Group 9 is next. This group of amendments relates to setting and reviewing biodiversity targets. Amendment 14 is the lead amendment.

Janet Finch-Saunders to move the Amendment.

Amendment 14 (Janet Finch-Saunders) moved.

Diolch, Llywydd. Amendment 14 enforces Welsh Ministers, before making regulations, to consult a committee of Senedd Cymru with the remit for environmental protection and members of the public. This way there is greater accountability. Amendment 15 makes sure that meeting the target would not have an impact on biodiversity outside of Wales. Amendments 16 and 20 ensure that regulations will not have a materially negative impact on agricultural output, to ensure that the agricultural community and our hard-working farmers are not disproportionately impacted. Amendment 17 ensures there is a balance of targets at land and sea. Too often, we concentrate our efforts on terrestrial land, when we know that our marine environment is really effective in not only protecting our marine environment but can also help us with our carbon-zero emissions. Too often, it's overlooked. Amendment 18 will ensure that the targets are reviewed every Senedd term. Amendment 19 changes the date of the first review—which I cannot believe it's even documented—from 2041 to 2032. It picks up on the point that Alun Davies made earlier: we're doing all this now, we want to get on with it. We're late with it, so why are we talking about the first review from 2041? We believe it should be put back to 2032, and that will be four years from when the regulations are put in place in 2028. Diolch.

Just to speak briefly to Amendment 41, which is consequential to amendment 36, it would clarify that the OEGW must set out in its strategy how it intends to exercise its functions in line with the general purpose set out in section 10(a), rather than the environmental objective as currently drafted.

And just to speak briefly on some of the amendments in Janet's name and to explain why we will not be supporting them. Those amendments would aim to limit the scope of biodiversity targets where they can be said to have an effect on agricultural production. Now, as I set out at Stage 2, this could have—well, it's likely it would have—detrimental effects on the farming industry and would be flawed on several grounds: firstly, on the presumption that biodiversity targets would have a negative effect on output, which is not tested; secondly, that they would provide a perverse incentive for farmers to focus on the quantity of output rather than anything else, as though that were a proxy for economic resilience; and thirdly, by the fact that during the intervening time since these amendments were first considered at Stage 2, the Welsh Government has published their sustainable land management indicators and targets. Now, this framework would, as I understand it, operationalise this Bill's targets with respect to land management, and would do so in a way—well, they will do so in a way—that takes account of agricultural output. So, it's for those reasons, Llywydd, that we will not be supporting those amendments.

Cabinet Secretary. 

Diolch, Llywydd. I'll try and go through these as quickly as I can while still making sense. First of all, I'm really excited about this, because I got an Amendment down. I'll come to that in a moment.

If I can turn to 14 and 41, first of all. I don't support these amendments, because I don't consider that this express duty to consult before setting targets is required, because appropriate consultation is already provided for within the Bill. So, when making regulations, the Welsh Ministers must (1) apply the principles of sustainable management of natural resources, which include making appropriate arrangements for public participation in decision making, which ensures appropriate, meaningful and proportionate consultation will be carried out, and (2) seek independent expert advice. To strengthen those consultation requirements, an amendment was passed at Stage 2 that added a requirement for Welsh Ministers to publish a report summarising the consultation carried out in connection with the regulations and any representations received as a result of the consultation. So, actually, this isn't necessary and, indeed, there's a danger of causing confusion or undermining the existing legislative process, if an express duty to consult is placed on the front of the Bill alongside an existing duty to apply the principles of SMNR. 

If I turn to amendment 15, Llywydd, I can't support this amendment, because there are existing processes in place to assess the impact of targets. Regulations will be supported, of course, by robust impact assessments. Now, due to the broad, extensive and potentially territorially long reach of this amendment, I have real concerns that this amendment would be outside the legislative competence of this Senedd, as it would require Welsh Ministers to exercise their functions by reference to matters otherwise than in relation to Wales and extend beyond the scope of this Bill.

On amendment 16, I don't support this amendment, because there are, indeed, as has been mentioned already, existing processes in place established through the Agriculture (Wales) Act 2023 that address the principle behind this amendment already. So, the role and contribution of our land managers will be critical in the delivery of biodiversity targets. My officials are working closely with representatives from the agricultural sector on the development of targets. Before setting targets through regulations, Welsh Ministers will, in accordance with those SMNR principles, carry out a consultation that will enable views to be considered. This provides a mechanism for any concerns to be raised and considered in target development. And indeed, I brought forward amendments at Stage 2 to require Welsh Ministers to publish a summary of that consultation, providing even more transparency over what views and concerns have been raised during consultation. In addition to that, the regulations setting targets will be supported by robust impact assessments and will include a sustainable land management assessment, if it is identified that any proposed policy or regulation will impact positively or negatively on agriculture or other activities carried out on land used for agriculture.

On amendment 17, I can't support this amendment. To be clear why, the target-setting framework applies equally to land-based targets and the marine environment. Targets will be developed in line with evidence, indicators, modelling and in the areas of pressing need. 

On amendment 18, I don't support this amendment for very pragmatic and evidence-based reasons. Section 6C(1) already sets out a requirement for Welsh Ministers to set long-term and short-term targets. The timescales are defined, as I've said before, as more or less than 15 years. We do need to ensure that enough time has passed before undertaking a review of the effectiveness of targets. Biodiversity reacts differently and over different timescales. For example, if we were to focus on just stopping damage, we could see improvement over a period of a few years; restoration could take decades. Now, biodiversity is an integrated dynamic system in which genes and species and habitats and ecological processes interact across space and time, and they cannot be conserved or restored in isolation. So, that's why the Bill sets out a 10-year period to allow time for action and targets to delivery to be embedded and evidenced before assessing whether they are effective.

Amendment 19, I can't support this amendment for the same reasons as given for amendment 18.

If I turn to amendment 20, I don't support this amendment. The purpose of the statement about targets is to inform the Senedd as to whether a target has been achieved and, if not, what steps the Welsh Ministers are going to take to achieve it. This section is intended to ensure that the Welsh Ministers are held accountable for achieving the targets. The amendment simply does not fit with the purpose of this section.

And amendment 21, I don't consider this amendment is required and can't support it. Public law principles of decision making already require Welsh Ministers to have regard to independent expert advice that they must seek.

If I finally turn to my little amendment, after a great build-up, it's a technical amendment to section 67 of the Environment (Wales) Act 2016, but it's my amendment, to update a cross-reference due to amendments passed at Stage 2. It's a technical amendment on that basis. Thank you, Llywydd.

Janet Finch-Saunders to respond.

Move to the vote.

The question is that Amendment 14 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is objection. We will open the vote on amendment 14. Close the vote. In favour 12, no abstentions and 36 against. Therefore, amendment 14 is not agreed.

Amendment 14: For: 12, Against: 36, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected

Delyth Jewell, Amendment 41. Is it moved?

Amendment 41 (Delyth Jewell) moved.

It is. Are there any objections to Amendment 41? [Objection.] There is objection, so we will move to a vote on amendment 41. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 23, no abstentions and 25 against. Therefore, amendment 41 is not agreed.

Amendment 41: For: 23, Against: 25, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected

Janet Finch-Saunders, Amendment 15?

Amendment 15 (Janet Finch-Saunders) moved.

It's being moved.

Are there any objections to Amendment 15? [Objection.] Yes, there are. So, we will open the vote on amendment 15. Close the vote. In favour 22, no abstentions and 26 against. Therefore, amendment 15 is not agreed.

Amendment 15: For: 22, Against: 26, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected

Amendment 16. Is it being moved, Janet Finch-Saunders?

Amendment 16 (Janet Finch-Saunders) moved.

It is. Are there any objections to Amendment 16? [Objection.] There are. Open the vote on amendment 16. Close the vote. In favour 12, no abstentions and 36 against. Therefore, amendment 16 is not agreed.

Amendment 16: For: 12, Against: 36, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected

Is Amendment 17 being moved, Janet Finch-Saunders?

Amendment 17 (Janet Finch-Saunders) moved.

It is moved. Are there any objections? [Objection.] There are. We will therefore open the vote on Amendment 17. Close the vote. In favour 10, no abstentions, 38 against. Amendment 17 is not agreed.

Amendment 17: For: 10, Against: 38, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected

Your little Amendment, Cabinet Secretary, is it being moved? [Laughter.]

Amendment 35.

Is it being moved?

Amendment 35 (Huw Irranca-Davies) moved.

Move.

Yes. Look at me. Look at me. [Laughter.]

Move.

The question is that Amendment 35 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Amendment 35 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Amendment 42. Is it moved, Delyth Jewell?

Amendment 42 (Delyth Jewell) moved.

It is. Are there any objections? [Objection.] There are. We will vote on Amendment 42. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 46, no abstentions, and two against. Therefore, amendment 42 is agreed.

Amendment 42: For: 46, Against: 2, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been agreed

Amendment 18.

Is Amendment 18 being moved, Janet Finch-Saunders?

Amendment 18 (Janet Finch-Saunders) moved.

Yes, it is.

Are there any objections to Amendment 18? [Objection.] There are. Open the vote on amendment 18. Close the vote. In favour 10, no abstentions, 38 against. Therefore, amendment 18 is not agreed.

Amendment 18: For: 10, Against: 38, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected

Amendment 19. Is it being moved?

Amendment 19 (Janet Finch-Saunders) moved.

Yes, it is.

Are there any objections? [Objection.] There are. Open the vote on Amendment 19. Close the vote. In favour 10, no abstentions, and 38 against. Therefore, amendment 19 is not agreed.

Amendment 19: For: 10, Against: 38, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected

Amendment 43, Delyth Jewell.

Amendment 43 (Delyth Jewell) moved.

It is moved. Are there any objections to Amendment 43? [Objection.] There are objections. We will therefore move to a vote on amendment 43. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 45, no abstentions, three against. Therefore, amendment 43 is agreed.

Amendment 43: For: 45, Against: 3, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been agreed

Janet Finch-Saunders, Amendment 20.

Amendment 20 (Janet Finch-Saunders) moved.

Move.

It's being moved.

Are there any objections? [Objection.] There are. Open the vote on Amendment 20. Close the vote. In favour 12, no abstentions, 36 against. Amendment 20 is not agreed.

Amendment 20: For: 12, Against: 36, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected

Is Amendment 21 being moved?

Amendment 21 (Janet Finch-Saunders) moved.

Yes, it is.

Is there any objection to Amendment 21? [Objection.] There is. So, we will open the vote on amendment 21. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 21, no abstentions, 27 against. Therefore, amendment 21 is not agreed.

Amendment 21: For: 21, Against: 27, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected