Item 6 is a statement by the Cabinet Secretary for Energy, Planning and Rural Affairs on the future of land management, and I call on the Cabinet Secretary, Lesley Griffiths. 

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. For decades, the management of our land has been shaped by the European Union. This has greatly influenced the structure and performance of our agricultural sector. Brexit brings significant and swift changes. The combination of leaving the common agricultural policy and new trading arrangements mean simply maintaining the status quo is untenable.

This matters greatly to Wales. The vast majority of our land is owned and managed by farmers, foresters and environmental bodies. Farming is a vital part of our rural economy. It is the social anchor of communities and land managers are the custodians of the land that underpins our natural environment.

The case for devolution is stronger than ever. The composition of our farming sector is very different to the rest of the UK, particularly England. Our landscape is more varied, our rural communities are a much greater share of the population, and our agriculture is more integrated into the fabric of our culture, especially the Welsh language. We have a once-in-a-generation chance to redesign our policies in a manner consistent with Wales's unique integrated approach, delivering for our economy, society and natural environment.

I am grateful for the help and support of all stakeholders who have come together at my ministerial Brexit roundtable. Drawing on those discussions, I have composed five core principles for the future of our land and the people who manage it.

The first principle is we must keep land managers on the land. To produce maximum benefit, land must be actively managed by those who know it best. This is also what is best for our environment and communities. However, this does not mean land use and the people who manage it should not change over time.

My second principle is that food production remains vital for our nation. There are many good reasons for Government support, but the basic payment scheme is not the best tool for providing it. There is a significant role for Government to play in helping land managers become economically sustainable after the UK exits the European Union.

Reform is also a significant opportunity to dramatically increase the benefits the broader Welsh public can receive from our land. So, my third principle is future support will centre on the provision of public goods that deliver for all the people of Wales. The richness and diversity of the Welsh landscape means there is no paucity of public goods to procure, from clean air, to flood management, to better habitats.

Fourth, all land managers should have the opportunity to benefit from new schemes. We will not restrict our support to current recipients of CAP. However, land managers may need to do things differently in return for support. This is the only way we can ensure our land delivers greater benefits.

Finally, we need a prosperous and resilient agricultural sector in Wales, whatever the nature of Brexit. To make this a reality, we need to change the way we support farmers. We intend, therefore, to have two elements of support—one for economic activities and one for public goods production. There are clearly important links between the production of food and public goods, so the support must be complementary. Many land managers will be able to produce both, but support for food production must not undermine our natural environment.

Through my roundtable, I have launched a new phase of intensive stakeholder engagement to work collaboratively on the details of how best to deliver the five principles. These groups are providing valuable ideas that will help the Welsh Government bring forward proposals for reform. These proposals will be included in a consultation document to be published in early July. 

The reputation of Welsh produce rests on high standards, so this document will also consider the implications of reform for our regulatory framework. We have the opportunity to design a more modern, streamlined and flexible framework. This is relevant for the quality of our water, our soils, our air and our animal health. In order to deliver this support, we will need the correct legislation in place. My officials and I continue to work with DEFRA and the other UK Governments to determine how best to legislate. I am considering both a Welsh agricultural Bill and including temporary provisions for transition in the UK's planned agriculture Bill.

Leaving the European Union brings significant changes, and we must have a well-planned and multi-year transition. I learned the importance of avoiding a cliff-edge removal of subsidies during my recent trip to New Zealand. I will continue to fight to protect a full and fair allocation of funding to support land management in Wales. However, the UK Government has so far failed to provide any detail or commitment beyond 2022. I was very pleased that Fergus Ewing, Cabinet Secretary for the Rural Economy and Connectivity in Scotland, joined me in writing to Michael Gove, Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, to ask for further clarity on future funding. Despite this uncertainty, I want to set a clear timetable for Welsh farmers.

The basic payment scheme will continue as planned for 2018, and I can confirm today that I will also continue to operate the basic payment scheme for the 2019 scheme year. From 2020, powers will return from Europe. I then envisage a gradual and multi-year transition from existing to new schemes. By 2025, I want to have completed implementation, and I will set out further details in July and can guarantee that changes will be subject to explicit consultation.

The great challenge of Brexit is to ensure that its impact does not undermine the true value land management provides to Wales. The great opportunity is to put in place new Welsh policy to help it adjust to future market forces. I am confident our land managers can adapt, and it is this Government’s role to provide time and support.

Can I thank the Cabinet Secretary for her statement this afternoon? I'm pleased that the Cabinet Secretary has brought forward this important statement, particularly in light of the agreement between the Welsh and UK Governments over the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill, which means that we're one step closer to a new future for British and Welsh agriculture.

Of course, we all agree to the five core principles that were set out in February, particularly around the idea of food production remaining vital. Indeed, farmers have continued to raise with me their concerns regarding the future of their subsidies if Britain decides to adopt an approach that prioritises environmental protections rather than food production. I'm pleased that today's statement recognises that Welsh farmers continue to be excellent custodians of our countryside and that it's crucial that the right balance is struck between environmental protections and food production. Whilst I accept that a consultation will be held later this year, can she give us a little more information from the outset about how the Welsh Government intends to strike that balance so that Welsh farmers can be assured of the direction of travel post Brexit?

Of course, a transition system must be in place for future funding arrangements, and the Welsh Government has been quick to point out that engagement has already taken place with stakeholders and other Governments on this point. In light of the representations that the Cabinet Secretary has already made on this issue, can she provide some more information about exactly what future funding arrangements the Welsh Government want to see in the future, given that the UK Government has committed funding until 2022 but in her statement today she has only confirmed that the basic payment scheme will continue to operate until 2020?

The Llywydd took the Chair.

Of course, we know that the Welsh agricultural industry is closely integrated with the European market, and we all recognise that the imposition of tariffs between the UK and the EU would be hugely damaging to Welsh farmers. I know that that is the Welsh Government's position on the matter, but perhaps in her response the Cabinet Secretary could provide an update on her discussions with her UK counterparts and, indeed, her European counterparts on ways in which to protect the industry for the future. 

Now, in March last year, the Climate Change, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee undertook an inquiry into the future of land management in Wales, and, as part of the consultation, the Farmers' Union of Wales made it clear that Governments should proactively support UK food and farming through their own procurement policies. In the circumstances, perhaps the Cabinet Secretary can now tell us about the Welsh Government's procurement practices in relation to farming and explain what new action the Welsh Government has taken since the committee's inquiry to specifically address this point.

Whilst there are clearly many land management challenges for Wales post Brexit, there are also plenty of opportunities too. Developing a domestic Welsh agricultural policy can now offer the Welsh Government the opportunity to seriously look at the current regulatory landscape for farmers, and I'm pleased that today's statement confirms that the Welsh Government will now look at a new, flexible framework. This has long been championed by the industry. Indeed, NFU Cymru tell us that poor regulation is often cited as a reason for a lack of farm business confidence, and that it adds significantly to farmers' workloads. Now the Welsh Government has the opportunity to overhaul this landscape and ensure that more voluntary approaches are adopted so that, where regulations are introduced, they are supported by informed and sound evidence.

We know that the Welsh Government has yet to firmly close the door on proposed nitrate vulnerable zones in Wales, and this is a clear example of where the Welsh Government can better support Welsh farmers. Given the burdens that poor and excessive regulation can have on Welsh farmers, perhaps the Cabinet Secretary could tell us about her initial thoughts on tackling the regulatory landscape to better support land management.

Today's statement suggests a move towards introducing legislation, and perhaps the Cabinet Secretary can tell us when she intends to make a more concrete decision on this, along with what initial feedback she has already received from the industry on this particular agenda.

I'd like to briefly reiterate to the Cabinet Secretary the importance of access to a stable and productive workforce for the farming sector, and I'll be grateful for any updates to the discussions she's had with the rest of the UK and the EU regarding Wales's labour needs.

