I thank the First Minister. Item 4 this afternoon is a statement by the Minister for Climate Change on the Infrastructure (Wales) Bill. And I call on the Minister, Julie James. 

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. I stand in the Chamber today to discuss the Infrastructure (Wales) Bill before the Senedd. 

This Bill introduces a modern and simplified regime for the consenting of significant infrastructure projects in Wales, both on the land and in the territorial sea. Having an efficient and effective consenting regime is vital to the timely delivery of important infrastructure projects in Wales that make a positive contribution towards our social, economic and environmental prosperity and net-zero ambitions.

As well as helping to improve the competitiveness of Wales and position us as an attractive place for investment and jobs, it will offer our communities the opportunity to engage in an open and transparent consenting process to help shape developments that affect them. The proposals in the Bill support multiple commitments in our programme for government. This includes building a stronger, greener economy as we move towards decarbonisation, as well as embedding our response to the climate and nature emergency in everything we do. It will also play an important part towards supporting our commitment to deliver on renewable energy targets as we move towards net-zero emissions by 2050, by enabling the consenting of renewable energy projects in a robust but timely manner.

The need for this Bill has arisen as a result of the Wales Act 2017, which devolved further powers to Wales for the consenting of energy generation projects, overhead electric lines, ports and harbours and other infrastructure works. As a consequence of the way these powers were devolved, we've been placed into older and outdated consenting processes by the UK Government that are not fit for purpose. This has put us at a disadvantage compared to other countries in the United Kingdom. These circumstances have caused a number of problems for developers and local communities in seeking to engage in the consenting process. It also discourages investment and growth in Wales through outdated and complex consenting regimes, which are not attractive or viable options to those seeking to invest here.

To address these issues, the Bill introduces a new unified consenting process, which will apply both on the land and in the territorial sea. It will include nationally significant projects where the Welsh Ministers currently have responsibility for consenting, such as onshore and offshore energy generating stations, overhead electric lines associated with devolved generating stations, as well as works to highways and railways. By replacing multiple consenting processes with a single process, we will help attract the essential investment we need, particularly in the renewable energy sector.

To provide the best possible consenting arrangements, this Bill has been developed with several key aims in mind. Firstly, it will ensure a streamlined and unified process. This will enable developers to access a one-stop shop, whereby permissions, consents, licences and other requirements currently issued under different consenting regimes can be obtained as one package. Secondly, it will offer a transparent, thorough and consistent process, which will allow communities to better understand and effectively engage in decisions that affect them. This will provide confidence and certainty in the decision-making process, which is underpinned by clear policy that strikes the right balance between the need for infrastructure projects to help combat climate change whilst respecting our natural environment. And finally, the new consenting process will be able to meet future challenges in a timely manner by being sufficiently flexible to capture new and developing technologies, as well as any further consenting powers that may be devolved to Wales.

As we are all aware, the delivery of such ambitious aims requires input and collaboration with a wide range of stakeholders, interested parties and local communities. This is why the principles the Bill seeks to legislate for have been subject to full public consultation and developed with ongoing engagement and communications with key stakeholders. This has allowed us to gauge the appetite for a new consenting process in Wales, and to provide an opportunity for stakeholders, including the wider public, to help shape the process to the benefit of everyone involved.

Dirprwy Lywydd, turning to the detail of the Bill, I will outline some of the key elements. The Bill clearly sets out the types and size of development projects identified as significant infrastructure projects to be captured by the new consenting process to achieve an appropriate balance between consenting at the national and local levels. Significant and meaningful consultation requirements are proposed to ensure early and ongoing engagement with stakeholders and local communities, which will begin with robust pre-application consultation requirements being placed on developers. The examination and determination process by which applications are to be assessed will be proportionate and flexible, whilst ensuring decisions are made against a clear policy framework. There will also be various enforcement tools available to ensure any breaches of an infrastructure consent order, or development undertaken without the necessary consent in place, can be effectively dealt with. It is also my intention that the consenting process will operate on the basis of full cost recovery, and the Bill provides the framework to achieve this.

Members will wish to note the Bill contains several powers to make subordinate legislation, which will set out much of the procedural detail required to make the consenting process fully operational. I've considered whether this level of detail is appropriate for inclusion in the Bill. I have concluded that, in order to allow for maximum flexibility to capture any necessary changes in the future, such details would be more appropriately placed in subordinate legislation. I have included justification for these powers in the explanatory memorandum that accompanies the Bill.

