25/05/2017 Welsh Assembly

In the short to medium term, Wales is right to take advantage of UK

policy to maximise the potential of the two cities deals and the North

Wales growth deal. It's a glorious opportunity to show how Governments

and local authorities have different political stripes can work with

common purpose. If local squabbling or uninspired ambition or lack of

confidence means these golden opportunities are squandered, it

makes a mockery of devolution and any claim we have to be big thinkers

in a small country. In that short to medium term, we need to keep eyes on

inequity in Wales and remember that the welcome focus on the city teal

in my region, it's not to my constituents' advantage if the rural

neighbours conclude they can't live on that and head south in droves.

The city deal will prompt that. I'm pleased that the idea is gaining

traction, as Paul Davies's long-standing campaign is gaining

traction. . It's with that spirit of common purpose that I say how

dismayed I am to see the Government's amendments regarding

the Severn Bridge tolls. I'm pleased to say Jane Bryant said she welcomed

the Prime Minister's commitment on it because our motion doesn't claim

the Prime Minister has the sole intellectual property to the idea of

the toll free Severn Bridge. It's inviting members simply to welcome

her commitment to doing this, a commitment coming from someone

who'll actually be in a position to scrap those tolls. By deleting that

point, Welsh Government does not welcome a commitment that can be

delivered by a UK Government for the benefit of Wales, preferring instead

to have a sulk because they didn't get a shout out. You even missed the

opportunity to mention Jeremy Corbyn's take on the tolls so I'm

assuming you don't either see him in a position to do that or you can't

bear the thought that it's he that seeks a position to do it. The Welsh

Conservatives are completely committed to the Swansea lagoon.

Arguments across the range amidst catalyst effect and clean energy for

catalyst effects for economic regeneration, to its catalyst effect

on our reputation in the eyes of the world, this is absolutely a

no-brainer. Even so, we cannot conveniently ditch the hours of

argument made by all parties and both Governments dedicated to

tackling fuel poverty, lowering energy costs for industry and

capping energy prices which have been balanced with arguments

demonstrating a growth in clean air and energy supply. That balance is

difficult to manage, difficult to find and takes careful dealings with

it from a responsible Government. The last thing the lagoon needs now

is Corbyn-omics, diving in, saying give us the lagoon at any cost is

giving up, it's saying that neither the company nor the UK Government

nor the UK Government has more to give on this to get us nearer that

delicate balance and that balance that means a positive decision on

funding. Perhaps there was probably a bit more that the Welsh Government

could have helped with, maybe something like cheaper finance

through Welsh Government streams rather than 100% private investment,

I genuinely don't know. Where the Welsh Government can act is to

ensure that the timeline for granting licences is aligned for the

time line for major projects for which the licences are needed. I've

only got 20 seconds, sorry, David. The slow progress in London has

disguised a serious delay and I don't think any of us would be proud

if devolved responsibilities were the sole reason that the lagoon

would be held back. I don't think marine licences should be what we

are talking about down the line. I call on the Cabinet Secretary for

economy and infrastructure. Can I start by thanking members across the

chamber for their contributions and giving me an opportunity to respond

to this debate. As Government, we are absolutely determined to spread

prosperity, growth and opportunity prosperity, growth and opportunity

across Wales to generate prosperity across Wales to generate prosperity

for all. That is the foundation upon which the work to refresh our

economic strategy and develop the economy of each region is to be

based. The Severn tolls given their strategic importance to Wales is

very much part of that thinking. We've been in regular discussions

with the UK Government about the tolls to ensure that future

arrangements represent the best deal for Wales. We've made it clear on

many occasions that the tolls on the bridge are an unfair tax on our

people and on our businesses. It's a barrier to business activity across

the bridge, hampering Welsh growth and acting as a deterrent to inward

investment as members have identified. In particular, the tolls

adversely affect small businesses looking to operate in the south-west

of England, as well as those engaged in the tourism, the logistics and

transport sectors which rely heavily on Severn crossings links for their

businesses. A number of member identified are 2012 study, the one

we commissioned which concluded that removing the tolls would increase

the GVA of South Wales by ?107 million. Although GVA has grown

faster in Wales and across the UK as an average in recent times, we

believe that the increase in GVA presented by the removal of the

tolls would offer a huge boost to the regional economy. I would agree

with Mark as well that the sum could be in excess of ?107 million and

also welcome his assertion that the economy today is now stronger along

the M4 and that there's a return in confidence to South Wales. That of

course thanks to this Welsh Labour Government. Despite the

Conservative's support at Westminster now for abolishing the

tolls, the last time we debated the Severn crossings here in the

chamber, the UK Government's option to improving the tolls was clear.

I'm glad to see the weak and wobbly position adopted by the Prime

Minister has finally come around to a better position, one that is being

championed by this Welsh Labour Government over many, many years.