Finally, Presiding Officer—and by no means least—I'd like to put on record the significance of the Welsh agricultural industry, not just to our economy, but to our culture too, and I'm pleased that the Cabinet Secretary has also reiterated the importance of farming to our rural communities and the Welsh language today. Therefore, in closing, can I thank the Cabinet Secretary for her statement? I look forward to scrutinising the Welsh Government's progress on its land management policies in the coming weeks and coming months. Thank you.

Thank you, Paul Davies, for those comments and questions.

I think you're absolutely right: it is about getting the right balance, and so that was why I started right at the beginning to have the stakeholder group, and I did pay tribute to them. I'm very grateful for their input and those meetings are always a really good discussion, and certainly the sub-groups that have broken out from that stakeholder group have been incredibly helpful in getting where we are now and will continue to be very important going forward.

You're right, we will be going out to consultation. I mentioned we'll be launching the consultation document at the beginning of July. I think it's very important to get it out there ahead of the Royal Welsh Show and the other summer shows where I, myself, my officials and front-line staff will be able to talk to many farmers and foresters and, obviously, people working for environmental organisations.

You asked what sort of things we were considering ahead of the consultation. So, in relation to public goods, I think it's very important that we continue to look at reducing ongoing carbon emissions and we're able to increase carbon sequestration. I want to continue to, obviously, manage water supply, improve water quality, improve air quality, look at our landscape and our heritage, and I'm also very keen to look at health and access and education opportunities.

Food production will come under economic resilience and, again, alongside that, we'll be looking at support for sustainable improvement, particularly around precision agriculture and support for diversification. I've seen some excellent examples of diversification: I was up in Pennal last Thursday where I saw probably one of the best hydroelectricity schemes I've seen on a farm, and what really struck me was that that was there. Okay, it needed somebody to come along and innovate and put in the scheme, but that water was there, and now we've got this fantastic hydro scheme. So, it's about supporting diversification also. 

I think, in relation to future funding, you're right, we have had that assurance that the funding is there until 2022, and we've made it very clear that that funding will be available to the sector up until 2022. But, after that, we have no idea what funding we will be getting. So, you'll be aware of the quadrilateral meetings that I have—we've got one on Monday in Edinburgh—we keep inviting the Chief Secretary to the Treasury to come along; unfortunately, she's not been able to do so yet. But it has to be a standing item because we need to know what's there from 2022. But that funding will be available. Although I've only stated what will happen up until 2020, that amount of funding will be available until 2022. But we need to look at how we then, obviously, support our farmers and land managers.

It is about making our agricultural sector as resilient as possible for what's going to come. One of the things we've been doing—we did it with the dairy sector last year—we had some European funding that we used to benchmark so that dairy farmers could see how resilient they were and where they needed to improve. I'd be very keen—I am very keen—to do it for sheep and beef as well, and I'm looking to see if I can access some funding to do that. So, those are the sort of things that we're doing to assist.

You mentioned 'The future of land management in Wales' report from the Climate Change, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee, and there were some very interesting recommendations in there, which my officials and I are currently considering. Again, there were some recommendations that don't actually fit specifically into land management policy, but I thought the report was certainly very good. 

In relation to regulation, I mentioned that this is really our opportunity—it's a big opportunity—to look at the full range of available measures we have for a future regulatory regime, and that, obviously, includes regulation, it includes investments, and it also includes voluntary approaches. Again, we need to have a look at who they will apply to. They will apply to all land managers, obviously, but we need to look at that going forward. There are still existing regulations currently in force that must be complied to, and I think everybody recognises that.

In relation to legislation, I've always made it very clear we would have our own Wales agricultural policy, but I mentioned that I'm keeping all options open in relation to the UK agriculture Bill. Unfortunately, we haven't had a draft shared with us, which we had hoped to have had by this time, but it hasn't been shared. So, again, we will ask on Monday.

Workforce is incredibly important because I'm sure, like myself, you've been told that a lot of EU nationals work in the sector and there's a huge amount of concern, not just from land managers and farmers, but also from processing plants. So, it's a conversation that I'm having and also other ministerial colleagues are having in relation to Brexit discussions. But it is a huge area of concern.

