The next item is the debate on the Climate Change, Environment, and Infrastructure Committee report, which is the report on the Welsh Government's marine policies, and I call on the Chair of the committee to move the motion. Llyr Gruffydd.

Motion NDM8003 Llyr Gruffydd

To propose that the Senedd:

Notes the Climate Change, Environment, and Infrastructure Committee report: ‘Report on the Welsh Government’s marine policies’ laid on 22 February 2022.

Motion moved.

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer, and thank you for the opportunity to discuss the content of the Climate Change, Environment, and Infrastructure Committee's report on the marine policies of the Welsh Government, because, early in this Senedd term, the committee agreed that marine policies should be a priority area for us in our work over the next few years. The intention was that this short inquiry would be an initial look, a snapshot of the current situation in terms of the marine policies we have in Wales. And even though we didn't have much time to take this initial snapshot, we did succeed in covering a lot of ground. The committee, of course, is grateful to all stakeholders who contributed to our work, and to RSPB Cymru and the Marine Conservation Society in particular for also providing the committee with further information in advance of this debate this afternoon.

Now, the Welsh coastline, of course, is over 2,000 km in length, and much of it is the envy of the world. It provides huge marine energy opportunities—enough to help reach our decarbonisation targets—and this in turn can lead to jobs, economic growth and the regeneration of our coastal communities—some of those communities, of course, that need our support as things stand today.

And our marine environment is also home to some of the most biologically diverse and important habitats and species that we have in Europe, and that is also something to be appreciated and to protect at the same time. The key theme of our report, of course, was the balance between these two priorities. We welcome proposals to ramp up marine energy development over the next decade, but we must strike the right balance between those developments and the element of conservation and protecting what we have in terms of marine ecosystems and biodiversity.

Our report starts by focusing on marine planning. Now, currently, in Wales, we have a national marine plan, and environmental non-governmental organisations told us that one of the main drawbacks of the plan is that it isn't a spatial one. And because of this, it doesn't set out, for example, where developments should be sited or how many developments would be sustainable. It doesn't allow us to consider the cumulative effect of developments on the marine environment. 

Stakeholders from the renewables sector firmly believed that the next decade must be focused on delivery of renewable energy developments, rather than redesigning strategies. They were worried that a new approach or policy would risk further delay. Having considered both arguments and these perspectives, the committee concluded that the best solution in the first place would be for the Welsh Government to commission an external review of the Wales national marine plan. Now is the time to consider whether the current plans and strategies in place currently will continue to be fit for purpose in the light of the expected increase in marine developments.

Even though the Minister has accepted the recommendation in principle—and I have a problem sometimes in accepting things in principle, as I don't always understand what that means—I am disappointed that her response shows that the external analysis won’t be commissioned in time for this year’s review, but for the next review, which isn't being undertaken until 2025, of course. Minister, this is a missed opportunity and means that any necessary changes won't be seen for many years to come.

A second focus for the committee was the progress of the marine renewable energy sector. I should say here that we welcome the efforts of Ministers, through the deep dive into renewable energy, to remove some of the barriers to development. Members will have heard the Minister for Economy’s statement yesterday on progress in this area, and there is much to be welcomed, but the Minister’s comments would have done little to reassure some of the contributors to our committee work. Members will have heard the Minister for Economy saying that he expects offshore wind generation to increase from current levels of 726 MW to 2.8 GW by 2030, and a potential 6.8 GW by 2035. That is a significant increase in little more than a decade from now.

It's no wonder, in that context, that stakeholders again questioned how fit for purpose existing Welsh Government plans are. The marine energy plan was published back in 2016. It does not explain the Welsh Government’s ambitions for marine energy over the short and longer term. So, we think this needs to be looked at again. We need a route map for where we are going, and this would then provide certainty for developers and build confidence in the sector's long-term potential. Again, the Minister has agreed in principle to review the marine energy plan, but there’s no hint of a timetable for that work. [Interruption.] Of course, yes.

Thank you, Llyr, for giving way on that, and for the way you've introduced this debate today. Would you recognise that some of those organisations, like WWF, the Marine Conservation Society, the RSPB, the Wildlife Trusts and others, do actually get the need to drive forward on renewables, but they want to make sure that we protect some of those valuable species, including migratory birds and wildlife, but also cetaceans? We just need to get this right, and data and evidence are key.