Now, you were saying this has been championed over many, many years. I

asked the First Minister, he said it had been championed since the Labour

manifesto in 2016, prior to that, he suggested keeping the tolls to fund

the wealth rate. Can I thank my right honourable friend for taking a

consistent position on this matter himself. He's not taken such a

consistent position on which political party he should be a

member of but on this issue he's remained very consistent indeed.

Turning to our priorities for North Wales, I should say I was very

pleased to be able to attend earlier today the inaugural meeting of the

North Wales group on cross border issues chaired by my colleague,

Hannah Blyt Hill n where we discussed several important matters

that will be faced by the region and that we must face in the assembly in

years to come. It's my view and I share the view of Russell George in

his assertion of the potential of the cross border economy, the North

Wales's growth deal bid must be dove-tailed with the growth deal

that is emerging on the English side of the border through the Cheshire

and Warrington elect. They must be complimentary and must also seek to

build on the existing capabilities on the cross border area of the

mercy Dee and North Wales region. It's absolutely essential that the

case for a North Wales growth deal is maintained, one that does he

flect the cross border nature of the economy in terms of transport alone,

and transport will be a critical element of the growth deal, I'm in

no doubt, this Welsh Labour Government's already committed to

spending more than ?200 million on resolving the Deeside corridor which

of course is crucial, as Mark identified, the deside area as being

a primary engine for the Welsh economy -- Deeside. That A 494 is

critical and requires upgrading and I'm very pleased to be able to be

consulting with the public tonne two proposals that we have developed.

The A494 and also the A 55. We are looking at investing tens of

millions in rail infrastructure, although the UK Government is

responsible for that, to enhance the north-east Wales capacity. Looking

at investing considerable sums in resolving pinch points in the road

network and taking forward the important third crossing for the

Menai. Of course one of the biggest single boosts that could be give

tonne the economy of North Wales would be the elect riflecation of

the North Wales main line but I fear that that has not yet been promised

by UK Government, certainly not in the near future -- eelectrification.

North south links are crucial to the economy. Mid-Wales makes a vital

contribution to the culture and economy of Wales and I also believe

that whilst the north south links, significant indeed, so too are east,

west ties and I see three primary arks of prosperity emerging for

Wales, one that crosses North Wales, one that crosses mid and west Wales

and a third that spans South Wales, all three potentially benefitting

from cross border collaboration and ties. I'm very keen in terms of

supporting mid-Wales to look at how we can turbo-charge the activities

of growing mid-Wales which is an important partnership and certainly

in so far as a growth deal for mid-Wales is concerned I'lled be

keen to see what the UK Government, however June 8th pans out, what the

UK Government actually looks at delivering as part of an expanded

offer of growth deals, potentially for the UK. I'll take an

intervention. I'm grateful. Particularly his emphasis on the

whole of Wales, mid-Wales and north as well. If I could draw his

attention back to south-west Wales, tolls need to be got rid of on the

Severn bridge but there is a real issue, as we heard from the member

from new Perth west with -- Newport west, with house prices and what is

going on in Bristol and the greater south-west area, that actually

wealth in your ark of prosperity end up travelling out of Wales and we

end up being a commuter belt. I would be grateful to understand how

the department is going to work with local authorities and businesses in

particular to make sure that businesses locate here to drive

wages up and we don't just become a dormitory. This is in part what I

was going to come on to in my final point, the important structural

element as part of the new economic strategy. We need to ensure that

productivity increases, that our manufacturing base in particular is

future proofed against automation and crucially in regard to avoiding

dormitory communities that we raise skills levels of people of Wales so

we can capture more of the work, more of the economic benefits of

infrastructure investments, not just as a dormitory territory serving the

south-west, but for the south-east of Wales and indeed the whole of the

south of Wales. It's our keen intent to ensure that through a new place

based approach, through development, working with leaders of the the city

deals in the south and growth deals in the north and particularly a

growth deal in mid-Wales, that we do move towards creating opportunities

to grow wealth across Wales and deliver prosperity for all. I call

for a reply to the debate. Thank you everybody who has spoken in this

debate. Thank you to Russell George for opening this, by welcoming the

economic boost to the Welsh economy being delivered by the UK

Government's abolition of the Severn crossing tolls supposing that Wales

is open for business -- showing that Wales is open for business and

opening the need for North Wales and mid-Wales, showing that people not

only look south to Government but in terms of their economic and social

lives, they Look East for their cross border movements and also west

to Ireland. We need to, as you said, cement

North Wales as an sbrinic part of the cross border region linked up to

the northern powerhouse. He said the Welsh Government was also devolved

economic levers to mid-Wales. Di Lloyd supporting the abolition of

the Severn crossing tolls and the development of devolution of powers

to the Welsh regions, very heartening to hear that and shared

his in-depth knowledge of British tolls across Britain. I suggest he

writes more about that. I would be interested in reading about that. No

tolls on Menai Bridge. But we do need the third Menai crossing,

something that was referred to. It's nearly a decade since the Welsh

Government commissioned a report on options for that which made

recommendations. It's a shame we have had to wait this long for

ground hog day to arrive. I hope the minister's aspiration of being a

decision to move forward by 2021 is reached for all concerned.