Dirprwy Lywydd, to conclude, I believe this Bill will deliver a consenting process for significant infrastructure projects that Wales deserves. I would also like to take this opportunity to express my thanks and gratitude to all those involved in the development of this Bill and the collaborative efforts made to reach this point. I look forward to working with you all as the Bill makes its way through the scrutiny process. Diolch.

Thank you, Minister, for bringing this here to us today. We know that the Wales Act 2017 devolved further consenting powers to Wales: energy generation stations with a capacity of up to and including 350 MW, onshore and in our Welsh waters; overhead electric lines of up to and including 132 kV that are associated with a devolved energy-generating project; and of course, consenting for harbour revision and empowerment orders. I think it's widely known that there is a need now for a more integrated and streamlined approach to infrastructure consenting. A one-stop-shop approach for major devolved projects, similar to the UK Government's development consent order process, would provide more consistent and transparent decision making, and more certainty for communities and developers alike. So, the consultation responses are really helpful. They show much support in response to the questions that have been asked of them. The consultation sets out a number of principles, which will underpin a new unified consenting process. These include basing decisions on clear policy, providing statutory time frames and streamlining the amount of consents required and strengthening the role of our local communities. And I don't think anybody can disagree with that. I just have some questions.

Could you provide, please, more information on the role of the statutory consultees? I believe that we are in agreement on the wish to strengthen the voice of local communities, but so far—. The Bill hasn't really started going, so it may be a little unfair to ask you to do this now, but if you could just respond maybe how you aim to strengthen their voice. Major infrastructure applications are, as we all know, very complex, and I know that, certainly in our community of Aberconwy, with all the renewable energy schemes that will be coming offshore, it's not wrong to say that, sometimes, residents can become a little overwhelmed. And when you mention to them, 'Oh, there's a full consultation process', trying to get them to engage can not be the easiest. So, how can we ensure that this Bill delivers a consultation process that is user friendly and that lay people can actually become fully engaged in?

Now, it is proposed to introduce optional thresholds for Welsh infrastructure projects alongside compulsory thresholds. Whereas projects that fall within the compulsory thresholds would be required to obtain a Welsh infrastructure consent, those projects within the optional thresholds would have a choice of obtaining a WIC or planning permission from the local planning authority. Now, I have been speaking to stakeholders on another issue only today, and it is clear that our LPAs are overwhelmed, certainly in terms of licensing and planning applications. There are already over 100 planning officer vacancies in Wales, and, even in the private sector, in terms of planning consultants, they're well above 100. So, at the end of the day, I do wonder how you're going to strengthen the framework so that developers know exactly who they're applying to.

Now, in light of the fact that our LPAs are taking up to 12 months now to respond to basic planning applications and to pre-planning applications, and it is taking years—planning applications that once upon a time took six to eight weeks now and are taking two to three years in some instances—will you work with us to ensure that the Bill—? Well, I can't see how it does avoid placing additional responsibilities on our LPAs. So, how are you going to ensure we've got the right skills for our planning departments to be able to handle this?

I'm pleased to see the consultation exploring ways to add fast-tracking elements for certain classes or types of work in progress. Whilst I would appreciate more information about a potential fast-tracking process, rather than applying it to certain categories, can we aim to have a consenting process that is really fast, really speedy and efficient? We need to ensure that the Bill unlocks the economic and environmental potential for Wales, removing barriers currently inhibiting efficiency. The slow pace of planning and delivery and lack of long-term plans do create inefficiencies and these are now inhibiting private investment.

Can you address the concerns raised recently by the Llywydd that the following provisions would not be within competence, because they do require the consent of the Secretary of State, our Secretary of State: section 30, pre-application consultation and publicity; section 33, notice of accepted applications and publicity; section 45, access to evidence at inquiry; section 46, payment of appointed representatives where access to evidence is restricted; section 60, what may be included in an infrastructure consent order; section 87, power to change or revoke infrastructure consent orders; section 121, fees for performance of infrastructure consent functions and services; and section 126—

Janet, you need to conclude now, please. 

All right. Power to consult. Can you clarify how you are already working with the Secretary of State? Diolch. 