That leads seamlessly on to the next part of my contribution. You are right; it isn't a binary choice of one or the other, but it's making sure that we have the frameworks and the strategies and the policies in place to make sure that these developments, which all of us, frankly, want to happen, and indeed need to happen in terms of the challenges that we face in relation to climate change, are done on the right terms, and within the right parameters.  

You mentioned data and evidence gaps, and that was the third area covered in our work. Marine plans and strategies are only as good as the data that underpins them. We all know that. The lack of a robust evidence base to underpin those development decisions means, actually, that there are inherent risks in ramping up the development that many of us want to see. We recommended that the Welsh marine evidence strategy should be reviewed and updated in light of the deep dive, which committed to identifying priority marine evidence gaps and identifying mechanisms to fill them. So, we were surprised to read the Minister’s response to our recommendation, which says, and I quote, that

'Officials are content that the overarching strategic evidence priorities still represent the high-level evidence needs including those identified by the deep dive.'

So, apparently everything is okay, there’s nothing to worry about. Minister, the lack of evidence, as we've heard, is a real problem. Everybody told us that as part of the inquiry. And if the strategy is right, then something else isn't working, clearly, so maybe you can tell us what it is and what, more importantly, you’re going to do about it. And you are nodding, so I'm looking forward to your contribution. I always look forward to your contribution, but particularly now. 

On marine protected areas, I am pleased that the Minister has accepted our recommendations, but delve a little deeper and there are still some areas of concern here. Recommendation 16 called for the Welsh Government to set out its latest plans for the designation of highly protected marine areas. The Minister says that the Welsh Government will look at this after the MPA network completion programme. But, the truth is that the consultation on that programme isn't due to take place until 2023. So, again, we may be looking at years of delay here. Where is the urgency?

The Minister's response to the committee's report does seem to raise more questions than answers. Anyone reading it would rightly feel that there are no problems in this policy area, no weaknesses that need to be strengthened, and no need for urgency. They might even think that the Minister is trying to kick these issues into the long sea grass. Take another example. We asked the Minister for a timeline for a consultation on the future of bottom trawling and dredging in marine protected areas. I know this is something that many Members have raised here in the Chamber in the past, and I know the Petitions Committee as well has considered this. The Welsh Government has yet to consult on the management of towed gear, including bottom trawling, within marine protected areas. In contrast, of course, the UK administrations have progressed to the introduction of management measures for all fisheries gears in marine protected areas. In her response, the Minister tells us that, and I quote again, 

'The timescale for any consultation will be determined alongside other Welsh Government priorities at the time.'

What does that mean? No detail, no dates. We're already behind other parts of the UK and we might still be years away from seeing changes on that particular issue. 

Minister, at the start of my speech, I said that this inquiry was a snapshot of the health of marine policies, so what was the committee's verdict? Well, we all expect a significant ramping up of marine energy development during this decade, yet all the while, our marine environment is under threat. So, to tackle this, we need a holistic system that considers the effects of cumulative development on the marine environment, whilst doing what it can, of course, to remove any unnecessary barriers that are identified to the utilisation of natural resources. The committee believes we are a long way from that right now. So, we need the Minister and the Government to accept that business as usual isn’t enough to respond to the climate change crisis and the biodiversity loss that we are facing. We need to do more and we need to do it sooner. Diolch.

It's a pleasure to follow Llyr, our Chair on this committee, and to say a few words. I'll try not to replicate what he said, but I want to touch on a few points, including in the Welsh Government's response as well, before I come to what I think is the critical issue of data and evidence, which I'm going to major on, if that's okay. 

First of all, in terms of recommendation 1, that an external analysis of the Wales national marine plan should be commissioned, we note that there's an agreement in principle there, but it is to inform the next statutory report. I think the committee would feel strongly that we'd like to see it earlier than that because of the urgency that the Chair has laid out so much. So, we would still, I think, push hard on that and I'm sure we'll return to it. 

On the stakeholder engagement in recommendation 2, just to say to the Minister that it isn't that there aren't the structures in place to do the stakeholder engagement, it's actually the quality of the stakeholder engagement. The feeling from some—and I will confess and admit that it's from some particularly in the environmental sector—is that whilst they're engaged, and they stretch themselves to engage on the various stakeholder groups, they're not clear that they're being listened to in the way that we face the nature crisis and the biodiversity crisis. The baseline that they want to start from is not the baseline, always, that Government wants to start from. They want to see a picture of the sea bed and the flora and fauna as it should be, not as it is now, and so on. So, it would simply be an encouragement, on recommendation 2, Minister, to see that recommendation in the way that the subtext behind it is that it's the quality of the engagement and the listening. You do an enormous amount of stakeholder engagement, but it's actually the engagement and the detail to follow through as well. So, take that in the spirit it's meant. And I know I'm the worst nightmare of any Minister sitting in that position—[Interruption.] I know I am; thank you for a 'yes' there. As a former fisheries and marine Minister myself, I am the worst nightmare. 

On recommendation 4, setting out the plans for the devolution of the management of the Crown Estate, I'm just wondering, Minister, if we have a contradiction, because you have accepted that, and that's wonderful, it really is wonderful, but then it talks about 

'looking at the implications of devolution.... Once this task has been completed we will be able to finalise our plans for the Crown Estate.'

You've accepted the recommendation about the devolution of the management, setting out the plans, and so on. I guess you can't go any further yet, but it would be interesting if you could get on your feet today and say, 'Well, actually, it makes sense now to just move ahead with this and move to the devolution of it.' I'm not underplaying, by the way, the role that they have and the work that they are currently doing, but it would be interesting to have some of the levers of control here. 

On recommendations 9, 10 and 11, on evidence and data—. Well, let me come back to that in a moment, because I do want to spend a couple of minutes going over it. Let me just skip ahead here. On recommendation 13, where we look at the lack of progress on the designation of marine protected areas and MCZs, and ask you to set out a timetable, you have accepted this, and you've said that this will be in the next phase of work to be launched in the coming months, which is great to hear. Subsequently, in recommendation 16, we go on to the slow progress on highly protected marine areas, and again, you accept that. You accept that

'The need, and appropriateness, for areas of higher protection should be considered as part of this process.'

We get all of that. All I would say to you—and I know you get this, Minister, I really know you get this—is that there is a real hunger out there to get on not only with the designation of those, but also, then, because that enables us to get on with the effective management of those areas as well, because that's the other thing. We've got a recommendation in here to do with trawling—that's the only other one I wanted to touch on before the issues over data and evidence. It's on dredging and bottom trawling. Again, you've accepted our recommendation, and you've said—and it's very well written—that you'll undertake

'a structured evaluation of potential fishing gear interactions with features of Welsh Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) referred to as the Assessing Welsh Fishing Activities project' and that it'll be completed in summer 2022. That's really great, but we actually know the damage that these activities do to some of the most highly sensitive areas. And I know this is tricky for people involved in the fishing industry, but, actually, this is one of the areas we're going to have to make a decision on, ultimately, for that aspiration of returning these areas to what we know they should be as opposed to what they are now, and how they're being damaged. 

I've run out of time already. I would ask you particularly, then, without referring to my notes, to look at this issue of evidence and data. There's a lot of good evidence that we took here. A lot of people said we are not at the point we need to be at with data and evidence, and unless we can actually see what is there in that great blue zone below the waves, and so on, it's going to be limited as to what we can do. I think, Minister, this has been going on for a decade and more, trying to pull together the evidence base. I know there are commercial sensitivities, and as my five minutes comes up, I would simply say, Minister, we need to go further with the marine science strategies and the work that the Welsh Government is doing to break down the barriers about sharing information between academia, commercial interests and NRW. Everybody should be pooling that, even if it's anonymised, so we can map more accurately what is actually happening out there now. Diolch yn fawr.

I'm pleased that the report has been tabled for debate today. Fifteen of the recommendations have been accepted, and five accepted in principle. That does sound good, but I'm afraid the marine sector could be described as being let down when considering the detail. 

