Questions now from party spokespeople. Conservative spokesperson, David Melding.

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. Cabinet Secretary, section 17 of the Planning (Wales) Act 2015 introduced a requirement for applicants to carry out pre-application consultations—I’m now going to refer to them as PACs—with the community and technical consultees. Have you made any assessment of how this is operating now that it’s been in place for 15 months?

That work is currently being undertaken.

I’m relieved that it is being undertaken, because this was an important reform to make the planning process more efficient and effective. Members will know that it is a requirement on major developments, such as housing developments of 10 or more houses, or developments on a site of one hectare or more. Now, one of the prime intentions is to engage the local community and enable them to have their views heard on significant applications. I wonder if you are going to instruct your department to make a careful assessment of how these community responses are being used to improve the planning process.

That will be part of the assessment and the monitoring, because I think it’s very important that we do see an improvement in that area.

I agree with you because I think the advantage of a pre-planning process is that the very real concerns a community may have can then be addressed, and then can shape the application, but the thrust of the application can continue in a moderated, adapted form. Another thing I think you need to look at, because, in the discussions I’ve had, for instance with housing associations, architects and builders, the Act itself makes a requirement that developers should consult with specified persons or statutory consultees during the PAC stages, but, of course, there’s no requirement for these consultees to respond. But, we are finding that, sometimes, no response comes in pre-application, and, then, an infrastructure company, a utility—all statutory consultees—then raise a major objection during the formal part of the planning application process, which is obviously undermining, or would undermine if this became common practice, the whole basis of these reforms. And it’s important for the social and economic objectives we have for future generations that we improve planning and have proper, regulated, effective planning so that our communities can thrive and flourish.

I don’t disagree with you, and, obviously, with the implementation of the planning Act, it’s very important that we do see the improvements to which you refer.

Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Simon Thomas.

Thank you very much, Llywydd. Cabinet Secretary, the Climate Change, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee has published a report today on using snares in Wales. Many of the recommendations you will respond to in due time, of course, but I think there is one recommendation that you could respond to today. Recommendation 7 states that the use of snares that don’t comply with your own Government’s code on land owned by the Welsh Government should be prohibited. I think this is a simple and positive step that you could take now, to show leadership and to promote only the use of snares that comply with your own code for efficiency and the welfare of wild animals. Will you confirm today that you’re willing to do that?

I’ve received the report and haven’t had the chance to read it yet. As you say, I will be responding in the usual way. Regarding that, I would certainly hope to be able to do that. I think that if we can’t comply with our own code, then it’s not worth having. So, I would confirm that.

Thank you for that positive response, and I look forward to reading your formal response too. But I do think that that shows the leadership that is necessary, and, as you know, we need to use the snares that comply with the code. It’s difficult to get a hold of them, but you’re giving some leadership there.

If I could turn to energy now, we are still waiting, of course, for a decision on the Swansea bay tidal lagoon. Since the election, I’ve written to Liz Truss, who now holds some of the purse strings in the Treasury, and have urged her to proceed with the financial permissions in order to lead in the area and put Wales in the vanguard of an industry that is sure to develop quickly. There’s £1 billion available for Northern Ireland, partly to clear up their own mess on the wood energy scheme, which demonstrates clearly that the Treasury can provide funding when the will is there. What have you done and what’s the Welsh Government done since the general election, therefore, to ensure that the tidal lagoon in Swansea bay does proceed?

I think you have to accept that the UK Government have been very tardy with their response to the Hendry review and obviously their announcements around Swansea bay tidal lagoon. I wrote, a fortnight ago again, to Greg Clark, asking when the response would be forthcoming. I picked up in the media today that those questions were side-stepped yesterday in the Houses of Parliament. I think we need to know what their position is. I think my first response that I received from Greg Clark said that the UK Government would be responding in due course. Well, ‘in due course’ means nothing to me. How long’s a piece of string? So, I do think that we need to know. So, as I say, I did write to Greg Clark about two weeks ago.

Thank you for confirming that, Cabinet Secretary, and I’m sure, if necessary, you will remind the Westminster Government that this Assembly has voted unanimously in favour of the plan, having seen and studied the independent review by Charles Hendry, commissioned by the previous Westminster Government, which said very clearly that this should proceed as a matter for a pathfinder project and at no cost, almost, or pain, if you like, to Westminster to invest in that.

There is one aspect of energy that is completely in your hands and that is that around community schemes and hydropower. My colleague, Sian Gwenllian, raised this with the First Minister yesterday and I’ll raise it with you today. I think we’ll both be raising it until we get a satisfactory answer, to be honest, which is the effect of revaluation on hydroelectricity and hydro schemes in particular. I’ve had a letter from the British Hydropower Association, which sets out that most independent hydro schemes, which include community ones, of course, would have previous rateable values of approximately 10 per cent of their revenues, which is similar to other businesses, and they are now seeing those values as a result of the revaluation increase two, three or fourfold, and in some cases, an increase of 900 per cent. This is clearly in danger of cutting off a source of investment for an important niche, perhaps, in some parts, but an important renewable energy industry that we have here in Wales and the potential for further expansion in Wales. So, will you now discuss with the rest of the Cabinet, but particularly the Cabinet Secretary for finance, to see whether some sort of relief can be put in place for renewable energy schemes such as these, similar to what’s happened in Scotland, so that we don’t choke off this growing industry?

Yes, I’ll be very happy to have that discussion with the Cabinet Secretary for Local Government and Finance, and then I’ll update the Member.

UKIP spokesperson, Neil Hamilton.

Thank you, Llywydd. Last time I questioned the Cabinet Secretary on agriculture a few weeks ago, we were discussing regulations applying to agriculture post Brexit. The burden of my question was that we should reassess all regulations to see if we could reduce them where there was no substantial diminution of public benefit. Part of the Cabinet Secretary’s answer seems to have caused a certain amount of consternation amongst some farmers, because she said, ‘Well, of course, this could mean an increase in regulation.’ I’m hoping that today she might be able to put that into a bit of perspective. I’ll give one illustration of how, in England at the moment, farmers are campaigning to relax hedge-cutting restrictions in August. Of course, we don’t have them in Wales. There’s a short window of opportunity between harvesting summer crops and planting winter crops, and it creates problems for farmers if they can’t do things like hedge cutting and other management issues in August. So, that’s an example of how having regulations that are more proportionate are in the interests of farmers, but don’t cause any problems for public benefit.

Well, I think the consternation amongst farmers was increased by a bit of mischief making from the Welsh Conservatives and the press release they put out. I think what I said was that I’ve got about 7,000 pieces of legislation and regulations in my portfolio, and I think I actually said ‘a case-by-case basis’, but what I was saying was that we wouldn’t allow environmental standards, for instance, to slip, and we could strengthen some in places if they were deemed to be needed. So, you’re right. We need to look at it very pragmatically to make sure that it is proportionate.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for that reply. I’m afraid my reading list is not quite as extensive as hers; it does not extend to Conservative press releases. But—[Interruption.] But can I raise a related issue? At the moment, the European Union is considering reducing permitted levels of zinc oxide, which is an important chemical in the post-weaning of pigs to reduce problems with diarrhoea. There doesn’t seem to be any problem with zinc levels in the ground in Britain or in Wales, but, if zinc oxides were to be banned, or significant restrictions were to be introduced on their use, this could mean wider use of antibiotics and that could obviously lead to microbial resistance. Calculations have been made that, if you delayed weaning of piglets from 28 to 42 days as one means of compensating for not being able to use this chemical, that would cost half a litter per year per sow, which would be £156 per sow, which would be a significant diminution in farmers’ incomes for those who specialise in pigs. So, can the Cabinet Secretary tell me whether she is making representations on behalf of Welsh farmers against the current proposal on the table in the EU?

Well, that hasn’t been raised with me, that issue, but I’d be very happy to look at it, and, again, I could write to the Member. But certainly there’s nobody in the pig industry that’s raised that directly with me.

I’ll be happy to write to the Cabinet Secretary, if she would appreciate that. At the current time, a lot of uncertainty obviously exists in rural communities about the impact of Brexit, and this uncertainty is likely to continue for some time. I think it’s very important that we keep things in perspective. We all hope, of course, there will be a deal at the end of the day that will, broadly speaking, preserve access to European markets as they exist now and vice versa. But isn’t it important for us to recognise that agriculture, although a very important section of industry and community, is very, very small in the context of national GDP? It’s only about 2 per cent in the UK, and the report that we’re going to debate later this afternoon from the climate change committee provides some useful figures on this, that GVA in Wales from agriculture is only £385 million—0.69 per cent of our Welsh national income. So, whatever problems might be thrown up by the Brexit process, it should be perfectly possible to finance them from existing budgets once the ability of the British and Welsh Governments is given to them to do so by leaving the European Union, with which, of course, we’re in a substantial deficit. So, therefore, farmers have very little to fear from Brexit, because we’ll be able to finance whatever transitional difficulties arise.

Well, I’m afraid I don’t share your rosy view of that. The agricultural sector is so important to Wales, and farmers are very concerned. They will have heard you and they can choose to believe you or not. But we’ve only had assurance that we will have that funding for them until 2020. After that there is a black hole. Those discussions are ongoing. We’re putting an incredible amount of pressure on the UK Government, who said Wales would not lose a penny if we were to leave the EU. So, those are discussions I’ve had. I’ve already had an initial conversation with Michael Gove. I’ve made that view very clear to him also. So, you know—as I say, I don’t share your rosy view. I do hope that that funding does continue for them, and we will be fighting for them.