Members will be aware that I tabled a motion to annul these regulations that will be debated and voted on next week, but it's good to have an opportunity to air some of the arguments as we prepare for that important vote. Of course, we will be supporting this motion today.

I oppose these regulations not because there is no water quality problem in some parts of Wales; I oppose these regulations because these regulations are not the right solution to tackle this problem. The regulations are disproportionate, they will have unintended consequences for the environment and, of course, they will undermine the viability of many Welsh farms. Why are they disproportionate? Well, Natural Resources Wales has recommended that 8 per cent of Wales should be placed within NVZs, targeting those areas of Wales where there are problems. But, of course, the Welsh Government has ignored that and has gone for a 100 per cent approach, even those areas that haven't seen any cases of agricultural pollution over the past decade. We know that the trend across Wales has fallen. When you look at the cases year on year over the past three years, they're down 28 per cent in that period. So, yes, target where targeting is needed, make regulations where you need to regulate, but don't place this unreasonable burden on every farm in Wales and every acre of Welsh land, even where it is not an issue that causes concern. This Government needs to be far more sophisticated and more appropriate in this place. Follow the data and follow the science—that's the Government's mantra when it comes to COVID. Well, do the same in this context.

There will be unintended consequences for our environment. Using the calendar to spread slurry is absurd, and the Minister herself acknowledged that she found it difficult to accept that that is the best approach in this area. Weeks before the time where this can't be done, and weeks after it has come to an end, there will be huge spikes in the nitrate levels in land and water as every farm in Wales clears their stores simultaneously. That will create pollution problems in areas where there are no pollution problems currently. The only option for many farms, particularly in those less-favoured areas, which, perhaps, keep 20 or 30 cattle, will be to get out of keeping cattle because of the cost, and that will mean that we will miss out on the environmental contribution made by grazing those cattle in terms of biodiversity and habitats, particularly in our upland areas. In losing those cattle, what you will see is farmers being forced to introduce more sheep on those lands, which will graze harder and damage those habitats. If you do keep 20 cattle, then the cost of paying for this infrastructure to store worth three of four months of slurry is going to be beyond those people's reach. The Government will say, 'Well, we're providing some £11 million to support', but that's laughable. That's less than £1,000 for every agricultural holding in Wales. I know about one farm that's been quoted £300,000 to put in place appropriate agriculture on the farm to meet the needs of these regulations. There's no way that farm could afford that investment, even if the Government were to contribute half the cost.

I will conclude with this—