Dai Lloyd extolled the virtues of the Swansea Bay tidal lagoon as did

many others, and emphasised the need to electrify the Valley lines and

North Wales coastline, something Welsh Conservatives strongly

support. Nick Ramsay referred again to the Prime Minister's decision to

scrap tolls on the Severn Crossing is a game changer with exciting

prospects for the good people and economy of Monmouthshire. He

referred to the GBA figures in the South Wales valleys, part of the

West Wales and valleys sub region which have had the lowest value of

goods and services value produced across the 12 UK regions and nations

for almost 20 years. For 19 years, the whole period of devolution. Even

the most prosperous corner of North Wales in the north-east has seen the

relative figure against the UK level fall from almost 100% of UK GVA to

just 84%. He's emphasised the need for the worst government to work

closely with the UK Government critical, the next UK Government is

seen as a positive partner with the Welsh government, and by the Welsh

government. Jane Bryant again government. Jane Bryant again

emphasised the importance of the Severn Crossing in relation to

Newport, another wonderful place not so far from here. I regret the

partisan comments that followed, I won't respond to those but

acknowledge we are in a general election period. The UK Government

announced tolls in 1962, it is this UK Government which has announced

it's going to scrap them. As she said this risks or the costs and

benefits of attracting people from Bristol could have an impact on

house prices and there is a need to support local young people onto the

housing ladder here, especially given Wales had the largest cuts in

affordable housing budgets after devolution in the UK. She referred

to another U-turn but to my mind its strong leaders who listen and

decide, it's weak leaders who ignore the facts and shoot the messenger.

Sadly something we hear too often in certain other places. Neil Hamilton

again welcomed Theresa May's announcement with a few added

comments. As he said, political independence for Wales would be a

disaster, as it would be for the rest of the UK. Mark Reckless

pointed out a Conservative government in 1992 legislated to

scrap the tolls following the return of the bridges to the public sector

and the Conservative government was now delivering on that. He said this

will add to the return of confidence along the M4 corridor strengthening

links between South Wales, Bristol and London, and she referred to the

sensitive and flexible way the UK Government was approaching regional

development in Wales as encouraging but it needs to be matched by the

Welsh government. Susie Davis said the post-Brexit regional policy may

look different in the future but it was right for Wales to take

advantage of UK regional policy now, as "Big thinkers in a small

country". We should welcome the commitment coming from the Prime

Minister rather than go, as she said, into a bit of a sulk. Welsh

Conservatives are committed to the lagoon, as acknowledged by the Prime

Minister to us, as Susie emphasised, and the last thing, as she said, the

lagoon needs now is Corbynomics. The Cabinet Secretary responded and said

they are determined to spread they are determined to spread

prosperity across Wales. It's a shame that since 1998 we have

remained the part of the UK with the lowest GBA. He said the Severn

Bridge tolls are a barrier which is why Theresa May has announced she is

removing them. He then made a week and wobbly proposition that

confidence is returning to South Wales thanks to the Welsh

government. In reality most things have been going backwards since

devolution, not because of devolution but because of

government. It's interesting the improvement in jobs and employment

and investment has happened since the conservative Prime Minister and

Conservative lead government took office in 2010. It certainly wasn't

happening beforehand. I regret he resorted to a petty personalised

attack against a colleague. He referred to the cross-party group

meeting today, I also attended and I welcome his attendance. I think I

was elected as a joint deputy chair of that group. The critical work to

do is great deals on each side of the border, the Cabinet Secretary

said, must be complimentary. No, this is a single great deal for both

sides of the border, that's why Warrington were represented there

today but also Gwynedd was represented there today.

It is nine years since the last scheme had to be scrapped by the

Welsh government of its proposals word... Would you like to stand? Is

it -- is it not true you campaigned against that skin? I campaigned in

support of local people which you'd also did when you realise there was

an election a few weeks ahead. I hope what comes out this time is in

keeping with the sustainability needs of the local community. You

talked about enhanced rail capacity in north-east Wales, it would be

wonderful if the worst government caught up with the Mersey districts,

the Liverpool district, and announce its going to support and invest in

this side of the border. So that the proposals do not end at the border.

Also to restore the two miles it removed from the Wrexham- Chester

line. Referring to the Menai, we had a consultation which made a series

of recommendations and it appears it is Groundhog Day as well there. As

he said, we need to ensure productivity increases and future

proof against automation through a new approach, working with the UK

Government supported great deal in North Wales, through the city deals

in South Wales and hopefully through a mid Wales great deal too. But that

will require the Welsh government to recognise the proposals will be

North Wales great vision and in the bit that's going forward, require it

to give up some power to the region also. Thank you very much. The

proposal is to agree the motion, does any member object? I will defer

voting until voting time. The next item is the debate that was

withdrawn by Plaid Cymru on live music and therefore item ten is the

Plaid Cymru debate on the National energy company. I call on Simon

Thomas. Thank you. I am pleased to move the motion in the name of Plaid

Cymru, which puts forward and presents evidence on the

establishment of an independent energy company for Wales. At the

beginning of the debate I would like to highlight the fact that we have

published a research paper on the issue, and have used the Assembly's

research fund, and the paper is attached to the debate and I hope

members of all parties will read the paper to criticise it or to agree

with that. I think it's important we use Assembly resources to build the

evidence base for our debates, and to disseminate information. If

anyone wants a hard copy or I would be more than happy to provide one to

you. It's true to save Plaid Cymru has always been in favour of an

independent energy company for Wales, but the evidence for that has

increased over the past few years, and the main shift in this area was

the environment committee's report that identified the opportunity for

an energy company for Wales which could do a great deal in order to

close the gap in terms of fuel poverty, to invest in new forms of

energy, particularly renewable and hydrogen, and also to identify

opportunities to challenge the current trading climate in energy

now underpinning the current situation is the fundamental

question, does the current market work? For the everyday resident,

does it work for business, and does it work in terms of long-term

investment in the kinds of energy and the energy industry we want to

see in Wales? Plaid Cymru is of the opinion the answer is no, the

current system isn't working. And we need at least one more move in the

current system to make things more lively. The opinion is shared by the

Labour Party, at least the Corbyn Labour Party, because that Labour

Party has put in its manifesto for the general election on the 8th of

June for an independent energy company in all regions. They use the

word region, I think Labour sees Wales as a region, it is a nation

for us of course. That's why I was surprised to see the Labour Party

here had tabled an amendment watering down our requests and

undermining what they are saying and what their own party is standing on

in this election. That is a matter for them to explain and I'm sure

they will do so in due time. There is no doubt that the current market

is damaging Wales. Low income households are highly affected by

high energy costs and this is common to all parties. The Labour Party

proposed a cap on energy prices two years ago. That was derided by the

Conservative Party at the time but now it's the Conservatives proposing

a cap on energy prices. That is something that is eight temporary

fix. It's not tackling the fundamental robber in the market and

that's what we are proposing here, something long time which would

actually intervene in that market here in Wales, 23% of homes are

believed to be in few will poverty. 3% are in severe fuel poverty, they

pay more than 20% of their income on energy costs. That puts you in a

very difficult position indeed. What's interesting is if you compare

that with the rest of Britain, because only 11% of homes in England

are considered to be in fuel poverty. In the past, possibly

today, some may argue, that moving towards removable energy is

increased prices and we are irresponsible in arguing for an

energy system which is less reliant on carbon because that will raise

energy prices for our poorest customers. But what is interesting

is that energy prices in Wales are far higher than they are in the rest

of the UK. But we produce less renewable energy than the rest of

the UK. So, as the percentage of electricity produced by renewable

sources at the moment is some 20% in Scotland it is double that. Over 42%

in Northern Ireland. It is 50, sorry, 26%. And even in England it

is higher than Wales, some 2% higher. Therefore there is no clear

link between using renewable sources and the price paid by customers. The

market is far more complex than that. And the fact is that we are

storing up problems for the future, as we continue with an energy

distributional system which is very centralised and isn't distributed at

a local level, not devolved in that sense, and isn't therefore

appropriate for the kind of energy production which we will soon see

developing. One of those is something we've already discussed

with the Cabinet Secretary, the shift towards vehicles of all kinds

running on electricity or hydrogen, particularly in terms of public

transport. The tidal lagoon which we are very supportive of and I'm

disappointed it isn't being reflected in the UK manifesto of the

Conservative Party, although it's in the manifesto of all other parties,

but the tidal lagoon particularly in south Wales and North Wales, does

require a more localised distribution centre where local

people seem more benefit from the investment made in renewable energy.

Now, although more is to be devolved to Wales in terms of energy planning

up to 350 megawatts, it is true to say the funding systems will remain

in London. In that context too, the establishment of an energy of

company for Wales will be of benefit. So what could such a

company do? Broadly speaking in the report we've commissioned, it looks

at how a company could bulk buy. So, buying energy on but half of

customers in Wales and passing on the savings in that context are

those customers. We are looking at how an energy company could be a

vehicle to provide some of the other objectives of the Welsh government.

We'd use this company as a vehicle for those improvements and the

company could be an envelope for investment in renewable energy. I

don't think it's broadly recognised that the Welsh Government's already

investing, to be fair to it, is already investing in renewable

energy. I think they have an investment in a solar farm in man

mouthshire somewhere, I think some millions of pounds were invested

there. We are also seeing a number of local communities coming together

to invest locally. There are some good examples of that. I

congratulate one particular company of meeting their target of ?5

million. Surely it would be better for a national company to coordinate

the deals to get better deals in the city for investment and in turn pass

on those benefits to the customer. Our national energy companies could

also lead... I'll give way. There are some major solar farm

developments, and would you agree with me, that as good as the

developments are, it's important the local communities get the benefits,

because in some cases the communities haven't been fully

involved along the way and they felt isolated from the benefits they

rightly should get? I agree with the general point that he's making. I

don't know if those are the projects that the Welsh Government's also

given support to, but I think the point that I'm making is that a more

national infrastructure would be a way of delivering those benefits

more directly to the local consumers. I think that's a point

that's something that's frustrate manied of us over the years who want

to see the developments happen but also are frustrated with the

national infrastructure that holds the benefits at centralised level

and doesn't deliver them even though the local people are seeing the

development locally. Bringing the two together is what a national

energy company could potentially do in the Welsh context. If I could

just conclude my remarks by saying that we would also, and personally

from the point of view of Plaid Cymru, we'd want to see this company

being developed either on a cooperative basis or certainly on a

basis which could include local councils or regional energy

developments. It's the cause of sadness to me that we have seen more

development in England and devolved systems from central government in

England who have used the localism Act to allow an energy company in

Manchester to allow an energy company in Nottingham, Robin Hood

Energy is well-known to us. And I think we too need to take advantage

of those opportunities and I very much hope that the spirit of the

motion will be accepted by the assembly.

I have selected the amendment and I call on the secretary for

environment and and rural affairs to amendment table one.

Can I start by being polite and commending Plaid Cymru's initiative

in using the new flexibility in assembly resources to commission

research projects. I generally think it's a good idea and in fairness you

have put your ideas out and we can have an excellent debate I'm sure on

this proposal. So I think we need more of this and you deserve a

serious response to your central suggestion.

We won't be supporting it for reasons I'll indicate but we do

share the aim for more fish and energy use at more competitive

prices. It's our view this can be achieved without heavy Government

intervention or nationalisation. I do know the thrust of the Plaid

Cymru recommendation is to have a sort of national company that's

bought in by local communities and local authorities potentially. I

suppose if something does emerge that is built up from a local

direction and mirrors something like Glas Cymru, there's more feasibility

for that. I have to say, imposing this sort of structure and pushing

the initiative and forcing it is something we would be suspicious

about. Yes. If I could put it to him, if I was a Conservative I would

have thought an energy cap was also a very heavy handed intervention

into the market. Well, it brings me nicely on to the point that it's not

an efficient or perfect market and the

difficulties we have are that the energy prices are high and also very

difficult to understand whenever you get your energy bill, unless you did

double maths at A-level, I don't think you've got a hope and perhaps

you need to have studied it at university as well. But in general,

we are about 15% higher on electricity prices than the OECD

average and that pinches on us all. But it's particularly I think

unfortunate for those in fuel poverty. According to some

calculations, it would be feasible to deliver effective electricity and

reduce the cost by 50%. There is that type of potential saving. I

think it's something that we should very much aim for. Efficiency is key

to that part. If we all use more energy, as it becomes cheaper, it's

not going to really get us anywhere. I think we do sign up to the

principle that more local generation is important and use of other

models, innovative models like cooperatives and I think many of us

would have visited some of these schemes and found them very note

worthy and inspiring. There are some draw backs. We need to sort of

balance diet here really of providers. There is a need for

resilience. You don't always get that in local community-run

projects. Also we still need a wider strategy and I think that is a very,

very important matter to be borne in mind. Can I just say that whilst we

have some reservations about Plaid's approach, but we are pleased to note

them and welcome this as part of a healthy debate, perhaps Plaid Cymru

would find comfort in this but we find the Government's amendment

broadly right in terms of its approach, although that is not me

praising full-scale all of the current approaches taken by the

Government in terms of energy. We would very much urge them to look at

some of the long-term structural issues that are limiting growth and

development in mid and North Wales in terms of the grid and access to

it and how smaller scale hydroprojects in particular connect

to it. Can I say that I think we need a policy based on increasing

efficient use and distribution of electricity. We need to reduce

fossil fuel use. I think that is very, very important and reference

has been made to electric cars, but of course that invites you to think

about you are going to generate that electricity at source and we do not

want to be fossil-fuel dependent. Our aim is a low carbon economy and

also plenty of room for innovative community projects. Again, I'll just

finish by commending Plaid Cymru for I think this is the first debate on

a commissioned report by a political party using the new resources, so at

least on that I can say well done. Thank you. If we are serious about

tackling climate change as one of the greatest threats facing

humanity, then we must first of all reduce our energy use, that's always

the starts point when it comes to energy policy, but then increase the

percentage of energy which is produced from renewable sources.

Plaid Cymru's aim in order to enable us to cut carbon emissions by 80% by

2050 and 40% by 2020 is to produce as much energy as is used in Wales

from renewable sources by 2035 and there would be a key role for Cymru

to play in achieving that particular ambition. As we have heard in the

last assembly, the environment sustainability committee produced a

report, smarter energy future for Wales and it received cross party

support and what it was in reality was a blueprint in terms of moving

this agenda forward. It suggested ways of achieving the economic

potential which emerges from using natural resources in a responsible,

sustainable manner and creating jobs and wealth for the people of Wales.

In so doing, it allows us to tackle the issue of fuel poverty, clearly

tackling climate change and also of course, empowers local community to

be far more proactive and far more engaged in deciding their own energy

futures. Wales doesn't have to wait for further powers in this area

before delivering much of what is contained within the committee's

vision. We can start on much of this work now and far more of it should

have already been commenced over a year ago. One of the committee's

recommendations in that report was to create an umbrella not for profit

energy company. We heard that local authorities across England have

established such companies, we know of examples in Bristol and

Nottingham and, of course, we could use that in order to target and

tackle fuel poverty. We know in Nottingham Robin Hood Energy offers

a particular tariff or residents of Nottingham -- for residents of

Nottingham. Within that, they can set lower rates in specific areas

where there is a great deal of fuel poverty, that isn't to say that

nothing is happening in Wales. We know in Bridgend council for example

about the local heat networks there and Wrexham's already done a great

deal in terms of solar energy. But this should be the norm, rather than

the exceptions as is too offn the case. The creation of a national

energy company for Wales is the chance for us to get to the core of

some of these issues of fuel poverty to investing in infrastructure,

joint bargaining, creating energy, generating energy and research and

development in energy and in so doing, creating those commercial

opportunities which will bring broader benefits to the people of

Wales, never mind of course the environmental benefits. Now,

reducing demand for energy is in a very important way and a key part of

that process of moving to a smarter energy future and we know the

households in the UK spend some 80% of their energy cost on heating

rooms and heating water in homes. We therefore need to ensure that homes

are as efficient as possible in terms of energy usage and we know

that there are schemes making contributions. I've said time and

again, they are nowhere near enough in terms of responding to the scale

of the challenge facing us and the level of investment that's truly

required when it comes to that agenda. But I would certainly feel

that Cymru would have a role in that area in terms of encouraging and

educating people on how to tackle this whole agenda. So we need to

move away. I've said this previously. I can't make the point

strongly enough - we have to move away from this bespoke model of

where energy is produced in large stations and transferred

inefficiently in a very costly way across an ageing grid which is

creeking very often. We need to move to a model of a grid which is more

of a spider web, a smarter grid with 2th the energy being produced closer

to where it is being consumed. Cymru could certainly be part of that

transformation and look at new storage systems in homes. I have ten

seconds left, unfortunately. We also need to look at the planning system

and the committee's report has done that and my plea is that the

template and blueprint is in place, what we need now is a political win

to try to drive this agenda forward. Neil Hamilton. I'm delighted to take

part in this debate. I have some difficulty in understanding how such

a company could in practice make any material difference to the power in

Wales if it doesn't have access to capital from private markets. I

assume we are not thinking about setting up a nationalised energy

company and, of course, there is a role for cooperatives and that is

not likely to make more than a morning national difference to the

current state of the market. I'm not opposed to this in principle but do

see certain practical difficulties in bringing it about to make a

difference. I have some difficulty with some of the claims that are

made in the context of this paper on which the proposal is based which

I'll come to in a moment. The background to all this is the

Climate change Act, and this is explicit in the foreword to the

document, there is an obligation to reduce the carbon emissions by 80%

by 2050. We need to Clear this can only be done by imposing colossal

costs on households and businesses in Wales.

In considering, as we heard in the last debate, that we had some of the

poorest parts not just of the UK but also of western Europe, that is a

significant burden which has to be taken into account. The costs of the

Climate Change Act are distributed amongst the population in 2014 were

?5 billion per annum, this is reflected in our electricity bills

as well as parts of the costs of providing ourselves with power which

are met by companies that feed into the power bills in other ways as

green taxes on the one hand and green taxes on the one hand and

increased generated costs on the other. That figure in 2014 will rise

to 14 billion a year in 2020. Let's put these figures into real

perspective. In 2020, the average household in the UK will be paying

?584 a year for the obligations we've assumed under the Climate

Change Act. In 2030 that will have risen to ?875 a year, by 2050 it

will be ?1395. In the 16 years between 2014 and 2030, the average

household in Wales will pay and extra ?11,000 in the costs of

electricity. But is not an insignificant sum. The further down

the income scale you go the greater the burden that is felt. So we have

to be clear that what we are doing is worthwhile to the public benefit.

I don't believe that that is the case. It is said in the

justification for this change that there is a list of present and

future challenges. It refers to increased incidence of erratic

weather events due to climate change. There is no evidence

whatsoever to justify that claim. In fact the evidence is all the other

way. What is it that we are seeing in world weather patterns which is

any different from at any time in the last hundred years? The datasets

beyond that aren't available so we can't compare like with like for a

very long period. So we are making dramatic assumptions on the basis of

inadequate data, on the basis of which we are imposing real burdens

on real people. I do believe it's a responsible way for us to behave. If

we take hurricane is, after hurricane Katrina in 2005, everybody

in the climate alarm as the world said the end of the world was night

and we had moved into an era of greater volatility which would

impose massive costs on the world. The evidence of the National oceanic

and atmospheric Administration data which go back to 1851, is that no

major hurricane has hit the continent of the USA since October

2000 and five. So we have the longest pause on record and they say

it is premature to conclude that human activities have already had a

detectable impact on Atlantic hurricane activity. In the bulletin

of the American meteorological Society in 2015 there was a very

interesting article on understanding trends and extreme storms. There

were no significant trend in the number of US hurricanes hitting the

United States since 1900. The increase appears to be a natural

variation. The variation occurs within years and decades but not

over the whole length of time of the datasets. This experience could be

replicated for tornadoes, droughts and all sorts of other natural

weather conditions. In the course of five minutes I can barely begin to

argue this point, but all I would like to say in conclusion in this

debate is that there is no scientific basis which we can rely

upon unambiguously to justify the vast costs which we deliberately are

imposing upon ordinary and vulnerable people. I call on the

Cabinet Secretary for environment and Rural Affairs stop.

The Welsh government has committed to delivering a low carbon energy

system for Wales and we have committed to delivering the maximum

benefits for Wales and protect the most abominable. I welcome the work

being done on developing the Ynni Cymru model. And certainly, reading

the report, clear that the report identifies very similar strategic

priorities to those that I set out in my energy statement in December,

using energy more efficiently, moving to low-carbon generation and

gaining economic benefit from the new technologies and business models

emerging from the transition. Most of the types of activity proposed

are already being taken forward by Welsh government funded programmes

of support, such as Welsh government warm homes, the local energy service

and the public sector support offer. We continue to identify sources of

capital finance which can be used to support the development of energy

efficiency and renewable energy projects across all sectors. We've

had significant impact with our efficiency programmes to date and we

are keen to address the energy efficiency challenge and set out

actions to be taken forward. I think it was an initial exchange between

Simon Thomas and myself that got this conversation going around

having a not-for-profit company, Simon Thomas and I had an initial

meeting and then the Welsh government held three events across

Wales in March to collect evidence and fears about the potential energy

service company for Wales. Simon spoke at the event in Aberystwyth

and I think it's helpful to see the aspirations you've spoken about

today are really set out in the report that we are considering

today. The environment and sustainability committee of the last

Assembly recommended setting up an energy company and its report

recognised the risks and challenges in entering what is now a highly

competitive market, with over 50 players. And certainly the feedback

we had from those three meetings is that we, it is very challenging at

the moment to sell cheap energy which is also low-carbon, unless you

own a generation. Profits are therefore uncertain. The supply

sector is about high customer volumes and very low margins. The

feedback we got was that people felt we needed to be very clear on the

purpose of an energy company. There is a danger that an energy company

could become a distraction from what is really needed which is the work

we are already doing in driving investment and energy efficiency.

Renewable edge generation and infrastructure. To enable that

transition to a deep carbonised energy system in Wales. We need to

look at the benefits and risks of such a company. We also need to be

clear about the purpose of a company. It could tackle energy

prices, it could address issues of trust in providers but it's unlikely

that any single model would be able to tackle all of the issues. It's

good to be working with people interested in this idea to

understand what activity is already underway, and clarify how Welsh

government can best add value in this area. We are also aware of a

number of organisations within Wales already considering or taking action

against a background where the number of energy companies is

increasing rapidly. There is already 50 providers with a supply licence,

some of which are providing greater choice. However we have seen the

failure of GB energy which demonstrates it is difficult to

compete in an increasingly crowded Arquette. We also got some feedback

from the event is about the fact Welsh government needs to continue

to supply a supportive policy environment and coordinate activity

across Wales, to enable projects to be delivered for the benefit of

Wales. Another bit of feedback was that people felt the government's

job should be to act as an honest and trusted voice above the sales

patter of competing energy suppliers, looking at the strategic

and regulatory issues. We work closely with oft gen, the National

Grid, the UK Government to ensure they deliver on our priority to

deliver an energy system which enables the low-carbon transition in

Wales. An arms arm's-length body without the convening power would be

unable to do this. We are linking up activities and supporting

developments which won't happen naturally. This is exactly what we

are doing by supporting projects such as energy local, which is

piloting local selling of electricity and I'm looking forward

to visiting that very soon. But will help us understand how regulation

needs to change to help this happen more widely. We've already

identified heat as a key area and have been working with Bridgend to

identify new approaches to delivering low-carbon heat. We are

now gathering evidence on the support services we provide in

Wales. These services have already captured local benefit from

delivering energy projects across Wales. They will continue to form a

key part of our approach to creating the right environment for that

transition to low-carbon in Wales. I very much look forward to publishing

our report from those recent events, along with our position on the

proposal. I look forward to continuing to work with Simon Thomas

and any other elected members who support our vision to identify how

to continue to use the available resources in the most innovative

ways to deliver our energy aims. I call on Simon Thomas to reply to the

debate. Thank you to everyone who's taken part and I think if we can try

and come to at least one thing we've all decided and agreed upon which is

that it is an imperfect market, and it's not delivering the efficiencies

you would expect a good market to do. That's why it needs such heavy

regulation. I could test that by asking members to raise their hands

if they still remain with the original energy company they were

with before privatisation. I think there would be quite a few, slightly

indicating they are still with those originals. I think that shows the

market is very difficult for the average consumer to batter Lynn.

That's why we need consumer champions. That can be a regulator

or it can be a company set up to intervene in a particular way. I'm

very pleased the worst government has undertaken these consultation

events and I'm look forward to hearing more details from them. I

think it's fair to say there was enthusiasm in the event in

Aberystwyth for eight development like this. I accept that purpose and

focus will be very important. What would the main purpose and focus be?

There are a wide range of things an energy company could be, fuel

poverty, of renewable energy, investment. It has to lead with some

of these to really be effective. That's a decision that I would like

to engage with with the Welsh government on, but not one that

simply says let's carry on the way we are. I think there's so much

wrong with the market at the moment but we would be letting the people

of Wales down if we don't have a more intervention. The ideal

scenario was described as more of a spider 's web approach to

maintaining our energy. I would like to think that Wales energy company

would be one of the threads, it wouldn't be the whole web but one of

the main threads that help that wept together, and the one of course. --

stickiest one of course. It's important to note the proposal we

have is just a discussion document but one of the proposals is that you

could float such a company but we would want the Welsh government to

retain a controlling stake. There's no reason private markets can't get

involved. I think there is a fundamental mistake in trying to

argue the world is unchanging. China is investing 300 billion in

renewable energy by 2020. India has a target of being 60% from renewable

energy by 2027. We are old-fashioned in this regard, it's the new

economies moving ahead and it's fair to say there are carbon taxes, but

there's ?6 billion a year of subsidy going into the current fossil fuel

industry. Twice that which is going into renewables. That's mainly in

tax breaks in North Sea oil and gas. There is also substantial subsidies

for nuclear. I think we would be remiss if we didn't acknowledge that

there is an ongoing subsidy to the way we live today and that the

demand to have new subsidies for a change to meet the challenges of the

future isn't unreasonable in that context. I think, though Neil

Hamilton wouldn't agree, and I accept, we have to reduce our

dependency on fossil fuel. That is good for us environmentally and good

for us as a nation because it makes us more self-reliant. We have the

energy here, without coastline, mountains and rivers, to become more

self reliant on energy. Who wouldn't want to become more self reliant on

energy? Does he agree the subsidy is in

respect of decommissioning in the North Sea, presumably that's

something he wants to see, rather than the oil infrastructure being

left there? It's a mix. Some were there for exploration so it's been

changed the other way around. I want to conclude on that and thank

members for acknowledging this debate has been engendered not only

by Plaid Cymru policy but also by using sources of the assembly and I

hope we see more debates like this. I encourage members to use the funds

for policy in this way. For policy development in this way, please

bring forward more debates in the regard, the resources are there to

support us as assembly members. It does mean that we can think outside

the box from time to time as well. I think this is something that will

develop naturally and organically in Wales. We'll see local energy

companies develop over a period of time. I would like us to take a more

national leadership on the issue. The proposal is to agree the motion

without amendment. Any members object? I will defer voting on this

item until voting time and voting time now proceeds and unless three

members wish for the bell to be rung, I will proceed directly to

voting time. The first vote is on the Welsh Conservatives debate and I

call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Paul Davies.

Open a vote. The motion is not agreed. If

amendment one is agreed, amendment two will be deselected. I call for a

vote on amendment one tabled in the name of Jane Hut. Open the vote.

The amendment is agreed. Amendment three, call for a vote on amendment

three tabled. Open the vote. Close the vote. Amendment three is

agreed. I call for a vote on amendment four.

Amendment four is agreed. I now call for a vote on the motion as amended,

open the vote. Close the vote. The motion as

amended is agreed. We now have a vote on the Plaid

Cymru debate on national energy company. I call for a vote on the

motion tabled. Open the vote. Close the vote. The motion is not

agreed. Amendment one, I call for a vote. Open the vote.

Amendment one is agreed. I call for a vote on the motion as amended.

Open the vote. Close the vote.