I absolutely agree with you, and I'm glad you picked up what I said around communities and the Welsh language and how important—. The Welsh language within agriculture—it's the most used by any sector, the agricultural sector. And another lesson I learned in New Zealand was, when they had that cliff edge and that huge change to their way of life in New Zealand back in 1984, they lost a lot of communities because farms became much bigger. So, therefore, the communities had huge upheaval, and I'm very keen that that doesn't happen here in Wales.

Thank you to the Cabinet Secretary for her statement. There were a number of questions about this statement raised in the Nefyn show yesterday. The statement doesn't contain all of the answers, but at least people can look forward to another summer of consultation on these particular details.

Now, as far as Plaid Cymru is concerned, you will be aware that we disagree fundamentally with the agreement that you have made with the Government in Westminster, and the fact that so many of the powers that will flow from the European Union will now have been put in the freezer, or whatever description you choose for that process. It is difficult to equate what you have in your statement about the fact that you say that the case for devolution is stronger than ever, that you say that devolution gives 

'significant control over our policies and actions' 

when, to all intents and purposes, you have given up that control to decisions taken, first of all, by the Government in Westminster, and, secondly, which are led by the Westminster Government, and not through the process that we've been discussing here and that is set out in the climate change committee's report—of collaboration, as members of equal status, between the two Governments. So, may I ask you some questions about how exactly this is going to work in practice?

You have set out your five principles in this statement and in the statement that you made in March also. Have you discussed those five principles with George Eustice and Michael Gove? Have you been given assurances by them that you will be able to operate on the basis of these principles here in Wales, given that the legislative precedent includes either an agriculture Bill in Westminster or a specifically Welsh Bill here? As we now know, the Westminster Government has the upper hand in areas as varied as GMOs, organic farming, farm payments, public procurement—which is so important for the future of food in Wales—and also food labelling. What assurances have you been given by the Westminster Government that they will not insist on their approaches to these problems, rather than listening to the consultation on the bottom-up approach that you have described to us here today?

In talking of the funds that will emerge from Brexit, I note—and it's already been mentioned—that you have only given a pledge until the end of the 2019 financial year. Now, the Treasury has made it clear that the total will still be available until 2022. When the climate change and rural affairs committee visited London last week, we met face to face with Michael Gove and spent an hour with George Eustice, and of course we discussed with them the need to secure this funding. It was clear to me that they would maintain the funding up until 2022, but after that, it goes into the comprehensive spending review. So, the nature of it will change after that, but until then, Wales will continue to receive the same funds. So, why can't you pledge today that that will be allocated in full, at least until the next Assembly elections, rather than on a year-by-year basis, as you have set out this afternoon?

In discussing that funding, it is clear that you want to retain some sort of sense of pillar 1 and pillar 2: the difference between public good and economic payments. But, at the same time, you say in your statement that the current single farm payment isn't an effective way of providing that economic support. Now, the climate change and rural affairs committee report has made a recommendation—which you should respond to, at least, this afternoon—that there shouldn't be a pillar 1 and pillar 2 approach, but that the funding source should be merged until you measure the public good and the economic benefits, and working towards something of a higher value. You just mentioned a project in Pennal and other projects in Wales. So, why haven't you considered that recommendation? Why do you want to maintain this rather artificial distinction between pillar 1 and pillar 2 in this new approach to funding in Wales?

So, although we welcome the fact that you are discussing these issues publicly in Wales, and that there will be an opportunity now for farmers and the unions and everyone who is interested to participate in this conversation, Plaid Cymru remains of the view that we have seen powers lost over the past fortnight, and that some of the things that you are talking about in this statement will be almost impossible to deliver because it won't be the Westminster Government's aspiration to see them brought about. And it's not just Plaid Cymru that is saying that. I now see today that former MPs Gwynoro Jones and Elystan Morgan have joined with us in their criticism of the inter-governmental agreement reached. There are some warm words in today's statement, but I fear that it will be empty rhetoric at the end of the day.  

Diolch, Simon Thomas. I absolutely accept your view around the EU withdrawal Bill. I don't agree with you, and obviously the comments of both the First Minister and the Cabinet Secretary for Finance have been very well rehearsed. You ask whether I've discussed the five principles with Michael Gove and George Eustice—no, not explicitly. However, we do meet, as I say, monthly, six-weekly in quadrilaterals, and they're very well aware, and agree, that we will be bringing forward a Wales agricultural policy. I mentioned in my statement that I'm keeping options open around the UK agricultural Bill, but still, until we see even a draft Bill, I don't think we can say exactly what we will do in relation to legislation.

I hope you heard my answer to Paul Davies around the funding. You're quite right; the Treasury have said that funding is there until 2022. I committed to keep to the basic payment scheme till the end of 2019. However, I absolutely pledge that that funding—and the First Minister has also done this—will be allocated specifically to the agricultural sector and our land managers et cetera until 2022, and certainly—again, you will have heard me say this before—until the end of this Assembly term. But that will be part of the consultation also. And we have about 25,000 farm businesses in Wales, of which probably 10,000 don't access any basic payment scheme at all. So, we need to look at how we share that funding out, and that, as I say, will be part of the consultation.

I mentioned the report from your committee, and we're considering all the recommendations. It's not that we're not taking any specific—. And, obviously, I will be coming forward with the response. It's absolutely for our farmers to decide how they use their land, how they get the best out of their land. They're the ones who can tell me how they feel about that, but then it's up to Welsh Government to be able to facilitate that. Certainly, one of the things I'm hearing from them is that they want to diversify. I mentioned, again, about the hydro scheme, et cetera, and I want to be able to be in a position to help them. I think this really is a big opportunity to get our policy right, and I'm afraid I don't share the fears that you have around powers.

Neil Hamilton.

Thank you, Llywydd. It's always a pleasure to be called by you.

I hope it'll bring joy to the heart of the Cabinet Secretary when I say I could have written this statement myself, because I agree with every single word of it. I think it's a practical, forward-looking and optimistic statement. Of course, I recognise that, at this early stage, she can't give a great deal of detail about how agricultural policy is going to be reformed in Wales, but I was very pleased to hear her say that it gives us an opportunity to reconsider the whole corpus of regulation that we've inherited from predecessor generations. That must be the right policy—to look at everything that is currently in place, as we have the opportunity to change it, if that's beneficial to farmers and, indeed, to the public at large. Hopefully, she'll agree with me that we should base our regulation in the future securely on a science base and that we shouldn't impose huge costs upon the agricultural industry for any marginal benefits to society generally. So, I think, in detail, that we'll be able to make many significant changes that will not imperil environmental interests, for example, on the one hand, by improving the economic circumstances of farmers.

I was very pleased to see also that she says the basic payment scheme is not the best tool for providing farm security. It's certainly true that the impact of the basic payment scheme has been to substantially increase the price of land, rather than to improve the incomes of farmers. Farm incomes, generally, are still very, very low, and we need to do as much as we can to make farmers' incomes more secure and, indeed, higher in future. It must be right to say that future support for agriculture will centre on the provision of public goods that deliver for all the people of Wales.

I personally think, from what I've read and what Michael Gove and George Eustice have been saying, that there isn't a great deal of disagreement between the Cabinet Secretary and the Welsh Government and what the UK Government wants to achieve. It's a great opportunity for us to have a British and, indeed, a Welsh agricultural policy that is more attuned to the peculiar circumstances of our own country. She is absolutely right to point out the almost unique combination of circumstances that we have to devise an agricultural policy for in Wales, with a high proportion of upland farms, for example, a greater dependence upon sheep farming, and so on and so forth. So, I do hope that she will be able to come back to us, at an early date, with a little more flesh on the bones of this agricultural policy, but in general terms I welcome the principles upon which it's going to be based.

