This Bill, as we've just heard, has received cross-party support during its journey through the Senedd, but it's also been slightly contentious because of the Welsh Government insisted on using an expedited scrutiny process for it. Now, I'm not suggesting that Senedd procedures have been misused, but what we have seen is far from being good practice.

The Climate Change, Environment and Infrastructure Committee was concerned that Stage 1 scrutiny of the Bill was bypassed. Although the committee was able to undertake a degree of scrutiny on a draft Bill, it was not adequate as a replacement for scrutiny at Stage 1, and if we had not conducted that work, then we would not have had a public consultation on the detailed provisions of the Bill, nor an opportunity for those affected by the proposals to have their say.

But it wasn't just the climate change committee that expressed concerns. The Finance Committee has expressed disappointment in the fact that the Minister hasn't been able to provide the financial information requested. The Minister suggested that officials might take at least six months to complete this work. As the Chair of the Finance Committee pointed out in his letter to the First Minister, the Bill will have completed its legislative passage through the Senedd by the time this important financial information is available, and I agree with the Chair that this simply isn't good enough.

The Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee also raised several concerns about the expedited process followed. The Minister has said that the intention is for all of the provisions in the Bill to be commenced by April 2026. The Chair of the committee has rightly questioned whether an expedited process was necessary on that basis. That process is an important part of our procedures, of course, and there will be times when we will need to use it. However, it should only be used when necessary, not because of convenience. The scrutiny of legislation should be seen by Government as a fundamental part of the law-making process, not as something that needs to be tolerated or, in the case of this Bill, avoided.

Having said that, I, like almost everyone else, I'm sure, hope that this Bill will be passed, but I do believe the Minister and the First Minister should reflect on the adequacy of the process that got us here. Thank you.