The following amendments have been selected: amendments 1 and 3 in the name of Caroline Jones, amendment 2 in the name of Paul Davies, and amendments 4, 5 and 6 in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. If amendment 2 is agreed, amendment 3 will be deselected.

Item 6 is a debate on Brexit and the fishing industry, and I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Energy, Planning and Rural Affairs, Lesley Griffiths. 

Motion NDM6755—Julie James

To propose that the National Assembly for Wales:

1. Notes the Wales Centre for Public Policy report entitled ‘Implications of Brexit for Fishing opportunities in Wales’.

2. Recognises the significant and distinct challenges Brexit poses to the Welsh fishing industry and marine environment.

3. Supports the following key themes identified by the seas and coasts sub-group:

a) plan to make the best use of our seas;

b) provide effective stewardship of our marine environment and natural resources;

c) continue to be responsible partners in UK marine and fisheries management;

d) secure a fairer deal for the fishing industry; and

e) stand on our own two feet.

4. Reiterates its support for full and unfettered access to the EU single market, including for food and fisheries.

Motion moved.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I'm pleased to lead this debate today on what is a very important issue for the people of Wales and, in particular, for our coastal towns and communities as we leave the European Union. 

Our coast and seas are an incredible natural asset contributing millions to the economy of Wales, supporting thousands of jobs and have a rich heritage and culture. The gross value added generated by the marine sector in Wales in 2014 alone was around £370 million. Over 60 per cent of the Welsh population lives near our shores, with all our major cities and many important towns located on the coast. 

Shortly after the referendum, I assembled a round-table group of representative stakeholders to seek their help to identify and understand the potential challenges and opportunities Brexit presents for Wales. The seas and coast sub-group formed from members of my round-table and the existing Welsh marine advice and action group have helped to provide a focus on our consideration of Brexit and our seas. Members have worked with Government to shape five key themes to work towards as we leave the European Union. This will guide further policy development and contribute to achieving our shared vision of productive, healthy and biologically diverse seas.

I've made arrangements for these to be circulated to Members today, and the themes include: planning to make the best use of our seas, which includes delivering the marine plan; provide effective stewardship of our marine environment and natural resources, including our contribution to a network of marine protected areas; continue to be responsible partners in the UK, including working closely with our partners across the UK in terms of science and enforcement, and we will work with those with whom we share a sea area; secure a fairer deal for the fishing industry, including rebalancing the UK share of fish quota and grow opportunities in domestic and overseas markets; and standing on our own two feet by enhancing our marine science and data collection capability, and reviewing our fisheries legislation to embed sustainable management of natural resources principles, and make sure it's fit for purpose. I ask Members to consider these themes as part of the debate today. 

Leaving the European Union presents an opportunity for a Welsh fisheries policy with the best interests of Welsh coastal communities and fisheries at its heart. To fully understand these opportunities, I commissioned the Wales Centre for Public Policy to provide independent insight on the implication for fisheries policy in Wales following Brexit. I wish to thank the WCPP for their work, and I'm pleased to bring this report to the Assembly today.

I hope Members note the significant and distinct challenges facing the industry. As outlined in the Welsh Government's White Paper, 'Securing Wales' Future', the Welsh fishing industry deserves a fairer share of fishing opportunities in the future. I believe it's important that the Welsh fleet has a prosperous and sustainable business model to encourage investment and attract future generations into the industry. Fishing opportunities for the fleet are currently managed through a mixture of Welsh legislation and the common fisheries policy. These set the total amount of fish available and establish the rules for managing fish stocks that spend part of their time in our waters. However, the CFP is heavily skewed towards more industrial-scale fishing, and my approach in annual negotiations is to ensure that the small-scale sector obtains a fairer deal.

Some commentators talk about a Brexit bonanza of fish returning to the Welsh fleet. The CFP has not served UK vessels well in terms of the share of the fish. The WCPP report confirms that Wales's share is only a fraction of the UK share. Any additional fish will need to be negotiated stock by stock and that will take time. Any additional fish realised through these negotiations are a public good, not a commercial asset to be bought and sold. It should be available to rebalance fishing opportunities.