Thank you, Janet. So, a number of specific questions there. The statutory consultees will be consulted at pre-application stage by the applicants, and at the examination stage by the Welsh Ministers. Where they are consulted, a substantive and timely response is required from the relevant statutory consultee. The Bill gives the Welsh Ministers powers to prescribe in subordinate legislation the form and content of a substantive response and the timescale for which the response must be provided. So, that will ensure all the necessary information is provided in a timely manner. Consulted bodies will be required to provide an annual report to the Welsh Ministers on their compliance with requirements set out in subordinate legislation. The list of authorities and bodies to be identified as statutory consultees will be set out in the subordinate legislation, but it's anticipated that many of the authorities and bodies currently consulted for the developments of national significance process will also be statutory consultees for the purpose of this process.

In terms of community engagement, we think that there is significant improvement in community engagement, because it will improve the level of service for developers and improve how communities can engage with consenting for major infrastructure projects. I think, Dirprwy Lywydd, we're all familiar with a situation in which constituents wish to get engaged in a consultation process, but they are very confused about whether they're engaged in the licence consenting process or the planning consenting process or one of the other consenting processes currently existing. What this will do is take that away. It will be a single process that will result in a infrastructure consent. So, for example, on a flood defence, instead of having to consult on the harbour revision order, the marine licence, the planning application, the highways issue and so on, there will be a single application. It will make it much simpler for communities to engage and much more understandable as to what they're engaging on. It's very frustrating when you're told that something isn't a consideration for the licence and will only be a consideration at some later stage. So, I do think it will improve that very substantially.

In terms of local planning departments, all of these things are currently being processed through Welsh planning departments or through the developments of national significance. So, we're not anticipating an enormous influx of applications, only a streamlining of the process. So, I'd suggest it would take things off the local planning process, rather than put it on. I will say, Janet, planning is one of the bureaucratic back-room processes that were so trashed throughout the years of austerity. It clearly isn't; it's clearly a service that's absolutely essential to any kind of infrastructure consent. Planning departments throughout Wales have been absolutely hollowed out by the austerity process, I absolutely agree with that, but you need to take some responsibility for that.

This process in this Bill does set out a full cost recovery. We don't see why the public purse should subsidise developers who want to make these applications and, therefore, the fees, of course, will provide some income, both to the Welsh Ministers and to local planning authorities and consultees.

And then, just on the Minister of the Crown consent and working with the Secretary of State, I'm afraid that has not been a happy process. We've requested Minister of the Crown consents; they have not been very helpful about it. Just to be really clear, Dirprwy Lywydd, why they're essential: the Bill is designed to operate by conferring some responsibilities on reserved authorities, so, for example, if an infrastructure project crosses the territorial water outside the 200 mile zone or it crosses the Welsh-English border, for example, there may be a necessity for an English statutory consultee to be able to respond. So, the Bill sets out that we could require that. We need Minister of the Crown consents for that. There are ways to do it without that, but it would stop it being such a streamlined process. So, it's in the interests of UK Government, acting as the English Government, to consent to that, and we have requested those. But rest assured that the Bill is functional without it, albeit not quite so streamlined. Diolch.

Thank you to the Minister for this statement this afternoon and for the opportunity to respond to it. Now, as a general principle, it's good to see that steps are afoot to simplify the process for giving consent to develop infrastructure of national importance. But there are questions arising that need to be aired before we go any further.

In her statement, the Minister mentioned creating a one-stop shop for consenting, licensing and responding to other requirements. Now, this is to be welcomed, and, on the face of it, it's positive, but how will this be provided? We will need to ensure that there are no bureaucratic barriers put in place, so I'd like to know what the vision is on how this one-stop shop will look. How will this new unified system respond to the different requirements and needs in areas across Wales?

I'm pleased to read that transparency, thoroughness and consistency in the process of decision making are central to this, in order to ensure effective governance. So, what mechanism will be put in place in order to empower our communities in this process? The local planning system as it currently exists is stacked against our communities and in favour of developers, so we need to ensure that the voices of our communities are given a prominent place in this more centralised process. I'd also like to hear the Minister's response to this: how will the Minister ensure that the voice of the community is heard?

Likewise, environmental considerations are central as we develop a plan for our national infrastructure, not just in terms of environmental projects, but also the carbon used. It's good to see this at the heart of the Bill. So, will the Minister take this opportunity to explain further how the environmental considerations will play into this process?

Further to that, more often than not, the justification given for any significant development is usually economic needs. But economic needs are often entirely contrary to ecological, linguistic, environmental and community needs. So, how does the Minister anticipate that the new system will strike that balance effectively? What consideration will be given, for example, to the linguistic needs in considering major projects?