In response to recommendation 1, the Welsh Government has committed to report on the effectiveness of the Welsh national marine plan. However, the Marine Conservation Society are very correct in highlighting that you should confirm that the review will consider the need for a statutory spatial and holistic marine development plan. I think the Minister and the Senedd have heard me mention this a few times. What I'm very concerned about—and I think it's something that my colleague Huw Irranca has mentioned—is that we need progressive renewable energy, but we've got to look after our ecological systems as well. I am very worried about this ad hoc approach—that developers come in and they seem to identify where they want to develop, but how does that then sit within an overall plan, a strategic plan? 

You've heard me speak about the need for a Welsh marine development plan on a number of occasions. Nonetheless, it is what we need. For example, RSPB Cymru highlighted a lack of a spatial component or development control policies, which means the existing plan does not embed strategic forward planning or seek to proactively address conflict, and that can then cause delays to schemes. So, I would be pleased if the Minister could explain why she's willing for her Deputy Minister to pursue strategic resource areas, but isn't prepared to create a detailed marine development plan. 

Similarly, we need greater ambition on the measures being taken to protect the marine environment. Already, you have acknowledged that there are evidence gaps in relation to interaction between the technology and the environment. This is despite the Welsh national marine plan encouraging the sharing of evidence. As the committee said in our report on the Welsh Government's draft budget 2022-23, the lack of a robust evidence base to underpin development decisions means that there are inherent risks in ramping up this marine development.

Emily Williams of Wales Environment Link advises that developers collect huge amounts of marine data when they are developing projects, but that a lot of those are then often cited as being commercially sensitive. So, I hope, Minister, that you will agree with me that we do need to reach a point where marine development licences require pre and post-construction monitoring and information sharing, so that developers do make a greater contribution to the evidence base that underpins marine planning.

I was surprised recently to learn that the Gwynt y Môr scheme, and this came from our local fishermen, actually—. Thirteen species of fish disappeared, and there are five species of fish that have never returned, and that was years ago. So, we need to see progress with the designation of future MPAs too. Successive Welsh Governments have delayed on this, despite it being a tool to address the dual threats of the climate and nature crises. In fact, there is no doubt that the Welsh Government consultation in 2012 was a disaster. Clare Trotman referred to it—and Clare did work for the Marine Conservation Society—as failing. Sue Burton called it woefully inadequate, and Dr Richard Unsworth advised that the consultation had failed to look at the experience of successful marine parks and marine protected areas anywhere else around the world. So, while you have confirmed, in response to recommendation 16, that you aim to assess the MPA network, it would be helpful if you could provide a target date for the completion of this work.

An October 2020 report in The Guardian said that 97 per cent of UK offshore MPAs were subject to bottom trawling in 2019. Now, we have heard NRW claim that those headline statistics don't really apply to Wales, but that their comments were based on an anecdotal understanding. Now, that would set alarm bells off with me, when even NRW are informing us that they cannot reach clear conclusions as to what is actually happening in our Welsh waters. As I have said before, NRW does have—what do they call it—a poacher/gamekeeper role here, because they issue the marine licences, and then they're responsible for the enforcement, and I know that there are issues there. So, this issue cannot be ignored.

Finally, you will be aware that COP15 is on the horizon. So, I think it appropriate to conclude with a question as to whether the Minister considers the current approach to implementing the WNMP as putting the nature emergency on an equal footing to the climate emergency. Diolch.

I'm really pleased to speak in this debate today, and I thank Llyr for his expert chairing, and my fellow committee members for bringing forward the report and the recommendations. There's a lot to unpack, but the clear message we received was about the need for the national marine plan to consider the cumulative impacts of developments. I think that the economy Minister's statement yesterday on offshore marine energy underlined how the Welsh Government is determined that economic benefits and renewable energy benefits should deliver environmental benefits too. So, I trust that that approach will guide the forthcoming review of the Welsh national marine plan.

I was part of the predecessor committee that looked into the management of marine protected areas in the previous Senedd. Five years on from that initial inquiry, our recommendation regarding the identification and designation of marine conservation zones remain broadly unaddressed—which the Welsh Government has acknowledged. So, I look forward to receiving updates on the next phase of the work in the coming months. But I would welcome some clarity on what a marine conservation zone is. What happens within it? What can't possibly happen within it? There seems to be a lot of conflicting messages on that front. One of them, clearly, going forward, is going to be the licensing of renewable energy. So, we really need some clarity there.

I want to turn to blue carbon. I wouldn't miss an opportunity, of course, to talk about blue carbon. Our sea grass, saltmarsh and seaweed habitats, and all the carbon that is stored and absorbed by the Welsh marine environment is far more than that which is stored in our woodlands or on land. And there was a distressing story, wasn't there, about Bangor University laying sea grass and then someone coming along and destroying it in a very short time. So, maybe that fits with my earlier question about what is a marine protected zone.

I'm very pleased that the Welsh Government has accepted the recommendation to explore how our blue carbon habitats can be maintained and enhanced. The Minister cites the nature networks programme as a mechanism through which to do that, so it would be very useful to have an update on that programme soon. I'm also looking forward to an update on the shared blue carbon evidence plan, and I understand that's currently under development. 

Finally, we did ask the Government to set out the purpose and timeline for the public consultation on dredging and bottom trawling in Welsh MPAs. I note the Petitions Committee recently considered a plea to 'Stop bulldozing our seas!' and I certainly sympathise with the petitioner's view. The Minister has accepted the recommendation, which is good news, but the timescales seem to be just a little bit hazy. Again, I should say that I've sat on previous Senedd committees that urged progress on this matter. I recall a draft consultation on towed gear in 2018. But to me there is something fundamentally wrong with being able to drag anything along the sea bed, taking out everything that exists there. And I'm sure, if this happened on land, if we went along just bulldozing the land and everybody could see it, there would be uproar, and I'm just concerned that people aren't at all in any way understanding what sea dredging really means and the damage that it does. So, I'd be grateful for a specific commitment and timeline on that. Thank you.

I welcome the report from the committee and thank them for all their work, and important work it is, as we move forward, because due to Wales's predominantly coastal geography, the marine sector is a huge contributor to the Welsh economy. Marine policy has a direct impact on people's livelihoods as well as on wildlife and ecosystems—many, often conflicting, demands on Wales's seas and coasts. The marine environment is used to secure clean renewable energy, sustainable food and for recreational purposes, as well as being crucial to Wales's biodiversity. For this reason, it is essential that the Welsh Government prioritises marine policy and gets the policy right, as well as ensures that it is protected and the biodiversity of our seas is protected.

Renewable energy is vital, and a growing sector, and is key in delivering on our commitment to addressing the climate and nature emergencies. However, it presents both opportunities and risks when not planned for comprehensively. Potential impacts to marine animals from marine developments include wildlife collision, disturbance, marine noise, habitat loss and loss of access to preferred feeding grounds. Any decisions on renewable development in Welsh seas should recognise that we are in a marine nature crisis and that marine wildlife has for too long been out of sight and out of mind.

In my view, and in the view of many others, up until now the Welsh Government has sadly failed to deliver upon its legal duty to achieve good environment status of marine habitats and species. Marine biodiversity continues to decline, and many marine protected areas are in unfavourable conditions. Admittedly, and to be fair, this is true of governments across the globe, but it is a particular sticking point for us Members who are species champions for marine wildlife—I, myself, being the species champion for the basking shark. It does boil down to this, in my view: the marine renewable sector is currently being driven by unencumbered market forces, resulting in incremental applications. As Welsh seas become more crowded, the marine planning system must operate at a strategic level to guide the siting of developments away from the most ecologically sensitive areas, as well as minimise the cumulative impacts on vulnerable habitats and species, and provide greater certainty to developers in the long term.

I welcome the recommendations made by the committee and I'd like to also echo as well some of the Marine Conservation Society's additional recommendations. Those include the Welsh national marine plan review, considering the need for a statutory marine development plan to complement the existing efforts the Welsh Government is taking to implement a more holistic approach. Furthermore, the deep dive must take into consideration the impacts of human activities on the marine environment and consider the interactions between all elements of the Welsh Government's marine work programme, for example fishing and marine planning, and not report on these elements in isolation. And finally, we need the Welsh Government to deliver a marine protected areas strategy that should include clear management actions for the existing network and, where feasible, any sites considered in the forthcoming MCZ process.