The nature of fishing in the four parts of the UK is different in scale and the species they target. We have a long history of working together to manage our respective fleets and the mobile fish species. In Wales, for historic reasons, the fleet is primarily small under-10 m vessels. The fishing industry is reliant on non-quota shellfish species, such as crab, lobsters and whelks, around 90 per cent of which is exported to the EU or other countries via EU trade deals. Most of our shellfish is exported as live or fresh products. This means that timing is critical. You can imagine the difficulties exporters will face if this shellfish is held up in UK or EU ports due to non-tariff barriers.

It is clear that any future policy can only succeed if we maintain full unfettered access to the EU market for our existing fisheries products. Both the WCPP report and our stakeholder groups were clear on this. I continue to push hard for this at meetings with my counterparts at Whitehall to get the best deal for Wales as the trade negotiations develop, and I hope the Assembly can support our attempts in this area also.

The Llywydd took the Chair.

Thank you for giving way. Just on the general picture that she just portrayed, she's talked about the shellfish industry, which, of course, is not dependent on quotas, and earlier she talked about quotas and the potential for releasing new stock, which we'd assume would be done on a sustainable basis, and she said that such quotas should be for the public good. Does that mean that she envisages Welsh fishing policy going forward to be based on quotas based on environmental sustainability principles but not based on buying and selling?

I just mentioned the additional fish being a public good, so I think it's very much open to discussion and negotiations, and that's something we'll be taking forward.

The First Minister has recently announced funding to help the fisheries and aquaculture sectors prepare, including funding for the research and tactical analysis for EU exit. I want to be very clear: I expect a fairer deal for Wales as part of any future fisheries agreement. I am unhappy with the current quota system and the way it's managed, and I believe that any new system will need to provide a community good and any future fishing opportunities should address historical inequalities.

I expect the UK Government approach to Brexit should be done in a responsible way. I will also push for devolution equivalent to Scotland by gaining full legislative competence for fisheries in the Welsh zone. Welsh Government is responsible for managing fishing in that area but is not able to make primary legislation. It makes no sense to have an artificial line in the sea that prevents us from making consistent legislation for our sea area. There is a need for all parts of the UK to work together in some policy areas in the future—the so-called UK frameworks. The agreement reached by the Cabinet Secretary for Finance on the inter-governmental agreement recognises this and protects devolution as we exit the EU.

Fisheries management is one of the 24 areas identified where powers returning from the EU fall within our devolved competence and where common UK frameworks are likely to be needed. We are working closely with the rest of the UK to identify what this framework will look like, which parts require legislation, what we want to do together and what we want to do ourselves. Alongside this, we are working hard to prepare the industry for day 1 readiness, and we'll work to reduce any impact on businesses following the UK leaving the EU.

Fisheries are heavily regulated. Over 90 directly applicable EU regulations covering hundreds of pages of legislation have been identified as needing amendment to make it operable. This is a mammoth task, and we are working closely with the rest of the UK to ensure the legislation work post exit, and also devolution, is protected. We're also well advanced in our preparations to amend our domestic legislation. Having a working legislative framework for our seas post exit is of vital importance, and I very much look forward to Members' contributions.

I have selected the six amendments to the motion. If amendment 2 is agreed, amendment 3 will be deselected. I call on Neil Hamilton to move amendments 1 and 3, tabled in the name of Caroline Jones. Neil Hamilton.

Amendment 1—Caroline Jones

In point 2, delete 'challenges' and replace with 'opportunities'.

Amendment 3—Caroline Jones

Delete point 4 and replace with:

Calls on the UK Government to implement a 200-mile exclusive economic zone giving UK fishermen sole access to the seas within 200 miles of the UK coastline.

Amendments 1 and 3 moved.

Diolch, Llywydd. Well, I'm very pleased that the Government has brought forward this debate today, and I find it difficult to disagree with many of the things that the Cabinet Secretary has said. I was particularly pleased to hear her say, in the course of her speech, that she will concentrate on getting a fairer deal for small-scale fishers and a fairer deal for Wales. That's what we all want in this Assembly, I'm sure. I also agree with her in her unhappiness with quotas, and I also approve of her intention to deal with historical inequalities. Unfortunately, we will not be supporting the motion today, but that's only because of one word in it. Because it says in paragraph 2 that it recognises the distinct challenges of Brexit without making any reference to the opportunities.

