Thank you, Presiding Officer. These amendments seek to introduce a specific provision on air quality in the Bill by adding a new part. I share the concerns behind the amendments. The quality of the air that we breathe is a matter of critical importance to public health.

As I have consistently stated, the Welsh Government has continued to demonstrate the importance that it attaches to this issue. This was most recently shown by a wide-ranging consultation led by the Cabinet Secretary for the Environment and Rural Affairs. Air pollution is an issue that requires true cross-Government working, and we are fully committed to taking this agenda forward through a range of existing and planned work. To illustrate this, a number of commitments have already been made that meet the objectives behind amendments in this group. For example, in relation to amendment 45, the Cabinet Secretary for the Environment and Rural Affairs and I have already written to the Chair of the Climate Change, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee to outline that the Welsh Government will issue guidance to local health boards encouraging them to support local authorities in their air quality work.

Similarly, relevant to amendment 46, the Welsh Government has committed to issuing new air quality policy guidance to local authorities in the next few months. This guidance will recognise schools and active travel routes, amongst others, such as care homes, hospitals, nurseries, and sports grounds, as sensitive receptor locations. It will also note that older people, those with pre-existing medical conditions, babies, children and people undertaking prolonged physical activity are not confined to the aforementioned locations and deserve the same level of protection wherever they may be.

Local authorities must therefore take a risk-based approach in siting their monitors. This should be informed by where the evidence indicates people are likely to be exposed to the highest levels of air pollution. Our steer to local authorities is that, in working towards the well-being of future generations, they should give specific consideration to the long-term risks to babies and children posed by exposure to air pollution, whether in their own homes, in their school or nursery, or travelling between the two.

In relation to amendment 44, section 80 of the Environment Act 1995 already requires Ministers to produce an air quality strategy containing policies with respect to the assessment and management of air quality. It would be inappropriate for this to be duplicated in this Bill. Due to the trans-boundary nature of air pollutants, the current air quality strategy, which was published in 2007, is presented in a document with common aims covering all parts of the UK.

Members may also be aware that, sitting alongside the UK-wide strategy, DEFRA has now published a joint UK consultation for a new draft plan. The plan focuses on the specific goal of achieving compliance with EU legal limits for nitrogen dioxide on certain roads in the shortest possible time. This draft plan focuses on one important aspect of air quality and does not replace the existing UK air quality strategy. The consultation on the draft plan for nitrogen dioxide closes on 15 June.

The plan includes significant new commitments by the Welsh Government to consult, within the next 12 months, on the detail of a proposal for a clean air zone framework for Wales. This critical new development is one of a number of significant pieces of work that we will be undertaking on the subject of air quality in the coming year. Others include making revisions to ‘Planning Policy Wales’ in relation to air quality, implementing the recently agreed improvements to local air quality management in Wales and reviewing what more can be done in relation to the trunk road network.

I am, however, disappointed with aspects of the UK Government’s draft commitments in the nitrogen dioxide plan, given the lack of information within the consultation on what further action will be taken to address emissions on a UK basis. For example, beyond Wales, there are many areas of non-devolved activity that are needed to bring down emissions as quickly as possible. For example, the House of Commons Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee and others have called for the UK Government to launch a diesel scrappage scheme that would give grants to cut the cost of a low-emission vehicle for an owner scrapping their diesel vehicle.

Another major concern with amendment 44 is that the drafting is defective as no definition of public bodies is given. This is problematic in two respects. Firstly, from a practical perspective, it’s not clear who is caught by the term ‘public body’. This could lead to confusion. Lack of clarity over the scope of the duties could lead to public bodies inadvertently breaching the duty to have due regard to the air pollution strategy placed on them by amendment 44. Where a legal duty is imposed, there needs to be certainty about its scope and this amendment doesn’t provide that.

Secondly, and more importantly, the drafting of amendment 44 is outside the legislative competence of the Assembly. As drafted, the reference to public bodies would include public bodies exercising functions of a Minister of the Crown. To place such a duty on these public bodies would require the consent of the UK Government. If the amendment as drafted is passed, it could lead to a reference, which would delay the coming into force and implementation of the other much-needed public health provision contained within this Bill.

For all these reasons, I am unable to support any of the amendments in this group, but would reassure Members of action taken to tackle this important issue through the various activities I have outlined.