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

Thank you, Llywydd. Minister, you will be aware that Plaid Cymru has been campaigning diligently against the M4 black route and, of course, we welcomed the decision when it came not to proceed with that specific proposal. We believe that spending at least £1.5 billion of capital on generating more traffic would be unwise. But, as that money is now not going to be spent for that purpose, can I ask you what case you are making within Cabinet for that funding to be used to strengthen green infrastructure in Wales, to reduce emissions and to tackle climate change? Because £1.5 billion, of course, could, for example, transform the renewable energy sector in Wales, which would have potential to generate income for the public purse in years to come. So, can you tell us what case you have made for using that capital funding for an alternative purpose?

So, those discussions will be taking place. I have had discussions around climate change and more funding for climate change across Government. I've had that conversation with the Minister for Finance directly. The specific funding that you refer to—the £1.5 billion in relation to the black route—obviously, you'll be aware that the Minister for Economy and Transport made an announcement around the group that he's setting up to look at alternatives. So, clearly, some of that funding—the majority of that funding; I don't know what will be the outcome of that review—will need to be used for those alternative plans. But I think all my ministerial colleagues, and many of them sit on the decarbonisation ministerial task and finish group, accept that if we are to mitigate climate change—and the whole point of declaring a climate emergency was not just to galvanise others into action—clearly, as a Government, we need to look at our plans and policies. So, those will be ongoing discussions.

Fine, and you're quite right to say that the whole purpose of declaring a climate emergency is to see transformational change, if truth be told. And it is quite some time since you made that declaration as a Government—it's been some weeks now. You've made some written statements and a few oral references to that declaration, but we haven't seen anything transformational as of yet in terms of your work and your responsibilities as a Minister. Now, I'm sure you would agree that that's not just your role; it's a role for every Cabinet member. And I, as others have mentioned before now, would want to see every Minister making a statement here in this Chamber explaining exactly how their work will change and how their priorities within their portfolios will change as a result of the declaration of a climate emergency.

But just to return to your responsibilities, and this is something that I've raised with you previously—and I hope that, since I've raised it with you previously, you've had an opportunity to give it some consideration, but I want to know what new direction you have given, following the declaration of a climate emergency, to the bodies within your remit. I'm thinking of Natural Resources Wales, Hybu Cig Cymru—there's a range of bodies that you fund and are responsible for. So, do you intend to amend their remit letters, because, as you said yourself, the whole purpose of the declaration of a climate emergency is to have that transformational change? If you don't do that, then people will feel that nothing has changed and that it's business as usual for this Government.

Well, it's certainly not business as usual. You will have heard me say that the low-carbon delivery plan, which was launched just in March, which contains a 100 policies and proposals, is the foundation for us reaching our carbon emissions target and our carbon budget, but I have asked officials to review those 100 policies and proposals in light of (1) the advice that we received from the UK Committee on Climate Change, which I think was a couple of weeks after we declared the emergency. A you're quite right—I think that, across Government, everybody is having to look at their policies and proposals and the schemes that they're bringing forward to see if they fit in and what needs to change in relation to the climate emergency.

I think we have seen others galvanised into action. I think it's been very encouraging to see the number of local authorities and town and community councils that have decided themselves to declare a climate emergency, so I think we are seeing that galvanising the action that we hoped we would see.

In relation to your specific questions about whether I'll be changing the remit letters, that is something, again, I'm looking at. I meet with NRW on a monthly basis, so we've certainly discussed the climate emergency and what they're looking at doing. So, I know, for instance, that NRW are looking at what extra land they have for planting trees. I think they've got some land that they've banked that can be reforested, and we need to look at, obviously, money for that. HCC I'm due to meet in the near future and, again, it will be on the agenda.

Okay. Well, we'll await any specific changes. I will suggest one thing to you. I remember when the previous Government was eager to oppose fracking in Wales. The Government at that time had no powers in rejecting it specifically, but the planning system was used, you may recall, as a means of creating some sort of moratorium. Now, some of us disagreed as to whether it was really a moratorium, but we won’t follow that up at the moment. But, certainly, there was a desire in the previous Government, although it didn’t have the powers, to try and use the levers it had to prevent fracking.

Now, you’ll be aware of the recent application for seismic testing in Cardigan bay, which is being used by gas and oil companies to find the best locations for drilling. That is non-devolved; that is still the responsibility of the UK Government, but, of course, licences can only be given if NRW are satisfied. So, shouldn’t the Welsh Government state, exactly as they did with fracking and the planning system, that NRW, for example, wouldn’t be satisfied in licensing any similar plans in the future as a clear message to the sector that they are not welcome, because, of course, that would not be in keeping with the climate emergency that we have in Wales and, of course, we should be keeping fossil fuels in the ground?

Yes, absolutely, and you'll be aware that that particular licence that you referred to has been suspended, but I certainly made my views very clear to the UK Government. I've had a lot of correspondence—and I'm sure there are some Members in the Chamber, including the Presiding Officer, who I've also written to regarding that, setting out that very stance that you've just described. So, we need to do—. We certainly need to look at how we can strengthen that so people are very aware of our view. But you're quite right: it would have to come to us at some point along the chain, even though it's a reserved matter, and I think I've made it very clear in my correspondence that that's the case.

Conservative spokesperson, Andrew R.T. Davies.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. Minister, I've raised with you on several occasions, and indeed I raised it with the First Minister yesterday, that, in your statement attached to the announcement around going for net zero by 2050, you said that that journey will be the biggest planned economic transition of modern times, and you've also made, obviously, a climate change emergency declaration. But when I go to the Cabinet minutes of that Cabinet meeting on 29 April, the declaration was informed to the Cabinet under 'any other business', and it says:

'The Minister for Environment, Energy and Rural Affairs informed Cabinet that she had declared the climate change emergency...that day.'

That hardly shows much planning or planning into the scheme of things that you're going to need to do to change the economy and to protect jobs and create quality jobs. Do you think that's an appropriate way for Cabinet to work?

Well, you're reading the minutes from the Cabinet; you won't be aware of all the discussions that went on ahead of the declaration of a climate emergency. The decarbonisation ministerial task and finish group, which I chair, meets every six weeks/two months. Discussions are ongoing through that task and finish group. The Minister for Economy and Transport sits on that committee.

The low carbon delivery plan, which I've referred to a couple of times already in this session, was where we set out our 100 policies and proposals. Again, there have been many discussions across Cabinet to bring that forward, and this is all part—. As I said yesterday, all these parts: decarbonisation, climate change mitigation, air quality, all are very integral—they're separate things, but they are integral. So, those discussions—. It wasn't just an announcement I made; people were very aware that that announcement was coming.

Thank you for that. I'm not knocking the decisions that you've taken; actually I've been supportive of them, but what concerns me is the action behind some of these announcements. I have to say that I thought that the minutes of Cabinet were meant to reflect the discussion that went on in Cabinet. And I agree that this is a whole Government response. We've heard since those declarations that Government obviously is having to deal with all these issues around their policy portfolio issues, but that minute doesn't clearly indicate to me that there has been that discussion. So, obviously, you're telling us there has. For example, can you tell me how many jobs will be lost in the Welsh economy because of the transition and how many jobs might be created in the green revolution we hope to see? That's a pretty straightforward question and, if Ken Skates has been on your committee, let's have an understanding of this transition that you've talked about and what we might and might not expect as we go forward.

So, the minute that you referred to wasn't a minute of a discussion. You said yourself it was 'any other business', so it wasn't a minute of a discussion in Cabinet. Those discussions take place in other places across the Government.

In relation to your question about the number of jobs, I can't give you a figure. What I've discussed with Ken Skates is the opportunity for more jobs if we transition to a low-carbon economy and I think, in other parts of the world that are ahead of us, you will see that that's the case.

I appreciate that you might not be able to give me an exact figure today, but, surely, amongst your discussions with Cabinet colleagues, you would have some understanding of the job implications here—the ones that might be lost from what we might call the old carbon economy and what might be created in the green economy. So, I'd hoped that maybe you'd be able to inform Members of that. One of the things that is happening in Westminster, for example, around their declaration, is that the Treasury there have provided hard and fast financials around some of the commitments the Government might have to take if it is to hit its net zero by 2050, and the figure of £1 trillion has been talked of, and about £70 billion a year. What economic modelling has the Welsh Government undertaken and has been made available to you when you've been making your decisions—and other members of the Government—so that you can make informed decisions that obviously put us in the best possible place? And, if that modelling has been made available to you, will you commit to make that available to Assembly Members so that we can have sight of it and understand exactly how the decisions have been taken?

So, I go back to what I said in my second answer to you, that I think there are more opportunities in the low-carbon economy sector—or sectors, really. So, the balance—. I can't give you figures. Certainly, the chief economist who advises all members of the Government will have given us advice that we will have considered. I don't know if it's commercially sensitive or if there's any other reasons why I can't publish it, but I will look into that and let the Member know.

Question 3 [OAQ54055] is withdrawn. Question 4—David Rees.