Now, I know that the Cabinet Secretary is one of the more open-minded of Ministers and frequently makes speeches drawing attention to the opportunities that Brexit brings, particularly to the fishing industry. There are few industries in Britain that have been more adversely affected by our EU membership over the last half century than fishing, and it's vitally important, therefore, that Brexit is capitalised upon in order to revive our coastal fishing ports and surrounding areas, and to revive the British fishing industry, including, of course, the Welsh fishing industry.

I'm pleased, in reading the report that was commissioned by the Cabinet Secretary, to see that it does actually refer there quite explicitly on page 8 to the fact that the common fisheries policy was cobbled together back in 1973 within hours of Britain's application, along with those of Ireland and Norway, to join the European Union. There was no common fisheries policy in the EU before our application to join, and this was a last-minute addition to the EU, designed purely and simply to enable other EU countries to plunder our waters in the North sea and elsewhere. And in doing so, over the last 40 years, they've utterly devastated the fishing industry of this country and the towns and villages that depend upon it.

Ninety per cent of the EU fish stocks, including the applicant countries in 1973, were in the waters of those applicants, and 80 per cent of the fish were actually in UK waters. This was an act of political piracy by the then common market, as it was called, on a grand scale. But that's all history, and now we have the opportunity to reverse the process. We've lived through the most appalling times in the last few decades of industrial fishing, and I was very pleased that the Cabinet Secretary, in the course of her speech, also referred to her intention to avoid that being repeated in Welsh waters.

Fishing is a very small industry—it's only 0.05 per cent of the UK gross domestic product—and, to that extent, it is in danger of being traded away as part of the Brexit process as well as the process that brought us into the EU in the first place. It's vitally important, therefore, that the UK Government does not sell British fishing industry down the river yet again as part of the process of negotiating our withdrawal, because it is possible that the Government will say that full access to British waters will be the price to be paid for some kind of a free trade deal, or another sort of deal, that is in the process of being cobbled together. The EU has played hardball throughout this whole process because their negotiation is not designed to improve the economic well-being of the peoples of Europe but is designed to keep tottering on with their failed federalist political project.

Now, Wales, of course, does have markedly different interests in fishing from other parts of the UK, not least because of the importance of shellfish fishing, as Simon Thomas frequently points out in his contributions to these debates, but we do have the opportunity in Wales to develop the industry in other ways as well. It isn't good for any industry to be over-dependent on particular forms of production, and diversification is an important part, therefore, of the opportunities that lie before us—

Will you take an intervention?

Yes, certainly.

Do you not accept, though, that with the agricultural produce and with the fish produce that we have within Wales, if we don't have absolutely unrestricted access to the European market where most of it goes, most of it will become adulterated, that market will actually be lost and the only people who will benefit will probably be the Welsh population who'll be forced to eat lobster every week?

Well, Pembrokeshire lobster is extremely palatable, I can tell you. But, yes, I realise that the industry is very dependent upon exports, but there's a massive opportunity for us here, because we have a massive imbalance in our trade in foodstuffs with the EU and if tariffs are idiotically imposed by the EU—not because the British Government won't be interested in doing so—then, we have huge opportunities for import substitution and changing, perhaps, the tastes of the British public to take advantage of the opportunities that will arrive.

Sadly, I haven't time to go into all the complicated arguments of trade imbalances, which I'm sure there'll be other opportunities to go into, but it is important to recognise that this gives us huge opportunities, also, to remedy the environmental disaster that has befallen the British fishing industry over the last 40 years, and I welcome the intention of the Welsh Government to play its full part in that process.

I call on David Melding to move amendment 2, tabled in the name of Paul Davies. David Melding.

Amendment 2—Paul Davies

Delete point 4 and replace with:

Welcomes the UK Government's intention to seek the greatest possible access to the single market through a comprehensive free trade agreement.

Amendment 2 moved.

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. I move the amendment. Can I congratulate Neil Hamilton on the sensitivity of his speech in emphasising that environmental concerns must override the free market? I'm sure that many of us have thought that a very, very, very important principle. Hurrah, UKIP now embrace it also.

This is a very important debate and we don't talk enough about it in the Chamber, so I'm really pleased that the Cabinet Secretary has brought it forward. I have to say, points 1 to 3 of the motion, I have no difficulty with, but the fourth one does cause problems. I have read this excellent report, 'The Implications of Brexit for Fishing Opportunities in Wales'—'opportunities'—and recognise the challenges and, in fairness, the opportunities, as Neil Hamilton has outlined, that the Brexit process brings the Welsh fishing industry and the marine environment. These are very important considerations for us to contemplate.

