Thank you, Llywydd. I’m pleased to see that we have at last reached the point where we have a debate on this long-awaited report, and I look forward to the fact that the hour we have today is only the start of the debate, because, as the Minister has just outlined, we need to consult more broadly on these issues, and we will need some discussion of them too.

I’m sure like many other Members, I've received over 300 e-mails to date expressing concerns about certain aspects of the report. I believe that the problem we have, perhaps just at the beginning of the debate, is that there are so many stakeholders who have been described by the Minister as part of the process, who obviously feel that they aren't part of the process. I do think that we need to tackle that first of all. I look forward to hearing what the outcome and result of the next meeting of this group will be—which I assume will be chaired, from what the Minister has said, by the Assembly Member Dafydd Elis-Thomas.

There are two Plaid Cymru amendments that just seek to cast some light on these issues that will need to be resolved and where decisions will need to be taken. In proposing these two amendments, we in no way undermine the need to discuss these issues. I think it’s important that we bear in mind that the different pieces of legislation behind the establishment of the national parks and the AONBs derived from a pre-devolution period. It's quite appropriate that we look at the principles and the approach to landscape conservation. I believe that the landscape that I live in is as important to me as the landscape of any national park, and it's important that we see that reflected throughout the whole of Wales.

Therefore, legislation should be reviewed, and certainly in light of devolution, and in light of the environment Act and the well-being of future generations Act, there is an opportunity now to see what the role of the national parks and the AONBs should be in terms of how we develop our nation and use our natural resources. So, in that context, we welcome the fact that this work is being done and is to continue.

It is a fact that there is a principle, as has been mentioned by the Minister—the Sandford principle—that has been encapsulated in the Environment Act 1995, which is referred to in our first amendment, and that needs to be discussed, we need to take a decision on it, and we need to ensure that everyone is content with the direction of travel for the future. Certainly, at the moment, not all conservation bodies, and not all mountaineering organisations, or those using the landscape for leisure purposes, are content with the debate as it's been at the moment.

We've moved from the Marsden report that discussed this principle and wanted, if anything, to promote it, to a paper that doesn't discuss the principle at all, but takes an entirely different approach to these issues. At some point, we need to reconcile these two things.

The second amendment simply restates the legal point, and I'm sure that the Minister would agree that any change to the governing principles of the national parks would need primary legislation in this place. The purpose of the amendment, quite simply, is to provide that assurance to those people who are following the debate, and take an interest in the report, and take an interest in the beautiful landscapes of Wales that there will be a thorough debate in committee, in Plenary and by all stakeholders before we change legislation.

There has been quite a bit of response to this report, after it was published, from people who had misunderstood the report and thought that this change was to happen today, in this debate—that’s not the fact. We are hopefully starting a national debate on the role of the beautiful landscapes of Wales—the landscapes that everyone in Wales has a right to access, namely the landscape that they live in, and the fact that we need to see development that is in-keeping with our landscapes to ensure that we have viable communities in all parts of Wales and we don’t turn any part of Wales into some sort of community held in aspic. Nobody wants to see that.

But, the challenge facing Government is encapsulated for me in a response that I received from RSPB Cymru, which I am going to quote to close, because it does underline how difficult some of the discussions we will need to have are. I’ll quote in English, as I received it. It goes like this:

Ein pryder dwysaf yw bod yr adroddiad yn argymell yn ddiamwys yr angen i greu deddfau newydd a fydd yn rhoi diben newydd i Barciau Cenedlaethol ac AHNE, a hyd yn oed yn waeth na hynny, mae'n cyflwyno hyn fel barn y gweithgor.

And that’s the point I want to emphasise.

Yn sicr, nid dyma farn RSPB Cymru ac nid ydym yn credu mai dyna oedd barn y gweithgor ychwaith. Nid oedd y grŵp yn nodi amcanion cyfreithiol cyfredol y tirweddau a ddynodwyd fel prif rwystr i reoli ein hadnoddau naturiol mewn modd cynaliadwy, ond cynigiodd y grŵp yn hytrach y dylid canolbwyntio ar ddefnyddio'r fframweithiau a amlinellir gan Ddeddf yr Amgylchedd a Deddf Lles Cenedlaethau'r Dyfodol. Nid oes gennym gof i’r grŵp drafod cynnig newydd Llywodraeth Cymru i ddeddfu ar y dibenion ... mewn unrhyw fanylder o gwbl. Mae hyn yn golygu ein bod yn teimlo nad yw’r adroddiad a gyhoeddwyd yn cynrychioli ein safbwyntiau ni yn gywir.... Rydym yn anfodlon, felly, fod barn Llywodraeth Cymru bod angen deddfwriaeth newydd yn cael ei phortreadu o hyd fel bod wedi’i chymeradwyo gan y grŵp.

I quote that just to demonstrate that there is a great deal of discussion yet to be had on these issues.