Finally, I note that there is reference in the draft infrastructure Bill to geological disposal of radioactive waste. It talks about a hole at least 150 m deep under the surface of the land or sea bed. Now, if we create the waste, then it should be our responsibility to deal with that waste, but it's interesting to note that no local authorities in Wales had offered themselves to take that UK radioactive waste. I would like to know and to understand what the rationale and science are behind this particular section of the Bill. I understand that the intention is to gather data and samples, but it's a question as to whether a depth of 150 m is sufficient, because in Finland, for example, they bury it around a mile underground, and in reality, the wisest thing probably is not to bury radioactive waste at all, because of movement in the earth's crust. So, perhaps the Minister could give as an example, so we can understand the science behind it. Thank you.

Diolch, Mabon. So, there are a number of things; just to say it’s an overarching answer, before I get into some of the specifics. This Bill is a process Bill. It’s about changing the process by which we consent things. It is not a policy Bill, so it is not changing any of the underlying policies that go with those processes. So, if the Welsh Government has a policy against the burial of radioactive waste, then that policy continues in force. We still must have a process for dealing with an application, but the policy stays in place, and so the application, I would suggest, would be unlikely to be successful. And that’s the same for all of the other policies. We have to have a process for the applicant to follow, but obviously, that process would have to take account of the policy. So, a number of your questions come up against that. So, we will continue to have the same policies in place; we will continue, I’m sure, to debate the policies here and so on. This process will then apply the policies in that case. So, I think quite a few of the things you asked me are about the interaction of the policy and the process thing.

I think in terms of a couple of the other specific things, the whole point of this regime is to make it simpler for communities to engage. So, it will have compulsory engagement at pre-application stage and then during the process, by both the developer and all the deciding authorities—in this case, the Welsh Ministers—and that will be enforceable as part of the process. I very seriously believe, because I’ve had this myself with my own constituents on a large number of occasions, and I’m sure you will have as well, that the single process will make it easier for people to understand what it is they can contribute by way of an objection, or wanting some improvement on it, or whatever it is. Because I’m sure—I’ve just said this in response to Janet Finch-Saunders, and I’m sure you’ve come across it as well—people say, ‘I want to object to the use of the highway for blah', and you say, ‘Well, that’s not currently in question; it’s the licence that we’re currently looking at’, and so on. People get really frustrated, and rightly so. So, that won’t happen any more, because they’ll be able to put the whole range of issues they wish to put forward in place for the one process.

The same goes for the environmental impact assessments and so on. I am very keen to get the right balance between environmental impact assessment, environmental protection, environmental restoration and enhancement, and infrastructure development—very keen indeed. So, the developers in their application—and, Deputy Llywydd, as this Bill makes its passage through our committees, I’m sure we’ll have some in-depth conversations here—the Bill currently proposes that the content of the application form and so on should be set out in regulations, and that’s so that we can update them very regularly with what we want the developers to have to put forward as part of the application. So, that would include, for example, environmental impact assessments or language impact assessments, or all kinds of other things that we do, and I would advocate very strongly that we need to be able to keep abreast of developments in that field and be able to continue to add them to the process, including, if we are successful in getting further devolution of powers, which I would very much like to see, in the territorial sea, for example, that we can seamlessly add them into the process, rather than having to go through this again.

And I think the other thing that will be able to happen is that the transparency of the process of application and the statutory consultees being able to comment on that will be much more transparent to the public and other stakeholders. So, again, it will be an enabling process that will allow people to see where they are in the process, and when they might expect to be able to see, for example, an EIA. So, I think it is very 'processy'—it’s not a policy thing—but I think sometimes, the process engenders an easier engagement, just simply because it’s easier to follow.

I very much welcome this statement. Infrastructure is one of the three pillars for driving successful economic growth, along with access to finance and high-quality education. I also want to stress the importance of planning to control development and to stop blocking developments. I am pleased that the Bill introduces a modern and simplified regime for the consenting of significant infrastructure projects in Wales, both on the land and in the territorial seas. Having an efficient and effective consenting regime, I agree with you, Minister, is vital to the timely delivery of important infrastructure projects in Wales that make a positive contribution towards our social, economic and environmental prosperity and net-zero ambitions. I welcome that you're introducing a new unified consenting process, which will apply both on the land and in the territorial sea, but the question I've got is: will it make it easier for offshore wind energy to gain consent for generating, make it easier for it to join the grid, and for the necessary grid upgrades to take place?