Brexit is an opportunity for Wales to build upon the progress made by the EU common fisheries policy and to create a more tailored and environmentally ambitious regime for Welsh fisheries management after Brexit. We also support the work of the seas and coast round-table sub-group and welcome the themes that they have put forward.

Point 4, as I've hinted, wasn't as straightforward for us, because the only way that a country is going to get full and unfettered access to the EU single market is with the acceptance of the pre-conditions such as the freedom of movement of people, goods and services. The EU has made it clear that there won't be unfettered single market access for any country that doesn't commit to these principles, as they see them, and this is a reality, indeed, that Jeremy Corbyn has publicly conceded. We should be aiming to get the greatest possible access to the single market, through negotiations with the EU in the form of a comprehensive free trade agreement, as is the one that the UK Government is currently working to achieve.

In the meantime, to ensure that we do make the best use of our seas and to ensure that we can stand on our own two feet, we need to develop an effective and sustainable policy that is appropriate for UK waters, and that respects the devolution settlement, but this will require a process based on consultation and evidence, and, again, I welcome the progress that's been made to date.

We know that the UK Government is going to bring forward a domestic fisheries Bill, which is still being consulted on, I believe, and is currently somewhat delayed due to certain difficulties between the UK and Scottish Governments. I sense that the Welsh Government is being more constructive at this stage. But I do urge them to be a strong voice, and you will certainly get our support in arguing the best case for Wales.

The nature and composition of the fishing industry varies significantly across the UK, as has already been referred to, and there's a need to recognise this in the development of UK-wide fisheries legislation and policy. I won't labour the point about our reliance on shellfish and the small size of our fleet and the smaller size of the actual boats. These are important differences. So, this does go to show that the needs of the Welsh fishing industry are different from the industry broadly across the UK. The Welsh Government needs to really be aware of this in the post-Brexit fishery arrangements and the frameworks that are now going to come forward as a result of the EU withdrawal Bill negotiations. 

We've also heard that fish are a common resource and should be managed for the public benefit. There's no other way. They can spawn in one area, feed in another and migrate extensively. This is a very, very important common resource to be managed effectively, and the results of overfishing are all too common and alarming. So, we do need to look at managing a shared common resource like the marine environment and fishing stocks.

For the future, I hope that the Government will take an industry-led approach on this matter for Wales, because I do feel that, for too long, their voices haven't been listened to effectively. I do acknowledge the frustration that was very powerfully expressed by Neil in his contribution in this respect. The research presented to us in the climate committee as part of our inquiry into fisheries post Brexit has told how the examples of Norway, Iceland and the Faroe Islands have shown that collaborative relations between Government, local authorities and the industry are vital for a thriving fisheries industry. So, we need to build on these sorts of approaches. Can I say, Llywydd, that, in approaching it this way, based on evidence and with clear Welsh need at its heart, the Government can expect to have our policy support when they're acting in the best interests of Wales? Thank you. 

I call on Simon Thomas to move amendments 4, 5 and 6, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth.

Amendment 4—Rhun ap Iorwerth

Add new point at end of motion:

Believes that there needs to be a strong voice for Wales in trade discussions in light of Brexit

Amendment 5—Rhun ap Iorwerth

Add new point at end of motion:

Notes the importance of fishing to the sustainable livelihood of Welsh coastal communities.

Amendment 6—Rhun ap Iorwerth

Add new point at end of motion:

Calls on the Welsh Government to allocate more resources to fisheries and the marine environment.

Amendments 4, 5 and 6 moved.

Thank you very much, Llywydd, and I move the amendments, and I’m very pleased to contribute to this debate. It is about time that fisheries had a full airing; it's the first debate for some time in the Assembly. I also welcome the new report prepared by the Wales Centre for Public Policy that underpins this debate this afternoon.

As has already been noted, fisheries are a relatively small sector in the Welsh economy, but they are an important part of the livelihood of Welsh coastal communities. One need only visit Porth Meudwy on a summer’s day to see the lobster fisherman who also works with sheep on the Llŷn peninsula to see land and sea coming together. That’s the kind of sustainable livelihood we want to see reflected as we draw up a new fisheries policy.

Although quotas and the way that quotas were dealt with under the common fisheries policy have taken a great deal of attention over the past few years in discussing exiting the European Union, and although I am quite happy to say, and have said in the past, that I wasn’t a fan of the EU CFP, the fact is, when you look at Wales, that 92 per cent of Welsh fisheries' output comes from non-quota fisheries. Of course, we are talking particularly there about shellfish.

It’s also true to say that before we had the powers, 88 per cent of Welsh fishing quotas were sold to Spanish businesses, not by the European Union, but by the UK Government. They approved that. Now, of course, we have greater control over our own quotas, but only 10 per cent of the Welsh quota is caught in Welsh waters at the moment. So, there’s quite some way to go to retake ownership of that area, and we have to do that in a way that is sustainable environmentally, and which also recognises the habitat and the relationship between land and sea.

Just to give you an example of how important this is: as we look at a few communities, we still export £5 million-worth of whelks abroad, but they don’t go to the European Union, they go to Korea. If you've visited the fish processing plant in Newquay, you’ll have seen the effect of that industry, but you will also know that it is reliant on agreements that the EU has beyond the member states, and that’s a market that can be very important to some communities too.

In that context, I would ask the Cabinet Secretary to consider putting a moratorium on any sale of quota outwith Wales until the situation is clearer, as we discuss these new contracts. That’s why I was so eager to understand whether the Government had a new policy that any new quotas in terms of fish that return, as it were, would be in terms of buying and selling or on the basis of a quota that was based on the environment alone. Because, in my view, the Welsh Government must hold that fishing quota for ensuing years, until we see clearly what the environmental impact is, who can fish our fishing grounds, and what kind of fisheries trade agreement we will have.

We will need access to fisheries beyond Welsh waters. Only 20 per cent of Welsh quota species are landed here in Welsh ports—I know that the climate change committee will be visiting Milford Haven very soon—and 73 per cent of Welsh quota species are landed in other ports within the EU. We can’t, and we don’t have the resources to change that fundamentally over the next few years. So, international negotiations are going to be extremely important but, in the meantime, I would appeal to the Cabinet Secretary to consider placing a moratorium on any further sale of quota.

The second part of the debate that is important to us is that there are sufficient resources to deliver this. I visited, along with Rhun ap Iorwerth, the Prince Madog, which is a research vessel that we have in Wales, run by Bangor University. Clearly, we need more investment in that area. I think the Cabinet Secretary recognised in the Finance Committee last week that we need more investment in this area. We don’t understand enough about our own seas: where the fish are, what their habitats are, and how we can sustain these habitats. So, we need to invest in the research as well as the safeguarding and policing elements of any fishing as we proceed.

And the final point in our amendments—[Interruption.] Okay, I think there may be time.

I just want to very much endorse the comments you've just made. I visited the school of oceanic sciences in Bangor last year. They spoke to me about the Prince Madog. Of course, it is in dual ownership, and I raised it with the Welsh Government. They represented that as a reason not to intervene, rather than a mechanism they need to follow to ensure this ship continues, but I fully endorse you: this ship must continue its great work.

I’m sure that Rhun, in a short debate soon, will be discussing the future of that particular vessel. But I accept your point, of course.

If I could just conclude: in the current context, it is very important that we fight for a non-tariff approach for Welsh fisheries. I will just close by quoting James Wilson who is responsible for Bangor Mussel Producers—I’m sure that some of you will have tasted them on the banks of the Menai—and he described his business in these terms:

'There’s a wagon waiting on the quayside when we land. We take the mussels off the boat and they’re put in the wagon, the wagon drives away. And then it's a 26 to 18-hour transit time from north Wales to northern France or the south of Holland. If they order from me on a Monday, then they expect the wagon to arrive on a Tuesday because they want to...sell them on a Wednesday. It’s that seamless. Anything that introduces delay or uncertainty or whatever you call it in that process becomes an issue in terms of the supply chain. That’s not just a small problem. Nobody wants to eat mussels that are gone off.'

