It's not at full capacity, I completely agree with you, but many of the staff there have had experience of working in this type of prison before and were informing their answers to me not just on their experience in Berwyn but where they'd been previously.

As I say, I did ask those questions about the burdens on local services, and they did fit with what we'd heard in the debate coming from Welsh Government. I appreciate that that's contestable as well. But I got to see the prisoner accommodation and a whole range of facilities. I won't go into the whole range of them. They were impressive, as you might expect. I saw the health centre, which was particularly impressive, which was staffed and supported by the prison service themselves, not by the NHS, which fed into those questions about how public services might be affected by this. But I've got to say that the most impressive thing about this visit was the interaction between the prisoners and the staff, which include many women staff, incidentally. It's a completely different culture, based on dignity and respect—on relationships between human beings and not that negative captive and captor sort of set-up that perhaps we associate with prisons. And I really don't want us to overlook this in the very specific question of Baglan and whether that's a suitable location.

One of the most important relationships we discussed was that with the local residents, because there were strong objections to the site in Wrexham at the time, and you can see why. The area's not the same as Baglan, but there are similarities in that it's on the edge of an industrial estate, it's next door to small businesses and adjacent to a housing estate. In terms of visual impact, there's no getting away from this: it's a functional prison; it's not the Taj Mahal. But there has been some success in working with the residents in the housing estate independently of local councillors in helping them understand how the prison works and allaying fears about public services, what happens post release and that sort of thing. I think that might be what the petitioners are talking about when they talk about 'associated problems'. I think it's referred to in the petition. The management there realises that it will take some time to persuade everyone of their commitment to be good neighbours and contributors to the community.

I did receive some evidence that there'd been some small business development on the back of the prison, but I didn't have time to explore that, so I'm not going to introduce that as a material point today. I don't expect the impressive number of signatories to this petition will change their views. You're right, David, it's a really impressive campaign. But in sharing their views directly with the MOJ, it's just sensible to be prepared for other views that the MOJ will have to take into account.

I'm a bit disappointed that these roadshows that we were expecting have been delayed until the new year—I've just had that confirmed—but it does give time for all the interested parties to marshal and test any new evidence. I think the First Minister yesterday could have told us who the beneficiaries of the covenant on the land are. Knowing that will help interested parties so that they can take a view on the likelihood of enforcement of any breach, and I'm pleased that the MOJ has now responded to that Welsh Government letter referred to yesterday, although, of course, I haven't seen it.

Just finally, Dirprwy Lywydd, the critical arguments against development will be in the domain of planning, and I ask: is it really likely that this land will change hands for that purpose before there is certainty on planning permission? As we know, no application has been made and, as we know, the petitioners have material arguments on this side—David Rees has mentioned some of those—and they will not be considered lightly by the local authority. They dare not consider them lightly, should it get that far. Thank you.