But, just to go back to what this debate is actually all about, the wilding of the hills of Wales, following on from the EU habitats directive, has caused a catastrophic increase in most predators, and declines towards extinction of some species, and particularly vulnerable ones. Leaving the EU does give us an opportunity to improve the environment of the uplands and gives power to this Assembly to take a very different approach to the one that has been adopted hitherto. The Cabinet Secretary did refer to the opportunities that this gives to Wales to design an agricultural policy that suits the specific climatic and topographical problems of our upland areas in particular. In the course of her speech she described the current common agricultural policy and the basic payments scheme as a very blunt instrument, and indeed it is. I fully agree with her on that. The one-size-fits-all policy for agriculture for the whole of Europe does ignore many important elements in the agricultural regime here in Wales, and I applaud her words in saying that she wants to introduce more freedoms for farmers to increase productivity and run their businesses in a more productive way. That seems to me to be a very good point to make, rather than the usual party political dogfight points about exports of lamb, and so on and so forth, and I'll deal with what Llyr Gruffydd says about that next.

Yes, of course, we know that about a third of Welsh output of lamb is exported to the EU. Two thirds is consumed within the United Kingdom, so let's keep this in perspective. The farming sector itself as a proportion of the national income is quite small. Total exports of lamb from the United Kingdom amount to about £300 million a year. We're not dealing with large figures here. Insofar as there are going to be transitional problems for sheep farmers, then they can easily be dealt with within the budgets that will become available as a result of leaving the EU because there will be a Brexit dividend, as we know. Instead of subsidising farmers in other parts of Europe, we can now subsidise farmers within the United Kingdom, and in particular within Wales, and it will be the Welsh Government that has the responsibility and the opportunity to do that. I'm amazed that they're so pessimistic and so defeatist about the opportunities for British agriculture that Brexit gives. What a pathetic spectacle to see a Welsh Government saying, 'We'd much rather that Brussels should take these decisions than we should take them ourselves'. What sort of government is it that doesn't believe in itself and its own abilities to provide best for the people of Wales, and in particular for the farmers and consumers of Wales?

So, UKIP has an optimistic view of the future, and we certainly have faith and confidence in our own country and our own ability not only to survive in the world, but also to prosper on the basis of an agricultural policy that is designed by us for us, and for our own people. If an agricultural policy is introduced, the consequences of which are failure, then we know where to look to put the finger of blame. It'll be upon those on the front bench opposite here.

So, just to return to what this debate is all about for a moment, we have seen, as David Rowlands explained, a rise in rank and unpalatable grasses infested with ticks, and, as a result of unburnt mature heather, that also becomes infested with heather beetle. Out-of-control bracken produces sterile landscapes that are both unsafe for tourists and walkers and also vectors of Lyme disease. So, these are all important points that are very important to the prosperity of the countryside in upland areas as well, as he explained, and the policy of the rewilding of the hills really goes against the whole grain of the impact and importance of agriculture in the life of any country, and in particular in the life of Wales because 84 per cent of Wales is characterised as a less favoured area. We have a much higher proportion of upland areas than other parts of the UK, and therefore to improve the quality of upland areas is not only better for farmers but also, as he pointed out, for walkers, for tourists and for all those who enjoy the countryside, as well as those who just like looking at it.

The countryside, as we know it, isn't something that is produced by nature; it's actually produced by those who manage the land and in particular by farmers who run businesses on it. So, we need to have a completely different approach to upland areas than has occurred hitherto. The habitats directive of the EU has spawned a lot of detailed legislation that has not been to the benefit of the agricultural community, or, indeed, in general to the public at large. The problems that are created by the spread of bracken and so on on the hills by people who don't really understand the need for land management, I think, are a potentially disastrous effect.

So, the consequence of the freedoms that we'll get as a result of leaving the EU can be, if those freedoms are intelligently used, an improvement in the quality of life and the quality of land for all. I can't see that there can be any downside to that. So, I invite Members of the Assembly to put aside party political considerations in this debate, to turn over a new leaf and to follow UKIP's lead in this particular respect to vote for our motion and show us some dignity and respect that, on this occasion, we are not seeking to debate in a partisan political way. This was a genuine attempt to improve the lives of the people of Wales and to bring the parties in this house together on an issue that is well able to sustain that approach. So, on that basis, I invite Members to vote for our motion and against their own amendments.