Questions now from the party spokespeople. Plaid Cymru’s spokesperson, Llyr Gruffydd.

Thank you, Llywydd. Back on 7 November last year, Minister, when we heard the news that the Planning Inspectorate for England and Wales intended to scrap the role of the executive director for Wales, you agreed with me that it was about time for us to have an independent planning inspectorate for Wales. I think 'now is the time' were the words you used here in the Chamber. Since then, can you tell us what steps you’ve taken to deliver the Welsh Government’s intention of creating an independent inspectorate for Wales?

Well, obviously, I haven't had responsibility for planning since the new Government came in at the beginning of December. That now falls in the portfolio of Julie James.

Well, can you confirm therefore that that is the Government’s policy still? Because you were the Minister at the time, and I would hope that commitments that you made were ones that the Government would adhere to. So, I would like to hear that as an answer to that particular question.

Another area where Wales needs to have more influence and more of a grasp on its own future, in my view, is energy, and I would always call for the devolution of more powers. But the Institute of Welsh Affairs report was published recently on re-energising Wales, and, in my view, this provides a firm foundation for the development of an energy policy that is fit for purpose here in Wales. I particularly welcome the emphasis on community ownership as something that’s particularly positive, and I am aware that the Welsh Government says that, by 2020, you want new renewable projects to have an element of local ownership. But there is a demand here, in this report, for every scheme over 5 MW to have between 5 per cent and 33 per cent in public ownership. So, I would ask whether that is something that the Government would be willing to adopt. And, more broadly, of course, what other elements of this report appeal to you, and how are you going to ensure that elements of the report are delivered?

If I can just go to the first point, I'm not aware of any change in policy, but I will ask my colleague Julie James to write to you to give you that assurance.

In relation to renewable energies, Llyr Huws Gruffydd will be very aware of the targets that I set for renewable energy 12 months last December, and, clearly, community ownership plays a huge part in that. I am very pleased with the number of projects that have gone through the pipeline—if you pardon the pun—since I've been in portfolio. Clearly, if we want to reach our targets, community energy ownership has a massive element to play. And I've certainly been very keen that officials work with groups, because I think it's important that there is some hand holding—some communities need it more than others—but I think that advice should be there. I am aware of the IWA report, and I'm certainly looking at what we can pick out of it to assist us in reaching our targets.

Well, I would ask you to do more than just pick out certain elements; I would be eager to see this forming the foundation for an energy policy that is far more ambitious and radical than we’ve had from the Welsh Government to date. And, in that spirit, I would be eager for you as Minister to be leading from the front in trying to deliver much of what’s contained here. Because I am convinced there is a consensus across parties for us to go further than the Government has stated it’s willing to go at present. I also feel that this does provide a precedent for us to do that. So, in that spirit, would you be willing, as I say, to lead from the front by perhaps inviting the parties to come together to discuss energy policy in the context of this report, and the broader sector too, because we have seen reports such as this come and go? I’m aware of reports from the environment committee of the last Assembly, such as ‘A Smarter Energy Future for Wales’, which are gathering dust. I don’t want to see the IWA report suffering the same fate. So, the responsibility is on your shoulders as Minister now to ensure that much of what’s contained here is delivered, and I propose to you that we collaborate in order to move along those lines.

Well, I'm always very happy to collaborate. I don't have all the good ideas; no-one does. It's really important that we do work together, and, certainly, I have worked with you and your predecessor on this issue. I do think that we've shown leadership and I do think—. When I sat down with officials and other stakeholders to come forward with those targets, there was a little bit of eyebrow raising that we were being overly ambitious, but I think the most important thing about targets is that (1) they're reached and (2) they're realistic. You don't want to set targets that you're not going to achieve. But, of course, they're just targets; of course, we can exceed them.

We've now got over 67,000 renewable energy projects across Wales, which, again, I think is really showing how we are encouraging these projects. Again, we're providing funding and we're providing advice, but I'm very happy at any time to sit down with you and work out what we can do.

The Conservatives' spokesperson, Andrew R.T. Davies.

Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. Minister, you've brought forward the proposals for new regulations to reduce water pollution. Obviously, we all want to see a better environment and a cleaner environment. These new regulations are in effect a cut-and-paste of the nitrate vulnerable zones regulations, and they will be applied across the whole of Wales if they are implemented. What assessment have you made of the economic, environmental, social and cultural impacts through any regulatory impact assessment you might or might not have done to date?

We are currently undertaking a great deal of work in this area. I don't accept that they're just a cut-and-paste. You'll be aware of the detailed work I've done particularly with the farming unions and other stakeholders to come forward with a voluntary approach. I was very keen to have a voluntary approach in the first instance. Unfortunately, last year, we saw about a 200 per cent increase in agricultural pollution incidents, which I think is unacceptable.FootnoteLink I think the majority of farmers agree that it's unacceptable and that we have to do more. So, unfortunately, I had to come forward with plans to bring the new regulations. I'm still very keen to work with stakeholders and with the farming unions—the National Farmers Union, in particular. There are people from the NFU who I am continuing to work with to see what more we can do. But I think the number of major polluting incidents we saw is very damaging for our reputation and I think the majority of people would agree with that.

But what is concerning is that there was no regulatory impact assessment done before you brought these proposals forward, because surely that should be done to assess, as I put to you earlier, the economic, environmental, social and cultural impacts that these proposals could have. And it's deeply alarming that no impact assessment was undertaken, because this potentially could shut down many currently viable rural businesses that create employment opportunities and produce high-quality food. So, that is bitterly disappointing. How can you defend that position, Minister—that the  regulatory impact assessment was not done before you made the announcement?

As I say, a great deal of impact assessment had been done. We had extensive consultations. I was accused of not going out to consultation. It had gone out to consultation before I came into portfolio in 2016. I wanted to work to try and find a voluntary approach. That was absolutely my priority, but I could not just sit back and see the increase in the number of major polluting incidents. Every weekend, I was getting several e-mails, as were other Members, with photographs of these incidents. So, it's very important that we continue to work with stakeholders to try and find an approach forward. I did not want to bring in the regulations as strictly as we had to, but unfortunately, because of the significant increase in the number of incidents, I've had to do that.

Regrettably, this does seem to be regulation by e-mail, to be honest, with a press story, rather than a proper assessment, because, obviously, the Government, to its credit, had been working with the industry and had indicated that they'd reached a satisfactory accommodation with the industry on how a voluntary approach would be best suited to tackle these pollution incidences. I accept the point that we need to take action, and the industry itself accepts that point. But if you take it on a step further and you do actually implement these across country—and they are virtually a cut-and-paste of the NVZ regulations—when other parts of the United Kingdom, such as Northern Ireland, introduced similar measures 10 years ago—there was a comprehensive package of support to allow the industry to make that transition, of 60 per cent support from that particular administration in Northern Ireland—we've also got to make sure that the planning system works in unison and doesn't actually block these improvements. So, accepting that you will bring forward these regulations, how will you be seeking to make sure that the planning system works with the industry and the new regulations, and, importantly, that there is support there to make the transition that other parts of the United Kingdom have put forward to help their agricultural industries?

The Minister wishes to note that rather than a 200 per cent increase, she was actually referring to the fact that last year saw an increase in agricultural pollution incidents to a figure of nearly 200.

There's certainly not policy by e-mail. The point I was trying to make is that these pollution incidents are very visible, so to have photographs being sent to you—and I'm sure you have received them; I know the farming unions receive them and I see who is copied into the e-mails, so I know that a great number of people, probably, in the Chamber have seen them—. It is a very visible thing, and it is damaging, and particularly—you know, post Brexit, it's going to be even more damaging. And I think—. It's going to have an effect on the work we've got under way, for instance, on sustainable brand values for Welsh products, so it needs sorting and it needs sorting now.

In relation to support, I said right from the beginning that I would be happy to provide financial support. What I'm not happy to do is for people to bring their slurry pits up to the legal requirement. That should have been done anyway. But I accept that, if we bring these regulations in, we would have to provide some sort of financial support and I will certainly continue to look at what we will bring in. But, as I say, I am very keen to carry on working with stakeholders to see if we can have a voluntary approach alongside the regulatory reform.

UKIP spokesperson, Neil Hamilton.

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Llywydd. Last July, I raised with the Minister the subject of non-stun slaughter and in particular representations that had been made to her by the British Veterinary Association, to which she said that she'd had a discussion with them a couple of weeks ago and asked officials to look at the information they'd brought forward in detail. It's now nine months since those meetings took place. I wonder if the Minister could bring us up to date, and ask if she's reached any conclusions.

I had a meeting with the Food Standards Agency not too long ago—it may have been before Christmas—to discuss the recent slaughter method report that they'd carried out to identify what the current position was between the industry and providing consumers with information that they would need to make informed choices through voluntary arrangements. At the current time, the position is still the same: there are no red meat slaughterhouses undertaking non-stun slaughter in Wales.

I accept that point that the Minister's just made, but I recently had a disturbing experience of watching some film footage from a supposedly non-stun slaughterhouse in England, where there were horrific images of animals being maltreated—kicked, stabbed, taunted—before finally being slaughtered in a most barbaric way without stunning. Now, that was caught on CCTV, so we were able to find out about it. And, although we're told that there are no non-stun slaughterhouses in Wales, we don't have CCTV in all slaughterhouses and it is possible that such scenes could take place in Wales. Will the Minister now take steps to ensure that CCTV is installed in all slaughterhouses in Wales?

Well, obviously, you referred to a slaughterhouse in England. We've got some of the highest animal welfare standards in the world in Wales. We have very strict regulations. There are a number of controls in all our slaughterhouses; there's a vet present in every slaughterhouse. The majority— certainly all the large slaughterhouses in Wales—have got CCTV. I am looking and I have provided funding to some of the smaller ones that haven't that do wish to do so. I visited a small abattoir in the constituency of the Llywydd last summer to see for myself the standards, and I reiterate that we have some of the highest animal welfare standards in Wales. And I can assure you, with the other checks, you don't need CCTV to know that that's not happening in Wales.

I'm not making accusations against any operators of slaughterhouses in Wales, but I'm just saying that, as a precautionary measure, it would be wise to move towards a situation where we do have CCTV and there is, therefore, incontrovertible evidence if mistreatment of animals does take place, and that's an elementary precaution. The Minister frequently says to me when I'm asking her about global warming issues that she wants Wales to lead the world, even though nobody, really, is following. And although we may take the view that, currently in Wales, we don't have a problem with mistreatment of animals in slaughterhouses, it would be wise for us to compel and provide the means to comply with such a compulsion to slaughterhouses to provide a record of what goes on in those places, so that the public at large, which is very concerned about the animal welfare issues involved in non-stun slaughter, can be reassured that for the foreseeable future—indeed, forever—we will not develop and cannot develop such a problem in Wales.

As I say, there are very few slaughterhouses in Wales that don't have CCTV. I did make funding available. We're certainly looking to see if we should make it mandatory; that's something we are considering at the moment. The industry itself, I think, has really led in this area, and they do publish extensive guidance on good practice, on protecting animal welfare at the time of killing. That information is available online, so should any member of the public wish to see it, it is available online.