Questions now from the party spokespeople. The Conservative spokesperson, Andrew R.T. Davies.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. Minister, I do understand the position you've taken on farm plastics and the disposal of farm plastics. It is a commercial decision, in the relationship between operators and farm businesses. But the regulations that surround farm plastics and the storage of farm plastics is obviously a Government regulation. Have you given any consideration to being a facilitator to try and overcome some of the blockages in the system at the moment, which obviously mean that there is a considerable amount of on-farm plastics now being stored, because the market, basically, has dried up on its disposal? As I said, I'm not looking to you to put financial solutions in place, but there is a role for Government in understanding the regulations that they impose on the industry and trying to be a facilitator to try and break the deadlock so that a solution can be found.

Thank you. You are right—it is a commercial matter between the farmers, the collectors of the plastic farm waste and the plants that can, and do, recycle it. Obviously, farmers have a responsibility to ensure their plastic is disposed of correctly.

I think farmers also recognise, of course, it's important to collect and treat the waste, and all other businesses have to pay for their recycling here in Wales. Having said that, officials have been in discussions with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. DEFRA, specifically, didn't include farm plastic film on the list of candidate products for extended producer responsibility. We thought that was something that perhaps should be covered in a UK- wide scheme, and I've asked officials to continue to look at that. I can't guarantee that DEFRA will do it, but I think it's something that we could make, perhaps, some progress on.

We could look at introducing an EPR scheme ourselves. So, again, I've asked officials to look at the options for that.

Any assistance, obviously, the Government can give to being a facilitator to solving the problem, I think, would be very welcome, as I said, given the amount of on-farm plastics that are used and, ultimately, moving to a scenario in years to come where plastics aren't used and there are alternatives.

But I would like to take you up on the statistics that you gave me in the last questioning that we did on farm pollution. You very kindly corrected the record, because, at that time, you said there'd been a 200 per cent increase in the instances when, in fact, it was just under 200 instances. If you look back over the 20 years' worth of figures that Natural Resources Wales provide, they clearly show that the parameters are, in a good year, about 100 instances, and, in a bad year, under 200—194 is the highest, which, I believe, was hit in 2012-13. Given that these parameters have been relatively constant over the last 20 years, do you think that it is right that you've brought such draconian measures in rather than listening to, obviously, your own working group, which you set up yourself, that set up this document for you to consider with cross-sector buy-in to the recommendations that were brought forward? And, surely, the recommendations contained in this report offer a blueprint to go forward for the agricultural industry, given the evidence that this group collated.

Thank you. Llywydd, I also wrote to you and placed a copy of that letter in the library for Members to be able to access.

I don't see it as draconian. I have heard that word used. We have seen an increase in the number of major polluting incidents, and I'm sure you yourself have seen them, and, certainly, in my discussions with the farming unions, they themselves accept that this is unacceptable and more needs to be done.

I've had a lot of correspondence on the incidents. The new regulations will come into force next January. There will be transitional periods for some elements. But you will have heard me say in my answer to Joyce Watson that I'm continuing to work with the group that you refer to. Obviously, I've had their report. NFU Cymru have employed somebody specifically to look at this. I've met with her, and officials are still continuing to have discussions. But I think it's really important that we stop these major agricultural pollutants. I'm also the Minister for environment, and I have a lot of correspondence from people, particularly about the state of rivers, following some of these major incidents.

I think we'd all agree that we want to see pollution incidents pushed back and down, and, hopefully, towards zero level, but, sadly, we know that's most probably impossible. But, as I said, with the 20-year projection, which is shared by Natural Resources Wales, there hasn't been this massive increase and, in fact, it's in line with pollution instances over those 20 years. As I said, you did bring this working group together, and they did bring a blueprint out, which had recommendations contained in it. You chose not to sign up to those recommendations and go for the belt-and-braces approach that, basically, could put many businesses out in vulnerable communities the length and breadth of Wales because those regulations are so draconian.

I'd be pleased to understand—I'm sure many would be pleased to understand—why you did not take up the recommendations within this report that was brought together from all sections of interested parties and, as I said, was a blueprint to take these regulations forward, which everyone has signed up to do, to drive down agricultural pollution across Wales.

Well, when I first came into post, which was three years ago, I was very keen to have a voluntary approach. I worked with the farming unions, with other stakeholders, to do that, but we did see an increase in the agricultural pollution. And we're still seeing—[Interruption.] No, we're still seeing a significant number of major polluting incidents. We had one—I think it was the week before last or the week before that—where the entire slurry store, unfortunately, was there polluting the land and the water. So, I think it's really important that we get to grips with this, particularly in light of Brexit. This will damage our sustainable value brand if we don't get on top of it now.

Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Llyr Gruffydd.

Thank you, Llywydd. Minister, I want to refer, if I may, to the consultation document of your own Government on disposing of radioactive waste—geological disposal. Now, I will quote from that document, and it says:

'Radioactive waste disposal is a devolved matter—the Welsh Government is responsible for determining the policy for this within Wales'.

But, looking at paragraph 99 of Schedule 7B to the Government of Wales Act 2006, that states that powers over nuclear energy and nuclear installations are reserved. That reservation includes nuclear safety and accountability for nuclear incidents. There are no exceptions as far as I can see, no carve-outs, as there are in the Scottish context, and, in the explanatory note of the Government of Wales Act 2017, it states entirely clearly in paragraph 99 that it reserves all related issues to nuclear energy and nuclear installations. Can you therefore confirm to us this afternoon that legislating on disposal of radioactive material is beyond the competence of this Assembly, which is contrary to what you claim in your own consultation document?

The radioactive waste management disposal, which I think is what you're referring to, is not the same as nuclear waste. The higher activity radioactive waste has been created in Wales, and that's why Welsh Government agreed to take part in the UK Government programme for its disposal.

Well, perhaps you can explain to us, therefore, what the role of the Welsh Government is in looking at where that nuclear waste, which has been in the news recently, is going. Because it’s clear to me that that is not devolved. Indeed, paragraph 3(2)(4) of Schedule 23 to the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2016, and I will quote in English, states:

'If it appears to the Secretary of State'—

on a UK level—

'that adequate facilities are not available for the safe disposal or accumulation of radioactive waste, the Secretary of State may—

(a) provide such facilities, or

(b) make arrangements for their provision by such persons as the Secretary of State may think fit.'

I will ask again, therefore: does the Welsh Government have sufficient powers in order to veto any site that is identified for nuclear waste—radioactive waste, to make the distinction that you made in your previous response? Because, again, it appears to me that the Secretary of State has the final say.

We made it very clear as a Government—and certainly the UK Government as well—that we didn't identify any sites, the UK Government didn't identify any sites. It was for a community to decide if they wanted to be a site. So, the work that was undertaken, the consultation meetings—well, they were then done on a webinar, as you know, one in south Wales and one in north Wales—were for communities to come forward if they wanted to put their community forward. It's not for the Welsh Government to veto or the UK Government to veto; it's absolutely for the communities themselves. And we did not have a view on whether there should be any site here in Wales; it was for the community to be willing to host it and in those discussions going forward. So, it's not for anybody—either Government—to veto it.

Well, I don’t quite understand the point that you’re making, because, at the end of the day, it's a decision for Government. I understand the fact that you wish to respect the views of communities, and I would agree with you in that regard, but the environmental licensing regulations make it entirely clear, and I will read again:

'If it appears to the Secretary of State that adequate facilities are not available'—

that is, where a community doesn’t want responsibility in this area—

'the Secretary of State may—

(a) provide such facilities'—

a veto, so it’s going to happen come what may—

'or

(b) make arrangements for their provision by such persons as the Secretary of State may think fit.'

It appears to me, Minister, that there is confusion here. We should have far greater clarity, and certainly the Welsh Government should should be far clearer on where responsibility lies, and throwing it back and saying, ‘Well, it’s not up to us; it’s up to the community’—the principle is fine, but, at the end of the day, you are the Minister, you are the Government, and you should be making the case for the people of Wales.

So, I absolutely agree that it's right that we manage the waste now. I don't think we should leave it for future generations. Certainly, when I came into this portfolio and this was a question that was sort of bubbling around, and there would be these consultations going forward, I felt it was absolutely right that we dealt with it now, even though it's probably in 20 years' time that this would actually happen, rather than leaving it for future generations. My understanding is, as I set out to you in my earlier answers to your questions, that it would be for a community to be willing to host it, it wasn't for Governments—either Government; UK Government or Welsh Government—to impose on it. I'd be very happy to write to the Member if that is not clarifying his questions enough, but, certainly, a geological disposal facility can only be built in Wales if a community is willing to host it.FootnoteLink

Information further to Plenary