I’m pleased to speak in this debate, and I'd like to thank the Chair of the committee, the rest of the committee members and the clerking team for the important work that they've done with the report and the consultation.

Storm overflows are an important issue and, as we've heard, this is also an emotional issue. Concerns were raised with us about how frequently storm overflows lead to sewage discharge and the detrimental effect that this has on the environment and public health. Concerns were also raised about the lack of reporting by water companies, again as we've heard, and the failure by environmental regulators to take stronger action against companies when pollution takes place.

I am sure, Dirprwy Lywydd, that we were all shocked to hear, earlier this year, that there were 105,000 cases of sewage discharge recorded in Wales. And worse still, as the committee Chair has said, we, as a committee, came to understand that the actual figure is probably significantly higher, given the lack of recording, or illegal discharges.

Storm overflows should be used infrequently only, and, as the Chair said, only in exceptional circumstances, but that is not the case. What is clear is that the number of cases of discharge is increasing. And, as Llyr Gruffydd has said in the past, this situation cannot continue, where a parent is afraid to let their child swim in a river in Wales because they are so worried about sewage. It's revolting. It's a terrible situation. It's clear that it's high time for the water industry to clean up the way that it works. It needs to reform and invest, and do what it is paid to do, namely protect areas of water for people, but also for the environment.

The many cases that we've heard about show that there is a gap in the environmental regulation process and in the way that environmental law works in reality. When will the Government tackle the environmental governance gap? Could the Minister please give us an update on this?

The Government's response to our report mentions £40 million-worth of investment over three years, as we've heard previously, in SuDS, namely sustainable urban drainage solutions. I don't know how to say that in Welsh. That is to be welcomed. But SuDS alone cannot solve the problem of the increase in urban development and the decrease in how permeable the land is. Other countries have looked at other ways to improve drainage. Austria has tried to reduce urban sprawl; Belgium is re-using brownfield land for developments; the Czech Republic has led the way in protecting agricultural land through landscape fragmentation. I would like to hear from the Minister whether this Government in Wales has looked at what happens outside Wales, or internationally, when they respond to this challenge. By the way, when we talk about urban development, I would agree entirely with what Janet Finch-Saunders said about plastic grass. Again, I'm not sure how to say that in Welsh.

I am pleased that the Government has accepted the recommendations, but I remain concerned. Welsh Water told the committee that removing all storm overflows and avoiding all spills would involve duplicating the drainage network at a cost of between £9 billion and £14 billion. It also said that the cost would mean an increase in customer bills during a cost-of-living crisis, so how will the Government respond to this challenge, relating to cost? Thank you.