And one final point before I close, Dirprwy Lywydd: we can't tackle the climate crisis unless we have a healthy marine environment. That means finding cleaner ways of producing energy, not polluting the marine environment, and protecting its biodiversity. All life came from the sea, but life can't flourish without it. Again, thank you to the committee for its work and I genuinely look forward to seeing where the Government takes this.

I call on the Minister for Climate Change, Julie James.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I'd just also like to add my voice to thanking members of the committee and particularly the Chair for the review and the recent focus on the marine environment, absolutely recognising the vital role it plays in tackling both the climate and the nature emergencies. And just to say, Llyr, I think you did an amazing job of getting through what you got through in a short amount of time, and it's been really valuable to us that the committee does that work for us. They can collect a lot of evidence that will help inform our process. So, I'm genuinely really grateful for the work of the committee.

To state the sort of blindingly obvious, our seas are a priceless natural asset, and I absolutely am fully committed to seas that are clean, safe, productive and biologically diverse for future generations to enjoy. As all Members have pointed out, resilient seas play a vital role in addressing the climate change and nature emergencies, and I very much welcome this report and the debate we're having today.

Despite Llyr's evident disappointment, the Welsh Government's written response was absolutely trying to reflect the positive spirit in which we received the report, and our commitment in continuing to develop our marine policies and strengthen our approach. The committee highlighted the growing potential for marine renewable energy in particular, and many Members have highlighted it, and I absolutely agree that it's very important to get that sweet spot of balance between development and conservation and to ensure that all the developments in the sea are fit for purpose and enhance, where at all possible, both biodiversity and the environment that they find themselves within. So, I absolutely—[Interruption.]—certainly, Huw.

Could I genuinely on a note of optimism say we are a world away from where we were 12 or 15 years ago? We actually have in place now all the things that are referred to in this report that the Welsh Government is working on—the marine planning, the ambition to deliver marine conservation zones, to have that balance rightly done to develop the evidence et cetera. So, there's a note of optimism there, but would she agree with me that, actually, this is the moment, when faced with both the cost-of-living crisis with runaway prices where we need to deal with renewables, and also a biodiversity crisis and a climate crisis—this is the moment where Wales could actually be the leader, take all those things we've had in place for a decade, and actually really bed them down, and show the UK, actually, what we can do here in Wales?

I'm never going to avoid the opportunity to do that, Huw, so I very much hope we will be able to do that.

Just to digress from my script just for a moment, I was giving evidence to the Welsh Affairs Committee this morning about the grid and the energy network for Wales, and one of the real frustrations for us is not to have all the levers that we need. So, encouraging the UK Government to work with our distribution network operators, in particular the transmission operators for energy, to translate the jargon, to make sure that the onshoring of energy in the Celtic sea, for example, comes onshore in the right way, enhances our coastal communities and then helps us with our energy network through Wales. It will be absolutely pivotal to that, so we're working closely with the UK Government and with the Crown Estate.

I was making again the point this morning about the need for devolution of the Crown Estate in order to get the levers in place for us to be able to make sure that we have that balance between the planning. So, the committee asked me this morning if it was about the revenue, and I said, 'Well, of course the revenue would be lovely', but actually it's much more about having control of the planning levers to make sure that we can get the rounds of leasing and licensing quite right for Wales in exactly the right place, in exactly the right way. So, I think that's an important intervention, Huw, which allowed me to make that point.

Coming back to my script, we do actually have, of course, as everyone has acknowledged, the Wales national marine plan, and it is the first time—I introduced it in 2019—that we've had that strategic policy framework to guide the sustainable management of our seas. I agree with everyone who's set out the need for a spatial plan for Wales for the seas. Everyone will know that I'm very keen on spatial planning for land, and the sea is no exception. The fact that we can't see what's going on underneath it makes it all the more important that we have that kind of strategic plan.