One of the opportunities that we've had, even within the current scheme of regulation, is to show that we can have a different policy in Wales. I've quoted before the habitats directive and the fact that we can cut hedges in Wales in August, whereas they can't in England; they've got to wait until September. I believe that our policy is a better one than we have in England, and there may be other ways in which Wales can lead the rest of the United Kingdom by example in the way that our agricultural policy for the future is devised.

Marketing is going to be at the heart, I think, of future prosperity for farmers in Wales, and I wonder if she can give us any further information on what the Welsh Government will do to promote a brand for Wales's agricultural sector as a means of securing the food and drink industry's interests, as well as farmers' interests, post Brexit. It must be sensible for a developed western country like the United Kingdom to concentrate upon the production not just of raw materials but the high-value products that richer consumers around the world want to buy. There is nothing to be gained from a race to the bottom in terms of price competition. It's improvement of quality that's going to be the best way forward, in my view.

I was pleased to see her mention New Zealand, as well—a country that I know quite well. I remember very well talking to Labour Ministers in New Zealand in the 1980s, who introduced the overnight abolition of agricultural protection, subsidies and the whole regulatory regime. It's one of the paradoxes of the 1980s that it was the New Zealand Government, under the Labour Party, that was more Thatcherite than the Thatcher Government in the United Kingdom. And it's true that, during the transitional period, there were very severe difficulties, although the New Zealand Government did actually soften the blow by having funding for restructuring of farms, and also for social welfare payments and so on in the interim, but it's true there were massive changes in the industry. But land prices fell 60 per cent, and the use of fertiliser fell by 50 per cent, so there were significant improvements in biodiversity as a result of those rather dramatic reforms, and now agriculture is actually bigger, as a proportion of a larger economy today, than it was 30 years ago.

So, there are opportunities for us in deregulation and, indeed, I believe, by controlling and maybe even cutting subsidies, if we can ensure that farm incomes, which is the key factor here, can improve. There's no point in subsidising for no reason. What we want is a prosperous farming industry and prosperous farmers. If that can be done at a lesser cost to the taxpayer, that must be in everybody's interest.

Thank you, Neil Hamilton, for that contribution. Indeed, I think I told you when you came into this Chamber that I do try to be optimistic and look for opportunities, and I do think this is a huge opportunity for us now.

I am determined that the consultation will be meaningful, so I haven't got any fixed ideas. I mentioned that we've had a lot of sub-groups from the Brexit ministerial round-table, which has come forward with a trade paper, for instance, and their views are very important to me. One of the things that they told me, right from the start, was that the status quo is not an option, and that CAP does contain perverse rules, and that does discourage delivery of public goods. Whilst the basic payment scheme does provide important support—of course it does—for many of our farmers, it wouldn't help them withstand the changes that they recognise would come following the UK leaving the European Union.

You're absolutely right around regulation. It must be done when we've got evidence from science, and I very much welcome you saying that. I've made it very clear that environmental standards must not drop, and you will have heard me say, in previous answers, that one of the things I want to do is help farmers and land managers become much more resilient to withstand the difficulties that are going to come. I think even before Brexit, the case for change was strong, and I think after Brexit, reform is absolutely unavoidable, and I think that is recognised.

The current policy we've got I don't think prepares our farmers for change in the long term. The scale of income subsidies paid to sheep farmers in particular is insufficient to keep the majority of them afloat when combined with price drops. The price of lamb at the moment is very high. I was talking to a farmer last week who told me he was getting £30 more this year than he was last year, but, obviously, due to the value of the pound, and it's not a trend that will continue, and I don't want them to be lulled into a sense of false security.

You mentioned that you didn't think there was much to choose from between us and England. I think all four UK countries would say we wouldn't have wildly different agricultural policies, but I can assure you there won't be a British agricultural policy. Each country will have their own individual one.

You mentioned New Zealand, and it was very good to be talking to Labour Ministers again. Of course, there's a coalition Government that came in last November. Certainly, the farmers that I spoke to—I did some farm visits and spoke to the sector and to other aspects of the sector, and whilst they said that, of course, it was incredibly painful and the lesson that they would want me to take away was that you needed that multi-year transition rather than that cliff edge, it was interesting that, although there'd been incredible hardship and a lot of pain, which lasted for many, many years, they wouldn't go back. They wouldn't go back to the system that was there, and I think that was something that I certainly took away.

