We now move on to item 7, which is a debate on the draft Welsh national marine plan, and I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Energy, Planning and Rural Affairs to move the motion—Lesley Griffiths.

NDM6616 Julie James

To propose that the National Assembly for Wales:

1. Welcomes the consultation on the Draft Welsh National Marine Plan (WNMP).

2. Recognises and supports the potential for sustainable 'Blue Growth' in marine sectors as set out in the draft plan.

3. Recognises, as set out in the draft plan, the significance of Welsh marine ecosystems and the importance of the sustainable management of our marine natural resources to national wellbeing.

4. Welcomes the Welsh Government's ongoing commitment to engagement and collaboration in developing and implementing marine planning for Wales.

Motion moved.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I very much welcome this opportunity to debate the draft Welsh national marine plan and its role in guiding the sustainable management of our seas. This is a strong example of a policy shaped by our Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 and Environment (Wales) Act 2016.

In developing our proposals in close collaboration with a wide range of partners and stakeholders we clearly demonstrate how we engage with and build on the views of the people of Wales. Wales has a proud and long maritime history. Our seas are more than important to us. They are special, blessed with a wealth of natural resources, iconic seascapes and inspirational wildlife, and we all have a collective interest in their future. 

The Llywydd took the Chair.

Unfortunately, at times, their significance may be overlooked. Welsh seas contain a diversity of habitats and species that contribute to healthy and resilient marine ecosystems. These ecosystems provide a wide range of essential benefits that support our national well-being. Our seas also contain a wealth of natural resources that offer the opportunity for Wales to benefit from blue growth.

Will the Cabinet Secretary give way?

Yes.

Just on that point, she'll be aware that, today, some of the charities involved in marine conservation have said that her plan has significant negative consequences. Does she recognise that as a valid criticism, or does she think that they have overstated their case?

I've obviously met with many of the organisations that have made the comments. So, I do think that they're perhaps being slightly disingenuous. However, we are in a consultation period. It's a very long consultation period. I made sure that was the case, particularly being over Christmas, so they can put their views in, and obviously we will consider all their views going forward.

So, to continue, we use our seas in many ways and long-established fisheries, shipping and recreational activities exist and thrive alongside newer uses such as offshore wind and underwater turbines, which may help us decarbonise our economy. However, as our seas get busier there is a greater risk of conflict and potential to undermine marine resilience. Therefore, strategic marine planning is critical. With effective planning, our maritime industries can grow and prosper whilst our precious natural heritage is safeguarded.

Last September, I set ambitious energy targets for Wales, including 70 per cent of our electricity consumption to be from renewable energy by 2030. I see offshore renewable energy having the potential to make an important contribution to meet this target. Offshore renewables could deliver a range of technologies to support the move towards sustainable, low-carbon generation in Wales.

To support the sustainable development of our seas for current and future generations, I'm pleased to have launched a formal consultation on the draft Welsh national marine plan. This is the first statutory plan for our seas and represents the beginning of a new strategic marine planning regime. It is important we have a clear, long-term view about what we are trying to achieve for our seas, particularly as the UK exits the European Union, because I believe it's vital to provide clarity and certainty for those who use and benefit from our seas. 

The marine plan builds on the strong progress we are already making in the stewardship of our seas, supporting our goal of delivering good environmental status, completing our network of marine protected areas, managing activities that may harm marine ecosystem resilience, supporting the recovery of our fish stocks and biodiversity, and ensuring we have a robust and effective consenting regime. 

Of course, there is more to do to maintain and improve the benefits we derive from healthy and thriving seas. I'm sure we've all been concerned by the recent news items on the devastating and far-reaching effects plastic pollution is having on our ecosystems. This shows how connected we are to our seas, not only culturally but in terms of how extensive and long-lasting impacts can be. 

We must continue to act in ways that recognise and demonstrate our commitment to being globally responsible for our actions. In terms of policy alignment, I'm committed to ensuring the national development framework and the land use planning system as a whole support the delivery of our marine objectives. By continuing to work with our stakeholders, we will ensure our national marine and land planning regimes work together to deliver their common goals.

The introduction of the plan represents an important step in bringing together a range of policies and organisations to help us focus on what matters, looking after our seas for the long term, recognising and tackling problems at an early stage, and working collaboratively to deliver real results. The draft plan I'm consulting upon has been developed in conjunction with a wide range of stakeholders. Industries, environmental groups, researchers and more have worked together to help develop the plan to guide future activity in a sustainable way.

In 2011, all four UK administrations devised a set of shared marine objectives. These were published in our 2011 marine policy statement. It is important to set objectives that respect the scale and interconnectedness of marine ecosystems. These shared objectives, together with our well-being goals and commitment to the sustainable management of natural resources, guide the plan's general policies, which apply to all activities in our seas. 

