Minister, I think you've heard the real concerns that are around this Chamber, although there are positives as well, but as the great Mark Isherwood has just told you, your wishy-washy approach just won't wash, and, frankly, that is something I wish to echo very, very strongly.

I really think post-legislative scrutiny is an essential aspect of what we need to do in this Chamber, and we should do more of it. This piece of legislation was born of the civic sector, it got widely praised around the UK, including in The Times newspaper, which highlighted it as an area of legislative activity that really can promote the public good, yet of the 24 recommendations the Government accept 11, and then accept another 11 in principle and reject two. I have to say, if that isn't wishy-washy, what is? 'Accept in principle', of course, is the Government's way of saying, 'Yes, but—' with the emphasis very much on the 'but'. Well, that's not really going to get the sort of transformation that we need. However, I am pleased to see that the Welsh Government has accepted recommendation 15, meaning that the Welsh Government's infrastructure projects will showcase the innovative active travel approaches it expects to see from local authorities, at least trying to lead by example, and it needs to do it much more widely in other areas of public policy, as Julie Morgan just highlighted in terms of the rail franchise, for instance.

So, we need to go a lot further, and let me talk a little about new housing developments. Now, if we transform those and make them really friendly for active travel, it is just an example of what we could do elsewhere, because we don't build that much, and, obviously, we need to go much further than new communities. But at least we should get their design right, and I believe that better use, for instance, of section 106 agreements would be a useful way of ensuring that the planning system hardwires in active travel. The Government, in fairness, is doing this to some extent with electric vehicle infrastructure, which is not exactly active travel but at least it's greener, and I think you should extend that in terms of the active travel agenda. Our policies need to be thinking 50 years ahead as well as what we can achieve fairly quickly, as Adam Price indicated in the example of Copenhagen. So, that's really what we need to see—some real transformation—in order to maximise the potential for sustainable travel, and that really needs a clear and sensible way forward, the Government leading, and ensuring that sustainability in new developments is ingrained for walking, cycling and public transport routes. It really needs to be a comprehensive approach.

I think it's good to look for best practice elsewhere, and there's much of it in Europe. I'm now talking about cultural Europe and Europe as a source of inspiring ideas coming from governments and localities and the people. Can I just highlight—and I hope my German's up to it—an example of this type of thinking in the Vauban residential development located on the southern edge of the city of Freiburg—I think I've got that bit pronounced correctly—which contains 5,000 residents? The aims for this development, which was completed in 2006, included creating a district with greatly reduced car use. This focused on high-quality public transport and active travel infrastructure alongside economic incentives to discourage the ownership of cars and their use. Now, that's not suitable for everyone, but, you know, the old garden village concept—garden suburbs—led the way and led social change. You would get groups that would want to sign up to that type of vision for their life and then have these streets where their children could play and be safe. Much of Vauban's development of a car-free environment has been successful; you can't park in the community, there are satellite parking areas, and as a result, most residents use public transport, walking or cycling to get around. This has resulted in there being only 164 cars per 1,000 people in Vauban—far lower than the average for Freiburg, which is already doing much better than most cities in Germany itself to promote active travel.

Can I conclude? Perhaps we should complete the circle here and have a radical approach in terms of vehicle use in our city areas where we allow it and have a 20-mph presumption, and that, again, I think will make active travel itself more desirable, pleasant and safer. I don't want to emphasise the safety issue too much, because it's still the safest option, usually, to be active in your travel. But this needs to be part of what we should be doing and I do hope that we will see some reform in terms of the speed limits very soon. And I do commend Cardiff in leading the way in Wales at the moment in developing best practice there.