I think there were many wild promises made by the Brexiteers. One of them was that leaving the EU would enable the UK to become an independent coastal state, which we were nearly 50 years ago, but I think that completely ignores some of the realities of life, one of which is that fish don't need passports to cross boundaries, and whatever policies are adopted by the European Union once we've left will affect the numbers of fish that are swimming in our waters, just as much as they did before.

I agree that the EU fisheries policy is not one of the most successful policies completed by the EU, and that was because politicians were always interfering with what were essential environmental and sustainability measures. So, always at the last-minute negotiations at 4.00 a.m. people would water down the proposals that had been put together by the experts. So, we are where we are for a lot of reasons, but not because we were or weren't a member of the European Union.

As Simon Thomas has already pointed out, most of the fish that is landed by Welsh fishermen is not subject to quotas at all, but, nevertheless, we need to ensure that the agreements that are reached with the European Union don't avoid or lose the trade that is already experienced by some of our Welsh ports. I understand that a third of the value of fish landed in Welsh ports comes from EU vessels, and presumably we want to continue to have the benefit of that trade. If half the boats in Milford Haven are Belgian boats, if we don't have a sensible arrangement with our European neighbours, then that will be to the detriment of those ports and the trade that brings.

But I absolutely agree with David Melding and Simon Thomas, and indeed the Cabinet Secretary, that environmental sustainability is a must-do in everything that we are doing relating to the fish because, if we don't, we simply will kill the golden goose. Obviously, it would be wonderful if more Welsh people were embracing the wonders of Welsh shellfish, which David Melding has waxed lyrical on often, and we need to remember that import substitution has got a lot of merits. Oysters used to be the main ingredient for scouse amongst poor people in the port of Liverpool. I'm afraid oysters are now a rare delicacy; so we don't want the same thing to happen to other shellfish, like mussels.

I have to raise the dreadful case of the scallop fishermen a few years ago, who were fined a derisory £50,000 for plundering Welsh scallop beds, when the catch alone was worth £400,000, in the Cardigan Bay special area of conservation. So, this remains a major issue regardless of whether we're in or out of the EU. We have to ensure that people aren't just flouting the law around maintaining the viability of our resources.

Obviously, one of the other massive issues that we face is the fact that all fish nowadays—you can see the plastic detectable in all fish, apparently, that is being landed. That, of course, is really undermining our enjoyment of fish. So, we need to have both of these policies going hand in hand: eliminating plastics from our oceans, and ensuring that people aren't over-fishing, in order to ensure that Welsh fishing people will continue to be able to earn a decent living from fishing—what is a very dangerous job, and something that we will continue to want to enjoy for the future.

I just wanted to make a contribution based on some of the evidence that was presented to the External Affairs and Additional Legislation Committee, of which I'm a member—and some of that evidence as recently as yesterday—and to ask Welsh Government how it views this alongside the Wales Centre for Public Policy report. Can I begin by saying, though, that I think this must be one of the first—if not the first—Welsh Government Brexit debate that includes the word 'opportunities', which is a positive word, albeit in the title of the report that has prompted it? At last, I think we seem to have reached a place where we can start talking about opportunities to be won from a sensible Brexit, after years of doom and gloom being the only tradable commodities in this Chamber.

Now, I think we need to start concentrating and start planning for carving out some opportunities, looking for the fact—and allowing for the fact, of course—that we don't know where we might find them at this point in the negotiations. Because whether you view this as the crumbs and the ashes or the gold that paves the streets, I don't particularly care; I just want us to start doing it, and to recognise that free trade with the EU and free trade with the rest of the planet is not a binary choice, and to support the Prime Minister in her attempts to get the best of both. Because we can't eat principles, and intransigence will not slake our thirst, and we can leave the European Union with a comprehensive free-trade agreement and a pragmatic menu that won't please the ultra-carnivores, won't please the ultra-vegans, but can still keep both parties at the table, healthy, well-fed and free to eat at other tables.

Now, the freeing up of the UK fishing fleet is absolutely one of those opportunities, and, acknowledging dissatisfaction with quotas, in our committee, we were told by Professor Richard Barnes that, and I quote him, drifting further from the continent is definitely an appealing option for fisheries. And not least in Wales, where perhaps at least we could consider throwing around ideas about how we can make the most of this—whether it's feasible, even, to grow that small part of our fishing fleet that currently falls outside the operation of quotas. That, of course, will take a determined voice from Wales—somebody with something valuable to say. But that is true also, Cabinet Secretary, of our smaller vessels, and I'm glad you mentioned those earlier, because, obviously, 90 per cent of our Welsh fish catch is outside the EU quota system, as we've already heard. That strong voice is going to be particularly important for tailored environmental support as well, and I endorse what, actually, David Melding and Jenny Rathbone have said about the importance of sustainable fishing and the fishing environment for this.

