<p>Thank you. I move my amendments 68, 69, 70 and 71, and will be voting against amendment 22. This requires the Welsh Ministers to consult the Senedd's prevailing environmental committee and the public before making regulations under Part 3 of the Bill. This is a matter of public interest. Amendment 70 requires the Welsh Ministers to satisfy themselves that meeting a proposed target would not have an adverse impact&nbsp;on biodiversity outside Wales. The reason why I've tabled this is because it is a fact that this country is now becoming more reliant on imports, and I'm very mindful that, in some ways, we're offsetting our own climate change and nature recovery obligations. Achieving our nature and climate crisis obligations is resulting in us offshoring emissions.</p>
<p>For example, the sustainable farming scheme is expected to cause a livestock reduction by 5 per cent here. Anyone who can say, hand on heart, that our farmers are not up in arms about this kind of—. At the end of the day, we've got a food security issue already in this country. We've seen what's happening globally. I do not want to see a 5 per cent livestock reduction. There's certainly not going to be a 5 per cent reduction in food demand. So, that reduction is going to be made up by us increasing imports, which I just think is hypocritical, potentially from nations with far lesser standards than us. By operating in this way, I believe that Wales is being globally irresponsible.&nbsp;This amendment provides an opportunity for this to be addressed.</p>
<p>Amendment 71 requires the Welsh Ministers to have regard to ensuring a balance in relation to the land and sea, with the aim of preventing targets being set exclusively in relation to one and not the other. As we are seeing with carbon capture, the focus is very much on planting trees on land. I'm all in favour of planting trees on land, but I don't like the 10 per cent obligatory target that's been placed on farmers. They know best how to manage their own land.</p>
<p>Also, over the years, I've raised several times that a hectare of seagrass captures more carbon than a hectare of trees, and I don't think there is enough emphasis. Even Lord Deben, on the carbon budget 3, I think it was, stressed that he'd heard me quite a lot speaking up for the marine environment in terms of looking at our nature recovery, but also our carbon-zero targets.&nbsp;As we know with planning, the marine environment is often overlooked. Land has local development plans, whilst the sea is yet to have any meaningful infrastructure and a national marine development plan.</p>
<p>Recently, NRW published their 'Species in Peril in Wales' report. This was rightly picked up and was ran by numerous media outlets. However, for those who cared to find the report, they would discover that its actual title is, 'Terrestrial and Freshwater Species in Peril in Wales'. It's a pity Joyce Watson isn't here, in some ways—no disrespect to you, Jenny—because Joyce has always been fundamentally very strong, like me, on ensuring that the marine environment has a part to play and that it's widely recognised that we ignore that at our peril.&nbsp;The focus of this report is on terrestrial and freshwater species, and excludes those found in the marine environment other than breeding seabirds. The pattern is clear: land does receive far more attention than our marine environment. My amendment would help to reduce the risk of that happening.</p>