and we hope that the Assembly will be able to express that to the UK Government on a cross-party basis.

We’ve also put out there two further principles, which we discussed at a stakeholder workshop and thought that the initial response was reasonably positive, even though, of course, some farmers and some areas may get some disbenefit from those continuing trends. But, they are continuing trends that we think may help secure greater support for what we’re arguing for in terms of financing and the requirement for that money to continue.

We do have flexibility in the timetable. We’ve put out the call for evidence and responses to the consultation by 25 November. Our intention is to have evidence sessions in January, so if there are particular experts, interest groups or individuals who the Member thinks we should hear from, I’d be very interested to hear his submissions on that. I was aware of the sub-committee that met previously and have heard positive reports, particularly in terms of engaging stakeholders from its work. I don’t think I’m betraying any particular confidence by saying that the committee has had discussion around the potential use of sub-committees and rapporteurs. We haven’t, as yet, taken a decision to establish a sub-committee for this. I think our intention would be to report towards the end of the first quarter of next year, but depending on developments in the overall post-Brexit discussions, as well as within the agriculture and rural development sector, it’s an area we could very well return to, given its primacy and importance to the work of the committee.

Like the Member, I agree with the UK-wide framework. I do also just put there that the Welsh-UK discussions are also important, because there’s a different political context in Wales, where we voted for Brexit and where we have a Government that is coming to terms with that and is committed to continued membership of the UK rather than the different perspective of the Scottish Government. So, I don’t think we should make something that the Scottish Government might veto or where it might want to go a different way. I don’t think that should preclude our working with the UK Government, although obviously we want to explore the potential for a UK-wide framework to the extent that would be agreed by the Welsh Government and by this Assembly.