So, the plan sets a framework for development that respects the environment and already established activity and it sets an agenda to secure lasting benefit from the opportunities. Our focus is on implementing the plan and, later this year, I will lay the first three-year annual report on the performance of the plan. To ensure a range of voices are heard, we are currently undertaking a stakeholder survey to inform the report that reports on the plan for that first three years. It's obviously been a very odd three years, with the pandemic and everything else, so I hope we'll be able to build on that.

Taking that spatial approach to marine planning, including identification of strategic resource areas, will help guide the right development to the right place, supporting our ambition for a thriving marine biodiversity alongside those renewables. And as everyone has said, the urgency of addressing climate change is clear; nobody is arguing with that. The deep dive into renewable energy reaffirmed our commitment to developing sustainable renewable marine energy. 

I've just started the biodiversity deep dive, which will be looking at the whole issue of what protection means—so, the point that Joyce Watson made about what does it actually mean, a 'marine protection zone' or a 'marine conservation zone' or a 'highly protected marine area'? What does that actually mean? Does that mean that you can or can't do certain things in it? What does it mean for bottom trawling and so on? So, the review will be helping me to come to some conclusions on that. We will obviously need to take our stakeholders along with us. We've tried before; we really didn't get it right last time. It's important to get those communities on board as part of this and to make sure they understand it.

Thank you for giving way. Really, really quickly—it's a proper debate here—just two things: one is, in taking stakeholders with you, don't be afraid of actually being radical as well. The Lyme Bay issue is quite an instructive one. It was totally contested, but it led to massive replenishment of nature, and the fishermen now like it because of what it's done. So, please don't be afraid of doing that in taking stakeholders along.

I'm not renowned for being afraid of that kind of thing, Huw.[Laughter.] So, I don't think I'll start any time soon. 

By 'taking them with us', I mean making sure that everyone fully understands the implications of what we're proposing and doesn't regard them as a negative to be fought, but actually as something to get on board with to enhance their own particular economic status and actually their own particular need to have the seas and their coastal communities be the way we'd all like them to be. So, I'm sure we can get those stakeholders on board. It's not just fishermen either; it’s a lot of other people that we need to talk to. Lots of fisherfolk have a full appreciation of this.

And then, just to accelerate, as the Deputy Llywydd is going to cut me off in my prime otherwise, events in Ukraine have clearly reinforced the need for a resilient energy supply, and green energy is clearly a hugely important part of that. I was delighted that the committee recognised our efforts in addressing the barriers to that development.

We’re also commissioning an independent review of the marine licensing process, as part of the deep dive follow-up, to improve the customer experience, ensuring works progress as effectively as they can, that it's agile for future demand. The review is under way. Part of that review is to make sure that, in deploying marine energy, we actually get cameras and so on out there to get the data that we need live on the ground so that we can continue to replenish our data source, rather than waiting until we've got it until we can do anything. So, I’m really keen to do that; happy to update Members as that goes ahead.

The next revision of the marine evidence strategy will set out how we can work even closer with the industry to make those kinds of provisions very much part of the licensing regime and make sure that the existing evidence is improved through data sharing. Huw Irranca and a number of other Members highlighted the need for that kind of data sharing all the way through. That robust evidence is critical to our planned strategies and policy decisions and I absolutely accept that action is needed to improve that evidence base. Just to be really clear, Llyr, we absolutely do accept that. We’re not complacent in any way. We’re working with a range of partners to identify and fill the evidence gaps that we know exist.

We have marine protected areas—139 of them; 50 per cent of all Welsh waters—long-term frameworks in place. The UK marine strategy and nature networks programme are important tools for understanding this as well. But, as Joyce Watson and others highlighted: what does that mean? The deep dive will be looking at that with me: what does it mean, a 'marine protected area'? What can you do and not do?

I’m also doing the deep dive overall. Thirty per cent of our land and sea by 2030 should be in good condition. We had a discussion during questions earlier on that Delyth started on that, and I think we’re all in the same place there.

