We'll move now to group 10. This group relates to the offence of supplying a prohibited single-use plastic product. The lead amendment is amendment 24, and I call on Janet Finch-Saunders to move and speak to the lead amendment and the other amendments in the group—Janet Finch-Saunders.

Amendment 24 (Janet Finch-Saunders) moved.

Diolch, Llywydd. Amendment 24 does insert a provision to clarify the defence of a person facing proceedings for an offence of supplying single-use plastic to consumers in Wales. Now, I tabled this as I do think that it is important that businesses are protected from being wrongfully accused of supplying single-use plastic. Businesses have had a tough time during COVID and indeed, now, they're still feeling the effects of COVID and many other pressures, and the last thing that we want to be doing here is putting overburdensome—. And we need to make sure that protections are in place for them.

Now, I appreciate that in Stage 2, it was discussed that businesses will be made aware of this piece of legislation and, as such, will have time to use up their existing supply. I feel that the matter is more complicated than that. We have businesses with a physical store in Wales that will supply products internationally through online orders as well as in person to their Welsh customers. They will have stock on their premises that they are not selling in their physical store. If an authorised officer enters their premises, they'll see this stock; they'll see on the business's website that they are selling banned items. This amendment seeks to protect these businesses from wrongfully being found guilty of an offence. I think this is important to be on the face of the Bill.

Amendment 42, which was tabled by Delyth, inserts a provision that clarifies that, where more than one single-use plastic product is supplied together, it is treated as just one offence. I have taken this to mean that, where banned single-use plastic products are sold in a multipack, it counts for just one offence rather than somebody being charged with 100 offences for selling 100 plastic straws in a pack. I'd like to think that this is correct, though, if I'm wrong, please let me know, Delyth. Diolch.

Delyth Jewell.

Sorry, I nearly took that as me, before hearing from the Llywydd. Diolch, Llywydd. I'd like to speak to amendment 42 in this group, and I'd like to thank the Government team for their assistance in drafting this. This amendment would insert a new subsection into section 5. Section 5 sets out the offence of supplying prohibited single-use plastic products.

The subsection that's new, if it's accepted, would mean that, when two or more prohibited single-use plastic products are supplied together, that would be treated as a single act of supply. Stakeholders giving evidence to the committee before Stage 2 had expressed concern about whether the definition of 'single use' in the Bill had the right effect when it came to products sold in a multipack, and this amendment would address that concern, it would help to clarify it. Its purpose is to tackle the multipack issue and to provide that, when a number of products are supplied to be consumed together, like a cup that's supplied with a lid and with a stirrer, or food that's supplied with cutlery, those products do fall under the scope of the Bill. That is the amendment—it will clarify that products contained in multipacks are covered by the offence in the Bill. And the amendment, it's hoped, would provide greater clarity to businesses so that they can have a fuller understanding of what amounts to a single, criminal act when they're supplying one or more prohibited product to a consumer at the same time. Diolch.

The Minister.

Diolch, Llywydd. Amendment 24 was tabled by Janet Finch-Saunders, and it seeks to provide a defence regarding the lack of intention to supply where a person is in possession of a prohibited single-use product. I confirm that a similar amendment was tabled and considered at Stage 2.

I'd just like to reiterate at this point that possession of a single-use plastic product covered by the Bill is not in itself an offence and therefore, there is no need for a defence to it. The offence is committed only where the products are supplied to a consumer in Wales or are offered for supply on premises in Wales. Where a business does supply or offers to supply those products to a consumer in Wales, we believe that the requisite degree of intention can be inferred. It is obviously incumbent on businesses to know and comply with the law in Wales. Consequently, the proposed amendment is unnecessary and, on this basis, I will not be supporting it.

Turning now to amendment 42, which was tabled by Delyth Jewell, at Stage 2, the Member sought to provide clarity that the definition of 'single use' would apply to the prohibited single-use plastic products when supplied in multipacks as well as when those products are supplied individually. At Stage 2, I was supportive of the amendment in principle and offered to work with Delyth Jewell on producing an amendment that achieved her intention and was also technically sound. I'm very delighted to have been able to do that.

As a result, amendment 42 was developed collaboratively with the Member. The amendment now inserts a new subsection into section 5 and provides that, where two or more prohibited single-use plastic products are supplied together, this is to be treated as a single act of supply.

This clarifies the operation of section 5(1) in cases where a person supplies a number of products to a consumer together—for example, where products are contained in a multipack, or otherwise form part of a sales unit, such as a cup supplied with a lid and stirrer, or a food container supplied with cutlery.

Amendment 42 has been tabled to clarify a point of law, and I am very happy to support the passing of it. Diolch, Delyth. Diolch, Llywydd.

Janet Finch-Saunders to respond.

Let's move to the vote.

The question is that amendment 24 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is objection. We will therefore move to a vote on amendment 24. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 14, no abstentions, 40 against. Therefore, amendment 24 is not agreed.

Amendment 24: For: 14, Against: 40, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected

Amendment 42 is next. Delyth Jewell. 

Amendment 42 (Delyth Jewell) moved.

Move.

It's moved, yes. The question is that amendment 42 be agreed to. Does any Member object? There is no objection. Therefore, amendment 42 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

We move now to amendment 43, debated as part of group 4. Delyth Jewell, is amendment 43 moved?

Amendment 43 (Delyth Jewell) moved.

Move.

It is. The question is that amendment 43 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is objection. And if amendment 43 is not agreed, amendments 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54 and 56 will fall. We therefore move to a vote on amendment 43. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 13, no abstentions, 41 against. And therefore amendment 43 is not agreed and all of the amendments that I listed a moment ago also fall.

Amendment 43: For: 13, Against: 41, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected

Amendments 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54 and 56 fell.