The potential for Wales to benefit from blue growth is both exciting and significant. By ensuring that different sea users consider each other's activities, as well as future potential, we can all benefit. The draft plan identifies that there is particular growth opportunity for a number of sectors: for offshore renewable energy such as offshore wind, underwater turbines and tidal lagoons; for aquaculture, particularly culture of shellfish; for shipping activity, which provides essential links into, from and through Wales; and, importantly, for tourism and recreational activities, which make an important contribution to our economy.

I recognise the significance of all sectors operating in Welsh waters. For example, marine aggregates provide essential building material to support economic growth. Fisheries allow us to enjoy healthy, locally sourced protein, and sub-sea cables allow vast quantities of data to flow through our homes and businesses and are, of course, essential to a modern economy. I'm sure Members will agree our seas need to be carefully managed to allow these diverse activities to continue and, where appropriate, grow alongside each other in harmony with our natural environment. 

The plan safeguards important natural resources to reduce the risk of losing the opportunity to use them in the future. To do so, the plan identifies such areas—strategic resource areas—and has policies to encourage sustainable sector growth. 

Public authority bodies play an important decision-making role in the marine environment, for example in assessing development proposals and granting marine licences. This plan supports them by setting out Welsh Government priorities to help guide their decisions, while in no way undermining the project-specific checks and balances in place to ensure each and every proposal is subject to appropriate scrutiny. I expect every individual project to meet the relevant statutory obligations before securing consent. 

Throughout the development of this plan, we have been committed to using the best available evidence and making this available to all. In Wales, we have a considerable marine evidence base summarised in the 2015 'Wales' Marine Evidence Report', and marine data is now publicly available on our online marine planning portal. This means stakeholders can use the portal to understand the reasons behind our proposals and what they may mean in practice.   

The marine environment is a complex and challenging workplace. Introducing a new marine planning regime represents an important investment in time and effort, not only from Welsh Government but from many stakeholders who've contributed their time and expertise to the process, and I wish to place on record my thanks for their ongoing support and enthusiasm. 

Welsh Government officials, with the support of Natural Resources Wales, Pembrokeshire coastal forum and others, will be holding a series of local events around the coast during this month, and I would encourage those interested in the future of our seas to go along and have their say. 

So, in summary, Presiding Officer, this is an important step for the future of Welsh seas, particularly as we begin Welsh Government's Year of the Sea. I want to ensure the Welsh national marine plan works for Wales. By acting together and clearly setting out and pursuing our ambition, we can all contribute to making the most of our seas.  

I have selected the five amendments to the motion. If amendment 2 is agreed, amendment 3 will be deselected. I therefore call on Simon Thomas to move amendments 1, 2 and 5, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth.

Amendment 1. Rhun ap Iorwerth

Add as new points after point 2 and renumber accordingly:

Welcomes the EU’s investment in marine energy in Pembrokeshire and Anglesey and calls for similar regional cohesion investment from the UK Government following Brexit.

Regrets the delay in taking forward the Swansea Bay Tidal Lagoon project as a pathfinder project that would allow us to learn a great deal about blue growth potential from tidal energy.

Amendment 2. Rhun ap Iorwerth

Delete point 4 and replace with:

Regrets the delay in the publication of the Welsh Government's final marine plan in the context of the challenge posed to Welsh seas following the decision to leave the European Union.

Amendment 5. Rhun ap Iorwerth

Add as new point at end of motion:

Calls on the Welsh Government to introduce a levy on disposable single-use plastics to help ensure that Welsh seas are clean, healthy, safe, productive and biologically diverse.

Amendments 1, 2 and 5 moved.

Thank you very much, Llywydd. If I may start by noting that we are discussing the draft Wales marine plan today and we will have another discussion tomorrow on the climate change committee’s report on this very subject, I just hope that the next time something like this happens, the Business Committee will be more creative in terms of having a debate on Government proposals applied and having light thrown on them by the committee’s report, rather than having two separate debates on the same issue. Having said that, I am very pleased that we are discussing this today. It is a consultation and many of the questions that I am to ask will perhaps be answered during that consultation, and there are a few points that will perhaps emerge during that process too.

I’d like to start on the areas on which I agree with the Cabinet Secretary, namely this basic principle that we, as a nation, have turned our backs on the marine environment over the past 50 years and don’t think enough about the sea as a source of livelihood, as a source of biodiversity and as a source of some of the more economically beneficial things that we can develop for the future. I also share, in terms of the Plaid Cymru amendments, the fears about the delays before bringing forward this consultation and these are concerns that are shared with the Conservative party, I know, too. A whole Assembly term has passed since we heard the marine policy statement, before we have seen this draft marine plan, and during that period, evidence received by the climate change committee, during its inquiry—the report of which we will discuss tomorrow—has shown clearly that the marine conservation areas are all in an unfavourable condition for the habitats and in terms of the variety of marine life within them, so time is progressing and things are in decline.