I was very pleased to hear you say that the support for food production must not undermine our natural environment, and I think that's absolutely crucial. Given that the numbers of species across Europe are crashing, it's very concerning to all of us that the common agricultural policy has obviously not been successful in preventing the numbers of wildlife from being eliminated in lots of cases. So, I know it's something that, in this Chamber, we feel quite strongly about, and, clearly, we're going to need to ensure that farming takes place without actually causing environmental degradation. Indeed, we need to build up the numbers that have been lost.

I'd just like to ask, in the light of the new circumstances, what support there will be for horticulture, because most horticulture is produced on fewer than 8 hectares, which is therefore not eligible for CAP. Given that some of the Tory Taliban are wanting to get us out of the customs union, it's obviously going to make it more difficult for us to import fruit and vegetables if that were to occur. So, I'd be keen to understand a bit more about what we can do to grow the sort of vegetables that don't need to be produced on an industrial scale, like potatoes. Freshness, locality and seasonality are hugely important. A limp lettuce nobody's going to want to eat. I remember Gareth Wyn Jones struggling to source vegetables within 50 miles of the school in west Cardiff, where he was trying to develop a meal for children on that basis.

I know that the LEADER programme has produced a lot of really excellent horticultural schemes, which local businesses have been falling over themselves to buy local produce for their cafes, restaurants and pubs. We know that polytunnels can extend the growing season and the range of produce we can grow up in the Valleys. We need more fruit trees, please. Lots of fruit trees can be grown in the harshest of climates. Just think of the Bardsey apple and the damsons that were historically grown for their dye. So, I'd be very keen to hear a bit more about how you think we can produce that for the well-being of our nation, as well as enriching our local food cultures that were spoken about in the land management report.

Thank you, Jenny Rathbone, for those points. I think you're right about horticulture, and I mentioned in an earlier answer that there are 10,000 farms that don't have access to any funding under the basic payment scheme, and I'm sure some of them will be included in relation to horticulture. So, again, I go back: we've got that blank piece of paper now, and we can make sure that we have a look at if there is a way to obviously include them in the funding.

Reducing food miles is very important to me, and I think you're absolutely right about schools, for instance, trying to source food within a smaller radius. I've had discussions with Cabinet colleagues around the National Procurement Service improving opportunities for sourcing that Welsh food and drink, and, again, I think that's a really big opportunity here. And we've got a food category forum that is committed to providing opportunities for all suppliers to compete for tenders, for instance. So, I want to see schools and other aspects of the public sector able to do that.

Food and drink is very important—I realise that I didn't answer Neil Hamilton's questions around food and drink. We've got a fantastic food and drink sector here in Wales. You'll be aware that our target was to increase turnover to £7 billion by 2020. At the end of 2016 we were already at £6.9 billion, so I'm looking at what target we need to do next. So, again, I need to make sure that the schemes that we do bring forward under our new agricultural policy enable us to do that.

I'd like to see other schemes. I know that, previously, under the rural development programme, for instance, we've supported community growing spaces in Wales, working with community farms, community gardens, community orchards, and you're right, we do need to plant more—we need to plant more trees, but we certainly need to plant more fruit trees also. So, I want to look at how we can support schemes like that. Also, community allotments are very, very important to the food and drink sector. Again, I go back to that blank piece of paper where we can start again and we can look at how we support everybody—you know, SMEs, micro food businesses. I'd like to be able to facilitate market engagement, which I don't think we've done enough of.

Cabinet Secretary, can I say—[Inaudible.]—I do not believe that there needs to be a tension between productive agriculture and care for the environment. So, we can certainly combine these very important public goods and aspirations. There clearly are some areas where we could have a broader range of produce, and horticulture I think is a very interesting one.

