Part of the debate – in the Senedd at 4:32 pm on 25 November 2020.
There are lots of good things in the revised version of 'Future Wales'. A picture tells a thousand words, so the maps of proposed zones for different activities are very welcome, and much easier for citizens to understand how 'Future Wales' is relevant to their vision for the well-being of future generations. So, I think there's been a considerable improvement on the first iteration. Thank you very much, Minister, for that.
There are two points I'd like to make. First of all, it's imperative that 'Future Wales' has a strong and clear message that we have to have green belts to stop the urban sprawl that joins up different communities. For example, we must have a green belt between Cardiff and Caerphilly, because otherwise, developers will always want to build on the edge of Cardiff, because they can make more money out of it than building in Caerphilly, and if we don't have that sort of arrangement, then it makes a mockery of our strategy for developing our Valleys communities and ensuring that Cardiff doesn't just become a monstrous overcrowded city with no green spaces to easily access. Equally, I think it's really important that we protect the floodplains between Cardiff and Newport, to safeguard them against the appetite of developers to build wherever they can, so long as it's on a greenfield site, even if it's on a floodplain. And the uncertainty over our future food supplies imported from the European continent make it even more important that we are able to safeguard this floodplain as a place where we can produce food for both Newport and Cardiff, and therefore improve our food security.
I'd also like the Minister to clarify the extent of the protection given to sites of special scientific interest. Wildlife Trusts Wales told the committee that SSSIs must be sacrosanct or, at least, granted the same protection as they are in continental Europe. Could we give Welsh SSSIs the same assessment steps as Natura 2000 sites, so that SSIs are afforded the necessary protections against development? This seems particularly important, given the disturbing loss of species across Wales from a multitude of activities by human beings. So, can we specify in 'Future Wales' that a habitat regulation assessment is de rigueur to test the impact of any proposed development and probe the conservation objectives of any particular proposal? If they're judged to have a significant impact, this could, then, be followed up with an appropriate assessment to determine whether the integrity of the site would be damaged. If this assessment, then, says such an impact would be unavoidable, despite mitigation efforts, then it seems to me that the only way development could proceed is if there are no alternative solutions and there are imperative reasons to override the public interest.
Most recently, we saw a proposal to build a relief road to the M4 going across the Gwent levels, which would have, of course, meant the invasion of this environmentally protected site by vehicles, which would have destroyed the virtues of the site. I hope that if the Welsh Government implements revised and more rigorous standards they can ensure that we never see such a proposal having traction again. It is, of course, brilliant that the First Minister decided the impact on the environment in that proposal was, indeed, far too great to allow it to go ahead and many other alternative proposals are now being drawn up. Thank you.