I asked the question of the Cabinet Secretary about the first response of some of the environmental organisations to this announcement and I think that was driven by the emphasis in the report on marine energy and the possibility of tidal lagoons. Now, that is something that Plaid Cymru supports in principle, but of course, it is also one of the tests of the future generations Act as it is progressed. It’s important to note that it’s a full year since the independent Hendry report was published on the Swansea bay tidal lagoon, which was to give us the answers to some of the questions that have been posed by the environmental organisations today and which are also mentioned in the consultation too.

We know that biodiversity is under threat because of marine energy developments—of course they are—and there is an impact on ecosystems in developing marine energy. But climate change is also, in turn, having an impact on our seas and our marine habitats and biodiversity in our marine environment, and actually finding balance between those two things was exactly what was to be answered, at least partially, by having a pathfinder tidal lagoon programme, as it was described in the Hendry report. So, it’s very disappointing that the Westminster Government is still treating Wales in a way where no decision has even been taken a full year since that independent report was published.

The second area that will draw the public’s attention in this report is the emphasis on pollution, and plastics are something that we’ve already discussed, having returned from recess, here in Plenary today. But it’s important to highlight that those who responded to the climate change committee on these issues had mentioned pollution and plastics in our seas as one of the things that concerned them the most. Not only does that have an impact on tourism and our enjoyment of our coastal areas, but it also has a specific impact on marine life, and therefore tackling plastics pollution is going to be an important part of marine planning as far as the Government is concerned.

There will be a number of other issues discussed as we respond to the climate change committee’s report, so I don’t want to repeat myself too much in two days. I will just mention a few of the challenges for the current plan. I would note, of course, that we are starting a consultation period looking forward to a response from those communities specifically living in our coastal areas, and I welcome what the Cabinet Secretary said on the possibility, now, of public meetings and public debate on this plan.

I call on David Melding to move amendments 3 and 4 tabled in the name of Paul Davies.

Amendment 3. Paul Davies

In point 4, delete all after 'collaboration' and insert:

'but regrets the delay in producing the Draft Welsh National Marine Plan.'

Amendment 4. Paul Davies

Add as new point at end of motion:

Calls on the Welsh Government to give greater priority to Wales’s marine environment and economy going forward.

Amendments 3 and 4 moved.

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. I move the amendments in my colleague's name. Like Simon, can I welcome the fact that the Welsh Government has now published a draft national marine plan? We're kind of getting the first half of the debate that will go on through tomorrow when we will discuss some of the committee's ideas in this vital area. And I do hope that these two hours' worth of debate will feed into the consultation process in an effective way. We've waited a long time, but we've been rewarded with a very long draft report. I mean, 300 pages, I'm sure, made, for most of us who pay attention to this policy area and those out there in the field and our colleagues in all sorts of non-governmental organisations—it made very inspiring Christmas reading for everyone. But I am pleased that we now have it, and I really am concerned about where it enables us to progress towards in terms of coherent policy in this area.

But I think we do need to remind ourselves that the ability to have this sort of planning goes back to the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009. We had the marine policy statement in 2011. Other jurisdictions have been quicker: in Scotland, their plan was rolled out in 2015, so they've had over two years, really, of additional time, perhaps, to start tackling some of the immediate concerns in terms of the ecology of the marine environment, but also, very importantly, how we fit the environment into our vision of sustainable development, and that's very different important as well. We'd have to say our current marine ecosystems are not in a state of pristine health, as far as we know, anyway; I'll talk a little bit about data deficiencies later. But the 'State of Natural Resources' report said that only 29 per cent of our estuary and coastal waters were defined as being in a good ecological status, so it's quite clear that we need a lot more attention in this area of public policy.

I have no problems with the first three points in this motion. I don't have any difficulties, either, with the Plaid Cymru amendments, but there is, I think, a sense of complacency in the Government's position, or at least this is creeping in, and that's why I'm not exactly delighted by point 4 and the pat on the back it seeks to give the Government. But we clearly need to identify the potential for what many call blue growth in the marine sector, and we have rich resources, a large marine environment from which to draw, and we really should be seeing this as central to our national well-being goals. We ought to be sector leaders and have that kind of ambition, and not be dragging a little bit behind in the slow lane.

I would say I think it's fine producing a document of 300 pages if it's still really quite clear and targeted. The problem if it isn't is that it appears rather prolix. If we compare it to the Scottish version, that's under half the length of our draft plan, and I think it is a lot more succinct and focused. Really, at the other end of the scale, the US national ocean policy implementation plan is 36 pages. I think that's the kind of crispness we need to see if we are really going to get a sense of how the Government is going to make decisions and enable others to act in this area and know what is possible in terms of applications they're going to be bringing forward. I think it's very important, Llywydd, that the marine plan needs to be spatially prescriptive, providing clarity to sea users and stakeholders alike, while ensuring space for marine life to thrive. That, clearly, is the balance that we need to set.

I have one major concern I just want to raise today. For these proposals to work, there needs to be effective intelligence on which plans and proposals can draw. The general quality of the evidence base is very poor. There's also a lot of confusion in the fragmentation that exists between different jurisdictions and sectors that have various responsibilities for our marine environment. I do think that we need to pay a lot of attention to this area so that we see much more data collaboration between authorities and organisations from across the various sectors, and see that as part of a solid foundation for our future development. But can I just conclude by saying that this is the start, and we will work in a constructive way to improve things and to ensure that, for the future, we do have a very clear strategy for our marine environment? Thank you.

I'm on the positive side. The arrival of the first ever marine plan for Wales, I believe, is a significant moment in the history of Wales as a maritime nation. Despite a land use planning system being in place for 70 years, a strategic spatial and plan-led approach to managing UK—including Wales—marine environments has been absent. That's not to say that the land-use planning has been without its problems, without its arguments, but at least we've had a planning strategy. We might not always have agreed with what's come out of it, but we've had a strategy. In response to the ever-increasing demands on space and marine resources, and the need to deliver a marine biodiversity commitment alongside aspirations for economic growth, many countries globally have begun to develop regimes for marine spatial planning. Many of us are old enough to remember when the sea was treated as one big dumping ground, with everything from raw sewerage to industrial waste being sent out to sea, because the sea would dissipate it—it would all disappear. And, of course, the abundance of fish such as cod would last forever no matter how many were caught. That the sea is no longer treated as a dumping ground, and fish as an infinite resource, is substantial progress for the last 40 years. 

Traditionally, the approach taken to marine management has been to manage the needs of each sector—so, fishing habits, then energy, then tourism and energy—all dealt with separately. I think it's important that the Welsh national marine plan manages to put all of them together, because sometimes they have competing needs, and a decision will have to be made on which one to give priority to in any one area. It says it aims to bring users together to look at an area of sea for its environmental, social, cultural and economic qualities, and decide collectively how it should be used. The plan introduces a framework to support sustainable decision making for our seas, sets out a vision of strategic objectives, presents general economic, environmental and social policies, and includes policies specific to the sectors that operate in our seas, which include aquaculture, aggregates, defence, fishing and tourism. Putting everything together and dealing with it like that, I think, is a positive move. I think that the people who've been critical from the third sector will accept the general idea of the policy. They might not agree with what's there, and they might say that different things should be done, but we're moving definitely in the right direction. Once we've got this, once it has gone out to consultation, it can be changed. The greatest thing about having a plan is it can be changed. The disadvantage of not having a plan is there's nothing to change.

The Wales plan has been a long time in the making. It started initially with the Countryside Council for Wales back in 2009, advising the Welsh Government on its initial approach to maritime planning. I'm not going to criticise it for taking that length of time. It's always better to get a policy right than to get one quickly, so I make no criticism of the length of time; I think it's important that we've managed to get it right. Wales is not alone. England, Scotland and Northern Ireland also have plans at various stages of development, as I said earlier. I think we need to give some thanks to the work of the European Commission in driving this agenda forwards—an agenda that the UK has established a world-leading reputation in. I hope that leaving the European Union will not affect the commitment of all four nations to create a long-term plan for the sea around our isles—and especially Ireland and England. What they do will obviously have an effect on Wales. If planning works successfully, it will fulfil the Welsh Government's ambitions. And I think that really is—. The ambitions, I think, they don't have much of a problem with, have they? It's the fact that—. It's some of the bits in there. I think the ambitions are good, and I hope people will accept and support the ambitions.

Can I just talk about renewable energy? I know Simon Thomas mentioned it earlier. I think that he and I have mentioned tidal lagoons very many times in the Chamber. I make no apologies for mentioning it again. I think the tidal lagoon is incredibly important, not only as a source of energy, but as a means of developing an industry based in south-west Wales, and having all of the benefits of being the first. I think it really is important that we do everything we can as an Assembly to put as much pressure as we can on the Westminster Government to finally say 'yes' to this tidal lagoon. As people are aware, Charles Hendry produced his report. Many of us were fearful when he was asked to produce the report that it would just be an opportunity to kick it into the long grass. It's the most positive report I've ever read, when he says it's a no-regrets policy—if you try it and it doesn't work, at least you've got a sea wall, effectively. So, it's a no-regrets policy, and I think it really is important that we get that, and I think we all support having that tidal lagoon in Swansea. Just think: it's the first anniversary of the Hendry report. Many of us thought that something would have happened well within the first year. Let's hope, by the time we get to the second year, it will be under construction.

Can I also—? If we're talking about the cost of the tidal lagoons, can they be judged by the same rules as nuclear? Nuclear get huge subsidy, and then they're told, 'Yes, we'll pay for all your decommissioning at the end'. No nuclear plant would ever have been built if they had to pay for their decommissioning. Calder Hall would never have been built if they'd had to follow the same rules as we have now for our tidal lagoon. I think that the most important thing for my part of south Wales at the moment is having the tidal lagoon being given the go-ahead, and I hope very much that it will do.