There are some areas where we would want more radical diversification, but perhaps going back to our roots, and one area I would suggest is woodland and forestry, which would, I think, provide an alternative income stream for many farmers in combination with their food production. Now, you will know—I'm sorry to rehearse these figures again—but since 2010, Wales has managed to plant just 3,500 hectares of woodland, and it should be planting something like 5,000 a year to meet our target of 100,000 hectares by 2030—that's of new woodland and forestry. 

So, we are where we are, and we need to revisit this, I think, quite radically. But I think, post Brexit, it does offer a really good example of a win-win, and the economic return on forestry and woodland is really quite considerable once you're over that initial 12 to 15-year period when the trees are maturing. So, I think that's an area we should certainly look at, and I would commend the committee report, 'Branching out', which I think is a very good source of information on this, and it does ask us to be a bit more ambitious in our woodland and forestry policy, and I hope to see that come to fruition.

Thank you, David Melding. I absolutely agree that it doesn't have to be either-or. It doesn't have to be public goods or food production—it can be both, and that's the message that I certainly make sure everyone is absolutely onside around.

I absolutely agree with you around planting trees and, obviously, this is now in the portfolio of Hannah Blythyn, the Minister for Environment, but you will remember that when I came to committee, I absolutely held my hands up and said that we were not planting enough trees. We should have been doing 5,000 hectares a year if we were going to reach our target of 2030, and I know that this is something that Hannah Blythyn is looking at—how we can get that strategy on target.

Certainly, farmers and land managers are telling me that this is an area where they want to help. I think there is a reluctance by some who feel that if they plant a forest on their farm, that that land is gone for a long time—it's a very long-term idea, so they're reluctant to do so. But I think, in general, farmers and land managers are very keen to look at what they can do, particularly in relation to diversification, which I mentioned before.

Certainly, the committee's report 'Branching out'—I think, again, there were some very good recommendations that came forward, and, again, myself and officials are looking at what we consider. I think there were a couple around using tree planting as a natural solution to reducing flood risk and trapping atmospheric carbon. We want to extend opportunities for community access to woodland. From a well-being point of view we want to be able to do that. And also, I think we need to find mechanisms to increase woodland planting, and I think that includes commercial plantation as well. So, these are all things that we can look at going forward.

Finally, Joyce Watson.

David has done exactly what I was going to do, so I'm not going to reiterate everything that he's said, but I do think that there has been a view in the past about crops and trees competing for space. So, what I would like to see is a joined-up approach between those two parts of agriculture, and looking at agroforestry, where the trees can be planted alongside the crops, and that in turn would boost production, and challenge that orthodoxy, which you reiterated here today.

You mentioned, quite rightly, the fact that, by putting trees on the land, you can also manage the floods that very often happen, and we've seen an awful lot of evidence of that. But it can also create a greater biodiversity and soil conservation. When we talk about nitrous vulnerability, if trees were planted alongside, you might not have the same level of run-off that is poisoning our rivers. So, it's about an imaginative approach, and the carbon capture and storage hasn't been mentioned yet, but it is significant.

I'm glad that you do recognise, Cabinet Secretary, the need to plant more trees. We on the committee, and others here, look forward to seeing the green shoots of that. And since David has said most of the things I was going to say, I will end there. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Joyce Watson. I do think, as I said in my answer to David Melding, that some farmers don't want to plant trees on their land because they are concerned about losing it when they may need it for crops. But I think they are now starting to think about it more from a diversification point of view, and I think it's important that we're able to help them and to facilitate that going forward.

I thought, as I say, the report was very good, and it does come up with many recommendations. I did mention about reducing ongoing carbon emissions and increasing carbon sequestration as one of the public goods that we could look at. I think that will help us as part of our response to climate change. There are other things within public goods that I think, again, planting more trees would help around. I mentioned access—again, people think that farmers don't want people on their land. Well, that's not my experience. Farmers are very proud to show what they do on their land to the public, but I think landscape is very important.

Another thing that's come forward from the Brexit round-table is that they want to increase that habitat resilience and really underpin biodiversity and our landscape—so, great opportunities here to be able to do that.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary.