I’d like to thank Suzy Davies for her questions and for acknowledging that, in terms of commercial activity, it is important that all organisations that receive public funds look to what they can do more themselves to make themselves more resilient. It’s absolutely essential, especially for many people who may be watching today who can’t make ends meet who look to national organisations to help themselves become more resilient, to give more back to the country. I know there are presidential elections today; well, national institutions should be asking more of what they can do for their country through what Government is able to allocate in their resources, rather than just look for more resources to do the same.

In terms of processes—and largely your questions relate to processes—the letter of 27 July relates to comments that were made, I believe, in committee by the CEO of the national museum, when he said that he was surprised that option 4 had been selected. Actually, if we look at that letter of 27 July, and I’m sure the Member has it—if not, I’m very happy to publish that letter, but also, Presiding Officer, I’m very happy to publish the letter, with the CEO’s agreement, that came ahead of my letter of 27 July. My letter was in response to his and I’d happily publish that letter as well. My letter of 27 July states that

‘the report sets out a number of different options for growing the sector and makes it abundantly clear that there is much cause for optimism if we work closely together and realise the synergies that clearly exist. In view of this’— and this is the crucial line—

‘option 4 may provide a solution to some of the issues and indeed opportunities that you raise in your letter.’

Why is it so bad to look at the opportunities that were raised in that letter? That letter, as I say, I would happily publish—not the letter of 27 July, but the letter from the CEO of 29 June. So, I am still open-minded, but what I would suggest to Members is that it is important to look at those options, as the steering group is going to do, in an open-minded fashion, and to assess them dispassionately for how they could benefit the entire sector.

You ask about Historic Wales and its place in the Welsh Labour manifesto. It was in the Welsh Labour manifesto. We live in the digital age, so the manifesto was online. If you go back and have a look at it, download it online, it is in there. It is in there, where we talk about the importance of Historic Wales bringing together commercial activities. I know that we name specifically within that the national museum and Cadw, but of course on the steering group there is also the royal commission and the national library. There may be synergies there as well. But this is for the steering group. This is for the steering group. I put on record again my assurance to you that I have an open mind. But what I will not accept is a status quo or a tinkering around the edges. Now, the Member in another question asked about a loose arrangement that was operating. Well, I’d ask back in return: if that was successful, why not make it slightly more robust—strengthen it? If that was successful. But I don’t think it was, because, over the years, we’ve heard many, many organisations talk very warmly about the need to collaborate more. But, often, they do not collaborate enough; they just don’t carry out what their promise is.

In terms of evidence, let’s take a look at it. In terms of evidence, we can look at the actual attendance figures, because the effectiveness of any marketing operation—of any commercial operation—is how many people you are engaging with, how many you are attracting. I’m sure that we would agree on that. So, if we look at the National Museum Wales, it’s done a good job in attracting people to the sites and in educating people, but not good enough. I want more. I want the people of Wales to be more active culturally and in terms of physical activity. I want more people to be more active in the arts, and, at the moment, while it’s good, it’s not good enough.

If we look at the figures, first of all—and these are the most recent figures—the most attended site is St Fagans, with 531,000; the second, 491,000 for the Cathays Park national museum, Cardiff; third, the National Waterfront Museum at 261,000; Big Pit, 144,000; the National Slate Museum, 142,000; the National Roman Legion Museum, 71,000; and the National Wool Museum, 31,000. We then take a look at the most attended historic attractions in England and Wales. We’ll see that comparable figures would have the most attended national museum site just fall behind the bus tours of Edinburgh, which is a paid attraction; half the number of people that visit the Riverside Museum. The Roman Baths is a comparable site in terms of cities—Bath to Cardiff—and it’s paid for. They attract 1,044,000. I’ll just go on a little bit more in terms of similar sizes. In Sheffield, the Museums Sheffield Millennium Gallery, which is free, attracts 764,000 people. Brighton’s bigger, granted, but Brighton Pier attracts 4,600,000 people; the National Museum of Scotland, 1,567,000; the Scottish National Gallery, 1,377,000.

Look, that historic environment of Wales is crucially important in terms of visitor numbers, in terms of its ability to educate and to engage people in skills training. It is doing good, as I say, but it’s not doing good enough. I want to make sure that in the years to come we can look back and say, ‘We did all we could to bring together the sector to promote itself collectively for the benefit of all’ and that the key players within the sector operated as a team for one another’s benefit. At the moment, I do not think that that degree of collaboration is sufficient.

In terms of the second question, again this related to whether people on the steering group are approaching the work that they are conducting in a sufficiently open mind, based on the assertion, which is wrong, that I have a preference for one option over another. Well, actually, today I can assure the Member that members of the steering group are very keen to participate in any way they can in achieving an outcome that will be of benefit to the entire sector. I can say that because of the letter that’s appeared today in the ‘Western Mail’. The Member may be aware of the letter, but I’ll just read it out. It’s from the president of the national museum. It’s also from the president of the national library. It’s also from the chairman of the royal commission. It reads:

‘we know it is timely and essential that we look for new opportunities to ensure that heritage is as relevant, as accessible, and as resilient as possible, and that it is based on working in collaboration…it is in this spirit that we are working pro-actively, as members of a Steering Group, with the Welsh Government’.

We are working together. Let’s all play to win, and let’s not see sabotage at the game.