I'd like to just endorse the fact of the anticipation and welcome for this draft plan, which my colleagues have mentioned here today. I do also regret the delay in its publication, given that the Welsh Government has had the ability to develop a plan-led approach to the management of our seas since the introduction of the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009, and despite calls from previous committees for the development of this plan to be prioritised. To date, we note that the management and regulation of our marine environment has been uncoordinated, and mostly done on an ad hoc, sector by sector basis. So, naturally, we do welcome the potential for a more co-ordinated approach to marine management going forward.

With regard to the environment, the UK marine policy statement dictates that marine planning must adopt an ecosystem-based approach, balancing economic growth and conservation. In particular, we know that the plan must support the UK vision for clean, healthy, safe, productive and biologically diverse oceans and seas. It's rather interesting that I'm with colleagues here today who were in the Petitions Committee this morning, and we find that all the debate and concerns now about the Hinkley waste in Cardiff here—that there hasn't been any assessment carried out about the impact of that on marine life, and that causes me much concern. Further, under the Environment (Wales) Act 2016, there is a requirement for the plan to support the development of sustainable management of natural resources. Yet, as we have noted, this document, after eight years of development, does not offer the insight, the scope and the detail that we would hope.

In my own constituency, I have a number of specific concerns in relation to marine management, and I'm really proud to represent a constituency that is very rich in abundance of marine life. I would advise anyone, if you are interested in exactly what's under our seas, to obtain a copy of the photography that's been undertaken, the numerous books that Paul Kay has written, and/or even watch one of his films. The threat to seals and harbour porpoises around Angel Bay and the Little Orme from sea craft and leisure seekers was highlighted only last week with the sad instance of a mutilated harbour porpoise being washed ashore there. I'm proud to be the harbour porpoise champion for the Assembly. Additionally, fishermen in the area have reported diminishing stocks of Conwy mussels, and they have got a 100-year remarkable status, which needs to be protected and preserved. Yet, there is a worrying decline in levels of seeding year on year. Management of this unique stock has been poor, resulting in the closure of the beds earlier this year as a last-ditch resort. In such situations as this, neither the environment nor the economy benefit, so the balance being aimed for in this draft plan is being missed.

Further along the north Wales coast, and still in my own constituency, concerns over the mass harvesting of razor clams at Llanfairfechan have been raised time and time again, and I would like to thank the Cabinet Secretary for her actions in actually putting a ban on those. That was action that you have meaningfully taken, and I am really appreciative of that. I have called for the Welsh Government to commission work through the School of Ocean Sciences at Bangor University to look at the impact of harvesting and salting on the species. How lucky are we to have such a university at Bangor. They are incredibly well renowned and recognised the world over, so use that resource.

It is concerning, though, that we may be heading towards a last-ditch situation here, and so it is disappointing to note that the draft plan states that strategic resource areas cannot fully reflect site-specific detailed considerations. That's what true marine conservation is. I don't consider myself a marine conservationist per se, but I do really care about preserving our marine environment. We will be very foolish if we do not do so.

Given the size of this document that's been mentioned, one would expect far more deliberation as regards our SRAs, yet they appear to have been developed purely based on technical and resource feasibility. Given that the plan notes that more than 50 protected sites important for wildlife could be impacted by its policies, I would like to seek assurances from the Cabinet Secretary that marine protected areas will not be undermined by this plan. So, whilst we do welcome the publication of this draft plan, I’ll be watching to monitor the responses that come back in the consultation and look at identifying and recognising the sustainability needs of specific ecosystems, species and wildlife habitats. I look forward to the responses, and I look forward to working positively with the Cabinet Secretary to ensure that we get a plan that really works for Wales and for our marine environment.

Neil Hamilton.

Llywydd, I’m glad to be called, perhaps a little later than I might have expected. I was beginning to think you were confusing me with Gareth Bennett, but there it is.

I agree with most of the—[Interruption.] It was supposed to be a joke.

I agree with most of what has been said in this debate so far. I do take the point that David Melding raised about the length of this plan, but for a politician to complain about prolixity, of course, is like sailors complaining about the sea—it’s just a fact of life. But I do think that this is an innovation, and one that is to be warmly welcomed; the first plan that seeks to integrate all the competing interests that are concerned by what happens in and around our coasts.

One interesting fact that I gleaned from my skimming of the document is that Welsh seas cover 15,000 square kilometres, and the interesting point is that that’s 43 per cent of the area of Wales. What we often think of as Wales is governed by the shape of the coastline, but, actually, Wales is far more than what is on land, and it’s right therefore to start this by reflecting that very important fact. I welcome, therefore, the length of the report, in a sense, because it seeks to give a comprehensive overview of the different interests that need to be reconciled, one with another.

I certainly do welcome the emphasis on blue growth, because the revival of our coastal areas—and Mid and West Wales, of course, covers more coastline than any other region does—is a very important need for the immediate future in my view, and that’s one reason why I think Brexit gives us an opportunity that otherwise wouldn’t be there, because when we’ve got control of our own fisheries and marine policy, we will be able to take decisions that are more honed to the interests of Wales than is currently possible.

But there are, of course, competing interests as well that we need to take into account. The economic development of our coastal areas is of uppermost concern in my mind, but I do accept the need to be sensitive to the wildlife needs of the environment, and I’ve had meetings with the Marine Conservation Society, and I see that Clare Reed says that

‘We are concerned that the current inclusions of strategic resource areas—mapped areas for growth of marine industry—may have significant negative consequences for marine wildlife and the habitats on which they depend.’

I don’t see that that necessarily may be a bad thing. I think one can have economic growth without having an adverse impact on the sea. One of the problems with the common fisheries policy, years ago certainly, was that it turned into an ecological disaster because of overfishing. That’s not a problem around our coasts, of course, because most of the extraction of marine species from the sea tends to be shellfish—about two thirds, I think, of the value of what is fished from the sea is in the form of shellfish. I’m sure we can do a lot more to expand the industry, and we can do that without in any way impacting adversely on the environment.

One of my main concerns, of course, is the impact of windfarms on our coastline, and that’s not just because of the visibility of these intrusions, as I see them, around our coastlines, wrecking coastal views, but also the threat to wildlife that that contains. I know that the British Trust for Ornithology has recently published a report that says that 99 per cent of seabirds avoid windfarms, but there is certainly a lack of data that is reliable in this area, and more work needs to be done to establish what the true position is. Because, of course, if seabirds are macerated in windmills, the bodies are not there to be examined, because of the operation of the sea. So, I think we must certainly be sensitive to the interests of seabirds as well as, as many see it, the interests of renewables. I've often made the point that, because our contribution to carbon dioxide emissions in the United Kingdom is but a minute portion of total global emissions, and therefore Wales's is even more insignificant, this is not something that we need to worry about too much even if you accept the theories of man-made global warming. But I do think, therefore, that the interests of wildlife and nature do need to have a higher priority than they have had hitherto.

I do welcome the approach that the Cabinet Secretary brings to this area. I've said before that I think that she is genuine in her desire to listen to all sides of arguments in relation to the countryside and the seas, and I do hope, therefore, that she will provide us with a plan that we can measure results against for the revival of our coastal communities and our seaports in particular.

As others have said, I think we are very fortunate in Wales to have such a high-quality marine environment, and it's very important that we now take forward marine planning as is proposed by Welsh Government so that we do have a more co-ordinated approach that, again, other Members have spoken of. Up to now, I think we have seen different particular interests pursuing their own agendas with regard to the marine environment, and often that has given rise to some tension, if not conflict, between different uses. We have seen groups concerned with wildlife and the habitats for wildlife, very concerned that there's been insufficient protection or acknowledgement of their concerns and their issues. I hope we do now see the correct and proper balance being struck through this more co-ordinated approach.

But there are various concerns that some of the environmental groups have that I think we do need to acknowledge and address. So, for example, in taking forward this more co-ordinated approach, we do need to ensure that we have sufficient understanding of the potential impact of various marine activity upon wildlife habitats; that we do need to sufficiently safeguard our natural environment and biodiversity through that understanding and policies that acknowledge and address it; that our strategic resource areas are developed not just on the basis of the potential for growth of particular industries, which has been the emphasis up to now, but that there is proper adequate social and environmental screening at an appropriate stage. So, there are concerns, for example, that if the maps were published at the current time, it would be premature, because that screening hasn't taken place, and there is a need for further work on spatial elements of the plan to ensure that natural resource issues are properly factored in to the delineation of those areas, and that we are sufficiently protecting threatened wildlife.

Of course, it is relevant to tomorrow's debate on marine protected areas. How will marine planning and those protected areas interact? How will the plan support protection of those particular areas? We do know that the strategic resource areas in the marine plan do not acknowledge the location of protected sites, but they do acknowledge that those sites may be impacted. So, how will Welsh Government ensure that marine protection areas are increasingly effective in ensuring and providing that protection?

Also, Llywydd, Welsh Government's own assessment of our national marine plan does acknowledge the risk of environmental damage, and that does obviously then beg the question as to how Welsh Government will guard against this risk and avoid the negative impacts that might occur. Of course, that's relevant as well to our well-being goals. Welsh Government must ensure that all of those well-being goals are properly addressed in striking the correct balance around these potentially competing interests. So, it is a major challenge, I would say, to Welsh Government. Some Members have referred to the timescale that's been involved in taking these plans forward—it has been a lengthy process—but I do agree that the challenge is to get it right. There's a lot to be considered in getting it right, and I do hope very much that the concerns of the environmental organisations that have been expressed here today are properly considered by Welsh Government, and that Lesley Griffiths, who I know is a listening Cabinet Secretary, does continue to have that necessary dialogue, because I very strongly believe it's only if that dialogue does continue that we will maximise our prospects of striking that correct balance.

Rhun ap Iorwerth.

Thank you, Llywydd, for the opportunity to say a few words. I feel that I have to say a few words as the only one who represents an island here at the National Assembly—as a constituency. I certainly welcome the fact that we now have a draft of a national marine plan. I remember in the last Assembly, when I was a member of the economy committee, some impact was had on me by the document that was created a few years ago by the Irish Government, ‘Harnessing Our Ocean Wealth’, and I could see in that document the kind of model that I wanted to see being developed in Wales. I think that it’s symptomatic of our attitude towards the sea that it has taken so long for us to have a document of this kind.

It sounds strange, almost, but, in Anglesey, I often feel that we don’t look enough to the seas and that we’re a society of the land in Anglesey. We have an incredible marine heritage, from the lifeboat and the history of the Royal Charter in Moelfre and so on, Holyhead port where my forefathers worked, the ship-building industry in Amlwch, the seafood industries, mussels, and recently Halen Môn. And of course the coastline is very important in terms of tourism. But somehow, the society is drawn more to what happens on land rather than what happens at sea.

You can compare it to what happens with energy. There’s a power station potentially going to be built on land in the north of Anglesey in the coming years, but much more exciting and more innovative are the schemes being developed for deriving energy from the sea flow on the western coastline of Anglesey. That’s where the innovation is. Minesto is the company that hopes to develop the technology on Anglesey that can then be exported globally, and there is huge excitement for the Morlais test zone that is reaching a critical period in its development. I know that the Cabinet Secretary is going to be briefed in the near future on the steps towards ensuring that that link is developed fully for Morlais. There is European funding that has been earmarked, I know, for that connection, and I would encourage the Cabinet Secretary to do all that she can to ensure that the Morlais connection can happen as soon as possible, and that new British models are developed with the assistance of the Welsh Government, possibly, to ensure that that can happen.

So, I am very pleased that we do have this plan now, but, of course, the consultation on the draft plan as it stands merely represents the start of the process. What’s important is that this coexistence can happen so that energy can be derived from the sea, but side by side with the development of our marine tourism, side by side with the development of the seafood industry and, of course, side by side with the rich natural life on the coast of Wales.

This is the start of the journey. I’m looking forward to playing my part as the constituency member, alongside regional Members for Anglesey in north Wales, to turn this seed into something that could be of national benefit to us.

I've looked through the document and I can't see any reference to the new growth industry in Wales of dumping nuclear mud in the Welsh marine environment. As the Chamber knows, there are proposals to dump 300,000 tonnes of mud from outside Hinckley Point just off the coast, not too far from where we sit and stand today.

In the Petitions Committee today, it was revealed that the licence has been granted without any testing of the dose of radiation of any substance below 5 cm. I think that's worth repeating, because the guidelines are so lax that a licence can be given without this material having been tested for the dose of radiation that it may or may not carry. There's been no assessment of the impact of this mud on the marine environment, so how can they get a licence?

Natural Resources Wales know little about where the mud, if it is dumped, is going to end up. All we were told was, 'Well, the area is dispersible', therefore the particles, which may or may not be radioactive to a lesser or greater degree, could go all around the Welsh coast, and I really do not think that it's good enough. So, what I would like to read in these documents is a much greater strengthening of guidelines on the issuing of marine licences. Diolch yn fawr.

I do welcome the plan, and I think that these things do take time, but the one thing that I will have to agree on with David Melding here is the data deficiency, and they are hugely important. If we're going to truly say that we know the state of our marine environment, we have to have the data that backs it up. I've had representations, the same as others have here, where organisations were dutifully collecting data, but their funding was removed or reduced to such a degree that they've no longer been able to continue that work.

Whilst we're on the issue of data deficiency, I also want to bring up the issue of monitoring. It's 12 months since the reintroduction of scallop dredging in Cardigan bay. It was hugely contentious at the time, both when it was stopped and when it was reintroduced, and we were promised that, one year later, we would hear something about any possible degradation of the sea bed that might have happened as a consequence of that reintroduction, which was the very reason that it was stopped. So, I'd like to see something in the plan that points us towards understanding how that monitoring as well as that data deficiency are going to be approached.

We've all heard mention here today about plastics, but we also need to look at microbeads and whether we should move in the direction of helping to ban those. There is plenty of evidence around at the moment that they're being ingested by fish and then by us and that they're prevalent even in sea salt now. The damage that is being done by us is pretty remarkable in that direction and we cannot say, 'Welcome to Wales' and invite people here to enjoy the beauty that is the sea unless we look after it. Really, that's what I would like to see; I'd like to see the balance. I don't want to repeat the issues that people have said here today, but I'd like to see the balance that absolutely gives us confidence that what we're doing isn't harmful to the sea, because it'd be very difficult to come to places like Pembrokeshire to enjoy the seabirds that are there—the puffins—in the report if we haven't actually looked at the harm that's being done within the protection zone that, again, relies on adequate data that tells us, and it's not there at the moment.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary to reply to the debate. Lesley Griffiths.

Diolch, Llywydd. I thank Members for their comments and for their general support for the draft plan, and I will say it is a draft plan. We are out to consultation, and please do put your views forward and encourage your constituents to do so also. I think that the feeling I've got from this debate is that Members feel as strongly about Welsh seas and their importance to our way of life and our national well-being as I do.

It is an exciting time for our seas. I mentioned that it's the start of the Welsh Government Year of the Sea. If I can just talk about the motion and the amendments, to start with, before I speak specifically to Members' comments, I'm obviously asking Members to support the motion. Looking at the amendments, I'm accepting amendment 1, to recognise the important role our seas can play in helping the move to decarbonise our economy. I would call on the UK Government yet again to let us know what their views are on Hendry, as Mike Hedges said. It's the first anniversary of that, and we don't want to be in the same position this time next year.

In terms of amendments 2 and 3, this is the first marine plan for Wales. It takes a 20-year view of how our seas should be used, and it is absolutely vital that we get it right. It's very complex, and I know David Melding referred to it being a very long document, and I think he said that Scotland's was succinct, but Scotland have also got several regional plans so, actually, if you put them all together, it would make their document probably more lengthy, actually, than ours. Again, about the time lapse, Northern Ireland started marine planning way before us, and they haven't even consulted on their draft plan yet. 

As I said, Welsh seas are important to us, and this new system of marine planning demonstrates my commitment to that sustainable management. My officials are already affording a very high priority to marine matters. I've increased the budget in this area also, and they will continue to do so. There are already policies in place to support our ecosystem recovery, so I therefore don't support amendment 4.

I will just turn to the points raised by Members. Simon Thomas referred to the work that we've done with stakeholders. We've done an incredible amount of work with stakeholders and we actually shared our first draft of our plan with them, and they asked for more detail, so we have been working very closely with them. But I go back to what I said. It is a draft and there is a long consultation process. It doesn't close until 29 March, so there's plenty of time for everyone to put their views forward. David Melding, if I can reassure you that, obviously, protections are in place, for example through a marine licence to ensure that the environment isn't damaged by any individual project, and that the plan, I think, makes that very, very clear.

Mike Hedges supported what I was saying about it being the first draft marine plan, and how it is a complex area—important to get it right. Brexit also brought a different aspect to it, and we have had to look at very specific issues. But I have to say, in relation to Hendry, while of course we call on the UK Government to stop dithering around, the lack of progress on Hendry hasn't affected the draft marine plan.

Janet Finch-Saunders, you mentioned it was eight years in development. I'm not sure where you got eight years from; it started in 2014, so it's about three years. [Interruption.] No, it started in 2014, so it's three years in the planning. I absolutely agree with you about Bangor University. It is a font of fantastic intelligence and science that really helps us, which is absolutely vital in making these decisions. And, again, just to reassure Janet Finch-Saunders, marine protected areas will not be undermined at all by this draft plan.

Neil Hamilton talked about windfarms, and I agree it is very important to listen to all sides. However, offshore wind developments are required to monitor their impacts. There are extensive studies that are enabling us to better understand the potential impacts. You referred to seabirds. There are some very extensive and important seabird colonies in Wales and, of course, we'll ensure that they're protected, and, again, the network of marine protected areas will ensure that that happens. 

John Griffiths also referred to marine protected areas, and I am absolutely committed to protecting our seas, and that includes through the management of MPAs. I think the draft plan does contain policies that confirm the protection for the MPA network of sites, and extensive habitats regulations assessment has been undertaken so that we do understand and manage potential effects of the policies in the draft plan.

Going back again, John mentioned dialogue with our stakeholders, and it's very important that we protect the environment, and it's absolutely at the heart of the approach that we're taking to marine management.

Rhun ap Iorwerth, yes, obviously represents the beautiful island of Ynys Môn, and I think you made a very important point about how we don't always consider the seas, and you were saying in your role as a constituency AM. I think that one of the things that's come out in the conversations that we've been having with our stakeholders, bringing this together, is how important the seas are for food, for the economy, for energy, for culture and for tourism and recreation. Just to reassure you, the Morlais test zone is supported in the plan, and we are very supportive of new technologies also.

Neil McEvoy raised the issue around guidelines, and I think the plan will help people as they look to determine licences. Again, we can ensure through the consultation if anything is missing that we put it in.

Finally, Joyce Watson mentioned about data efficiency. Effective intelligence is very important, and I think the portal that we have at the moment is an excellent tool, but of course we need to do more.

So, I do very much, Llywydd, look forward to considering the responses to the consultation on the draft plan.

The proposal is to agree amendment 1. Does any Member object? Amendment 1 is therefore agreed. Amendment 1 in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. Therefore, amendment 1 is agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

The proposal is that amendment 2 be agreed. Does any Member object? [Objection.] I will defer voting, therefore, until voting time. 

Voting deferred until voting time.