Yes, thank you, Mike, and I agree; a streamlined process will bring many benefits. I'm not sure it's easier. It's more transparent what the process will be. It will make it much more obvious to the developer what they need to include in their initial application. It will make it easier for them to understand the costs of doing so, and what the likely mitigations necessary will be. And so, I think it will make it a more attractive place to invest. I'm not sure I would use the word 'easier', as such, because we want them to have to jump the various hurdles we put in place, but those hurdles will be obvious and transparent and they'll be able to put them into their planning process.

I also welcome this development. Thank you so much for outlining this and also for briefing me as well. It is something where we can see that large schemes, if scrutinised effectively and managed effectively, do hold applicants and developers to the highest possible standards. So, I can see the benefit of a streamlined and efficient and effective process, so thank you for developing this and bringing it before us here in the Senedd.

I just want to touch on one thing if I may. We rightly have ambitious targets around energy generation, and I just want to ask a specific question about local democracy and accountability. You talked, in response to Mabon, around it being processy, and I do get that, but very many people think that large developers are coming in, often riding roughshod over their local communities, extracting resources, causing years of disruption, and then going away, and we have one of those developments actually in my region in Mid and West Wales now, where communities feel quite voiceless and powerless. So, I guess my question to you is: how would you feel this actually helps local communities to have their voice heard and also makes the process transparent? Thank you. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Diolch, Jane. I've said some of this before, but it's worth repeating, isn't it? There are improved and consistent pre-application consultation requirements incorporated in the process, on applicants of all types, for all types of infrastructure. There's a local impact report necessary, which comes from the local planning authority, which will enable them to express their very firm view. At the moment, if you have—. I'm not going to comment on any specific proposals, obviously, but if you are trying to develop an onshore energy generation system, you need a licence and planning consent for the thing itself; you need licences and planning consents for the transmission of the energy; you may need highway consents; you may need all kinds of other small licensing arrangements; you may need landlord—. You know, there is all kinds of stuff. What this does is put a single consenting process in place. So, if you have a community that's very concerned about the energy transmission arrangements, for example, they can object as part of the process. They can put their views in as part of the process. At the moment, I know people try to do that, and they say, 'Oh, that's not what we're looking at at the moment; we're currently looking at this bit.' What communities feel is that, 'Well, once they've got that bit, it's going to be much harder to object to this bit', and I have some sympathy with that. This allows a single process for the application, which means you don't have to turn concerned citizens away. They can get engaged and understand the throughput of the application. I genuinely do think that makes it easier to engage them, and you don't have this terrible kind of, 'This isn't the right time to put that forward, Mrs Jones', kind of thing, that we have had in the past.

The Welsh Ministers will be in charge of what constitutes an adequate consultation as well, which I think we will develop some case law about, I'm sure, as we go ahead, and we will have a very robust view, and I'm sure as we go through the committees, the committees will have a robust view on what constitutes decent engagement, and I'd like to see that reflected in this as the Bill goes through. I genuinely do think that the simplification of the process makes the policy ambition more transparent and makes communities much better able to engage. And then, just to say, we will continue to fund things like Planning Aid Wales, and so on, to help communities engage with the process.

I welcome the statement today. I think that there is a need to move forward to a modern, to a simplified, and to a much-needed regime. Lots of people have asked questions, of course, that I might have done, but Wales is facing an economic and environmental challenge on a scale that has never been the case before. In fact, all of Europe and the rest of the world are the same. And that in itself, alongside the war in Europe, has seen some real challenges in this space that we couldn't have been anticipating. But at the same time we could have the solutions here if that planning process allows those things to happen. I notice that the big infrastructure projects are the ones that are going to be captured here. So, my question is who decides what is big. Where is the criteria for that? You've answered a lot of the questions on community engagement, so I won't ask those. But are you going to align this with other policies so that we've got a spatial awareness of the impact, not just a streamlined planning process?

Thank you very much, Joyce—a very good set of questions indeed. I completely agree with your analysis of the problem. How we're going to approach it is the Bill itself will set out, in Part 1, the types of infrastructure projects and associated minimum thresholds that are automatically captured by the consenting regime that will be set out in the Bill. The list and thresholds can be built on by the Welsh Ministers, and they reflect, as you'd expect, very much the thresholds that are in the current developments of national significance process and other consenting regimes. They've been the subject of public consultation and engagement with stakeholders to inform them as well of that list, as you'd expect, Joyce. But I take the point you make, and it's a very good one. It's one of the ones that we've had some discussion about, and I'm sure we will in the committees as well.

We absolutely recognise that, in some instances, a quantitative threshold isn't appropriate as to whether a project is of such significance and complexity that it requires consenting through this unified process. So, the Bill, in its current form, enables Welsh Ministers to issue a direction as to whether a project that is outside of the qualifying threshold is nevertheless considered to be an SIP, as it's called—a significant infrastructure project. If it doesn't meet that threshold, or we decide not, then it will go through the normal planning process as normal. It will be similar—I know, Joyce, you do this yourself—to if you are being asked by constituents for the Welsh Ministers to call in a planning application—that's where a planning application is deemed by the Welsh Ministers to be of more than local significance. A very similar process will occur to make sure that even though a project is below threshold, it might be of such importance to the economy of Wales or to the people of Wales that we think it should come through this process. So, those will be incorporated.

I welcome the statement. The questions earlier highlighted how we need public sector funding to be able to deliver private sector as well, and I'm glad that they will be contributing to the planning process. I hope social value, maybe through energy for communities, community infrastructure levies or section 106 funding, will be tied in as well. Minister, can you outline how the Bill will simplify the consenting system in Wales? You may have covered it slightly before, but if you could elaborate a little bit further. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Carolyn. Yes, the idea is to have a full cost recovery system. I've always been a little bit baffled by why the public purse is expected to subsidise the planning or licensing applications of various private-sector individuals. We certainly want to make sure provisions exists to make sure that that doesn't happen, going forward, and that these developments pay for themselves in that sense.

The Welsh Ministers will then be in charge of the process, so any conditions—antecedent or precedent or whatever—that are necessary for this will be part of that process. So, negotiations around highways orders, harbour revision orders, all that kind of stuff, will be part of the process. The costs associated with those, and the benefits associated, will also be part of the process.

In terms of local planning authorities, these are projects that are probably being dealt with in a local planning authority at the moment as a series of very diverse applications. A flood defence, for example, in north Wales, in your region, would have gone, perhaps, through a marine consent, a planning consent, a harbour revision order consent, a highways consent, an energy diversion consent—blah, blah—whereas now, it will come through a single, unified process, and it will divert that work away from the local authority where it's an issue of such complexity.

Finally, Huw Irranca-Davies.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I really do welcome this statement today because of the impact that this could have potentially on us achieving our net-zero targets, but also because of the potential impact on driving those green jobs as well, energy security, and the development of some of our ports infrastructure as well, such as that in Port Talbot, Milford Haven and so on.

Minister, one of the challenges with this is getting the balance right, of course, in terms of a streamlined, unified structure. People often say, 'Why don't they get on with these things?' and then, quite rightly, people concerned with environmental impacts say, 'Yes, but we've got to get the environmental consenting right, and we've got to make sure that the public are engaged meaningfully as well'. So, what does this simplified, unified approach mean for shortening timescales on delivery of projects so that these projects are up and running, and we can hit our net-zero targets; for the environmental aspect of this in consenting in this unified approach, how we safeguard that environmental protection; and also for meaningful engagement with the public? I realise this triple stool is very difficult, but if any one of those three legs falls down, the whole stool topples over in terms of consenting.

And just to flag up as well, Dirprwy Lywydd, if I might, I'm sure all the committees will be looking at the balance between what's on the face and what the Minister once again takes into that flexibility of secondary regulations and guidance. 

Diolch, Huw. I did wonder whether I'd managed to slide that one past you or not. I'm sure we'll have some robust discussions about what is necessary on the face of the Bill and what is necessary for regulatory action.

You're right; the triple stool, as you rightly called it, is a tricky balance, but this doesn't take away any of the responsibilities of the developer to have put the application in in a good position. In fact, it will make it very clear to the developer what is expected by way of an application, and that application will have inside it all of the various needs for an environmental impact assessment, habitats directive assessments and so on—it will be set out very plainly.

Will it speed it up? It will speed it up once the application is in good order, but if it's necessary to monitor a habitat for a year because you need to know what the seasonal variation is, it's not going to shorten that; you're still going to have to do all of the right assessment, evaluation, monitoring and so on. It's just once you've got the information, and that information is shared in the format specified in the regulations, so we don't have nonsense arguments about, 'Well, I used a different system entirely, but it's just as good', which I've seen on multiple occasions—. It will be very clear that you use the system set out in the regulations, which is why I think they should be in regulations, by the way—get my arguments in first. And then, once the application is in and the pre-application stage is finished and all of those consultation are done, the process will be much more speedy because it will not require multiple consenting regimes to kick in. I think that's the real issue.

I thank the Minister.