Questions Without Notice from Party Spokespeople

Part of 1. Questions to the Minister for Environment, Energy and Rural Affairs – in the Senedd at 1:47 pm on 29 January 2020.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Llyr Gruffydd Llyr Gruffydd Plaid Cymru 1:47, 29 January 2020

But the fact remains that NRW is not supporting the proposal to make the whole of Wales an NVZ, and whilst there are incidents and those need to be tackled, clearly they feel that doing so across 8 per cent of Wales would be sufficient to address the issue. We all look forward to seeing the regulatory impact assessment, because the draft one was only a 20-page document, and for a change this substantial, then we really need something a bit more robust than that. I'll leave it at that.

But of course, if you want to pursue a whole-territory approach, then we need to be convinced that that is the best way forward. I'm not convinced, and I haven't seen the evidence out there that tells us that a whole-territory NVZ will actually be effective in reducing agricultural pollution. Because information obtained, again from Natural Resources Wales, provides no substantive evidence of the effectiveness of the NVZ action programme in reducing agricultural pollution, despite designations dating back to 2002. We've seen numerous scientific research papers that consider the effectiveness or otherwise of NVZs, and they tell us that the approach has little or no effect, with some highlighting actually detrimental effects as well. One study found, and I quote:

'that 69% of NVZs showed no significant improvement in surface water concentrations even after 15 years. In comparison to a control catchment, 29% of NVZs showed a significant improvement'— that's positive—

'but 31% showed a significant worsening.'

So, where's your evidence that a whole-territory NVZ approach will actually have the effect that so many of us want to see?