We heard in our committee yesterday that the ministerial fora that brings the relevant Cabinet Secretaries, Ministers and so on from the four national administrations together to help inform the JMC (EN) work particularly well in the case of DEFRA. You mentioned those conversations, Cabinet Secretary, in your opening speech, and I hope that you can confirm for us that that relationship works well and that your voice is heard during the conversations you have. Because as a Member, of course, of South Wales West, with its productive shellfish seaboard, particularly in the west, my constituents will hold you to those reassurances that you've given today, that non-quota stocks won't be overlooked in moves to influence the UK Government on that exciting bigger picture.

We also heard that, as of yesterday, the Welsh Government's Brexit transition fund—that's £50 million this year alone—has paid out just £2.1 million to the food sector so far in order to protect it from the effects of Brexit. Now, Professor Barnes told us—and I think we will agree with this, won't we—that the overriding importance is to make sure that there is a market for our fishing products. Transition is a period to start looking for those new markets, those new opportunities, even if we can't access them straight away. So, this £50 million transition fund can be used to start scoping out new markets, planning how we might start looking now for those opportunities, and exploiting the connections that Welsh Government has promised us through its network of offices around the globe. I urge our fishing fleet, and all our food and drink producers, actually, not just to recognise the challenges presented by the range of possible Brexits, as referred to in the motion, but to start thinking about the opportunities and to use some of this £50 million to start identifying them. Thank you.  

For over 40 years, ever since the then Minister, Geoffrey Rippon, deliberately misled the British public by promising that British fishing grounds would remain sacrosanct if we entered what was then the Common Market, our former sovereign fishing grounds have been plundered by foreign fishing fleets. Under the common fishing policy we lost almost all control over the fishing quotas, even though, prior to us entering the EU, we held 80 per cent of Europe's fishing stocks. The CFP has been a total disaster for fishing stocks, and it was only over the last few years that the policy of jettisoning any non-quota fish back to the sea has been, to some extent, brought under control. It is estimated that literally billions of perfectly edible fish were dumped at sea every year under CFP rules. Not only was this a particularly wasteful practice, it was also an environmental disaster. Contrary to what David Melding said about our credentials in UKIP, it is UKIP that has been making the point of how disastrous this CFP has been to fishing stock.

I appreciate your science-led approach in this matter, and I do hope you extend it to other areas of your policy.

We're realists in this world, David. We won't follow—[Interruption.]

Will he give way? 

As far as Wales—. Yes, David, of course. 

I do thank the Member for giving way, and I appreciate what he just said about UKIP's position. Are you therefore as hugely disappointed as I am that your former leader, Nigel Farage, attended one of the 42 meetings of the committee that dealt with fisheries?

That's terrible. That's terrible.

Yes, and quite frankly it was because he read very carefully many of the reports, which is what most of the other MEPs did not do, and that's why he came to many of the conclusions he came to, actually. 

As far as Wales is concerned, it suffered disproportionately from CFP policies because most of the Welsh fleet is under 10m in size. So we only have 1 per cent of the UK fishing quota or 0.02 per cent of the European quota, and I agree fully with Simon Thomas's points with regard to retention of any new quotas coming to Wales. 

After Brexit, the UK should return to the 200-mile exclusion zone as advocated by the United Nations law of the sea, freeing up huge areas of the seas around Britain to British fishing fleets. Incidentally, these are some of the richest fishing grounds in the world. Welsh fishermen will then be able to invest in much larger vessels, perhaps aided by Welsh Government grants, which could lead to a vastly expanded Welsh fishing industry. Post Brexit, the UK could insist all fish caught in British waters be landed in the UK, which would lead to the establishment of a whole array of onshore fish processing facilities. The proposed licensing of foreign vessels until such time as we can rebuild our own fishing fleets could also create revenue to help our fishing industry explore other markets worldwide. Mick Antoniw mentioned that there are other markets worldwide. Ireland's fish product exports to China rose 56 per cent last year alone, and exports—[Interruption.] Yes.

Thank you for taking the intervention, but isn't the point this: that, unless we have unfettered access to the European market, where the majority of our produce goes, it will actually kill off our fishing industry and our shellfish industry, unless we have that? So, isn't the logic of what you're arguing that we must have unfettered access?

Well, I think that's something we would all, actually, want, Mick, but that is not at the expense of the European Union telling us exactly what we have to do, and at the expense of unlimited access to us by any number of people, which is exactly what the people of the Valleys voted against. We will not sacrifice that in order to get free access to the European Union. 

The proponents of the totally negative aspects of Brexit on the Welsh fishing industry totally ignore—and I do not include the Cabinet Secretary in that statement—the entrepreneurship of our fishing fraternity and the huge benefits Brexit could bring to our, let's face it, ailing Welsh fishing industry.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for environment and rural affairs to reply to the debate. Lesley Griffiths. 

Diolch, Llywydd. I'd like to thank Members for their contributions, and I'll turn to some of the points they raised in a moment.

I'll just start with the amendments. I ask the Assembly to oppose amendment 1, and recognise the very real and distinct challenges that do face the fishing industry; oppose amendment 2 on the basis the Welsh Government's been very clear it expects full, unfettered access to the EU market after Brexit, and anything short of this has the potential to harm the industry; and oppose amendment 3 on the basis that an exclusive economic zone will have little or no positive impact on the Welsh fleet and it actually could negatively affect trade negotiations with the EU. I'd ask Members to support amendments 4, 5 and 6. I believe a strong Welsh voice in negotiations is of vital importance, and I of course recognise the importance of this industry to our coastal communities. The Welsh Government has made significant investment over previous years to the sector and we will work hard to ensure it gets its fair share in the future.

Simon Thomas referred to evidence I gave last week to the Finance Committee. I do agree it is an area where we need to continue to put extra funding and resources, but Members will be aware that we've got new enforcement vessels currently being built. I agree around the research—I think that's an area where we need to have some significant input—but we already work very closely with Bangor University and have use of the Prince Madog, which helps us to undertake marine research. 

Neil Hamilton and David Rowlands referred to environmental disaster. Well, I absolutely disagree with that. UK fisheries—as a result of the CFP, it means most of our fisheries are being managed sustainably. We're working towards MSC accreditation of our fisheries—that's a quality mark—and we will continue to do that. 

David Melding, we do very proactively engage with the fishing sector. I mentioned that they sit on the ministerial advisory group. I have regular meetings with the fishing sector. So, I think we do that anyway, but of course we can always do more. Suzy Davies talked about the word 'opportunities' for the first time. As even Neil Hamilton recognised, I do use the word 'opportunities'. It's very hard sometimes to look for them, but I think we have to do that. I engage fully in the quadrilaterals with my UK Government counterparts. The next one's on Thursday in London and it's really important that Welsh Government sits around that table. You also mentioned the EU transition fund. My portfolio did very well in the first tranche, and while you say it's only £2.1 million, I have to say that my food and drink companies are very happy with the funding that we've already got. 

Several Members talked about shellfish and seafood. I've just today announced a new £1 million project to market to both domestic and international markets. The UK market will not absorb the volume of shellfish that we have been exporting, so we need to look for new markets. I was at Liverpool port yesterday, having discussions there around the amount of shellfish that is exported there, particularly from north Wales, and clearly we don't want to see it sitting on the docks. You made a very good point about James Wilson and Bangor mussels. 

I also wanted to be clear to Simon Thomas about the quota: it was Welsh fishing businesses that sold the quota to Spanish boats. It is a public good and I've no intention of allowing quota to be sold out of Wales. We don't own it, we're guardians of it, and it's really important for our future generations. I'm certainly happy to consider a moratorium on the sale and movement of quota outside of Wales and I think we could include that in a future fisheries policy.

So, I'm very pleased with today's debate. I think we all must recognise that the future is very challenging for this sector, but also there is great potential and opportunities, and I will continue to work hard to ensure that we are delivering for Wales over the coming months. I welcome Members' support.

The proposal is to agree amendment 1. Does any Member object? [Objection.] I will defer voting on this item until voting time.

Voting deferred until voting time.