We are supporting the MPA network with a management framework supported grant scheme, which includes blue carbon potential, climate change on protected features and a bilingual app called Wales Coast Explorer to inform and help plan visits to the marine environment. I've also allocated budget to fund five actions this year, including the development of citizen science programmes to help identify non-native species and further research to understand pressures the network faces, particularly marine litter, particularly plastic pollution. I hope many of you are doing the Big Plastic Count that's under way at the moment—I certainly am. We want to be—. Following the success of the first year collecting recycling—1.2 tonnes of end-of-life fishing gear; extraordinary success—we want to continue that scheme and spread it out to all the ports in Wales as fast as we possibly can. It reduces the risk of gear lost at sea potentially harming the environment, and we've all seen the terrible photographs of wildlife caught up in that. 

We absolutely agree as well that we want to accelerate the review of so-called bottom trawling. That's clearly fundamental and I'm not putting that off at all; I absolutely see the need for that. And that will be part of this issue about what can you or can't you do in particular bits of the sea and so on. We'll also be setting out ambitions for a marine conservation zone designation process as part of the MPA network—again, what does that mean, how does it enhance resilience?

And then, turning just lastly, Dirprwy Lywydd—I know I'm testing your patience—

[Inaudible.]—but I do wish to keep to times.

I know; that's fine. I'm now gabbling, but I'll just turn to that last bit, which is, as Joyce Watson highlighted, the blue carbon piece. That's a hugely important role in our journey to net zero. We recognise the need to protect and restore sea grass, salt marsh restorations and habitats. The biodiversity deep dive specifically has a Professor from Swansea University on sea grass on it for that reason, and we're accelerating that all the way through. 

So, finishing up, Deputy Presiding Officer—and thank you for your patience—I really welcome the committee's report. I assure you we are not dragging our feet, we are going as fast as humanly possible, and I very much welcome the recommendations, which we will look forward to reporting back with you on as we implement them.

I call on Llyr Gruffydd to reply to the debate.

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. I won't repeat the points that have been made, just thank the Minister and everybody else for their contributions. I think the nature of the discussion reflects how broad are the areas that this short inquiry tried to address and, clearly, how broad is the work that needs to be done by us as a committee, and the Government, of course, in that context.

Just a few points, perhaps, that were raised and that I didn't touch on in my introduction. Clearly, the Crown Estate is key. There is a completely central role there, and I'm pleased to see that the Government now is on the same page as a number of us when it comes to devolving some of those powers. I know that the majority view, perhaps, in the committee would be that, but certainly it's an opportunity for us to see a real difference. And I look forward to welcoming the new chief executive of the Crown Estate here to the Senedd next week, and hopefully it'll be an opportunity to develop some of the points and these discussions. 

On bottom trawling, again, a number of Members raised that, and I think it is something that we've been grappling with for a long, long time, and we would all wish to be further ahead than we are at the moment. I'm glad to hear that the Minister's pledging to change gear on towed gear and bottom trawling, so let's move as swiftly as we can on that. Joyce Watson is absolutely right: five years on from our predecessor committee report on marine policies, nothing's changed, frankly, or at least we're still waiting for the recommendations to really be addressed.

The blue carbon agenda is a huge agenda, significant in locking in carbon—more so than terrestrial carbon stores. There are many fledgling schemes around Wales that I think deserve our support, and certainly deserve greater attention from us as a committee, and I hope that that is one of the areas that we will choose to pursue in detail.

Species champions were always going to come up, I thought, in this debate. And just to let you know, I'm at the—. Am I at the top or the bottom of your food chain? I can never remember. But, you know, without the sand eel, there wouldn't be basking sharks, okay. So, just keep that in mind. [Interruption.] Oh, yes. Well, the oyster is the Minister's. There we are. Okay.

Lay off the salmon.

Yes. And lay off the salmon. Good, good.

And I think the point on spatial planning is important—terrestrial spatial planning, and then we have marine spatial planning. Well, surely there shouldn't be a disconnect either. We need that seamless spatial planning for terrestrial and marine, as far as I'm concerned. Using the work that we're now seeing accelerate in terms of developing renewable energy to enrich our data, to fill some of those evidence gaps, I think, is absolutely something that needs to happen. 

So, this report, as I said, is very much a starter for 10. It's a snapshot of where we are. It's a snapshot of, I think, what we all know needs doing, but, if I was to simplistically sum up our message to Government, really it's, 'Get on with it.'

The proposal is to note the committee's report. Does any Member object? No, therefore the motion is agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Motion agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.