Thank you, Minister, for your statement. I've said to you before and I'll repeat it again, I believe that you have one of the most exciting opportunities in Government to actually genuinely shape a policy that historically has been shaped some distance from these shores over the last 45 to 50 years. Irrespective of what people think about Brexit—and I appreciate there have been many heated debates in this Chamber—as the First Minister said in responding to my question this afternoon, for the first time there will be the ability for Welsh Government Ministers to direct the support and policy in this particular area and across the rural economy, and that's something that has to be welcomed.

I also welcome—. I'll go to the end of your statement, if I may, where I'll start. I do welcome the assertion from your good self—and I can appreciate the Member for Mid and West Wales chuntering away from a sedentary position, offering commentary as much as she wants—but I do note in the statement that you give the reassurance that any moneys that will come forward will stay in the rural affairs department and be directed at forestry, agriculture and other initiatives to support the rural economy. I think that's a really important assertion to make here because there have been concerns that, potentially, some of this money could go into other projects, and I appreciate not from the Government bench, but certainly from other commentators in this particular area. So, I think that's a very important assertion that has been given.

But then I move on into the statement where it says that the implementation of any of these policies needs to be 'realistic for farmers to implement'. I notice that in the statement it doesn't talk of what we've seen in the explanatory documents about bespoke plans for each and every farm. I do wonder how logistically you're going to be able to achieve that. I have to declare an interest: it's in the register of Members' interests that I'm a farmer myself and I have some experience of the Tir Gofal scheme and the Glastir scheme. These types of schemes are very complicated, take a huge amount of time to develop, and the mapping exercises and all the other pieces of information that have to be collected to create that very personal plan for that particular business are hugely time-consuming and bureaucratic. So, I'd be grateful if you could highlight in your response to me how you see that actually being implemented in (a) the time frame you've got, and (b) in the very bespoke way that you refer to in the explanatory documentation that you've released with this statement today. Because obviously that is a massive exercise that needs to be undertaken.

Moving on into what you've done now by bringing the two streams that you originally proposed in 'Brexit and our land' and moving it into the one stream of support. Obviously what's happened historically under the common agricultural policy is you've had the direct support for agriculture and you've had the RDP—two separate streams. I'd be grateful to understand—because you touch on it in your statement about developing capacity for skills, developing other business models to support the rural economy—if it is not to be envisaged that there will be a similar RDP-type project, how exactly are you going to make moneys available in a one-size-fits-all project, which again could in one breath be simplified but in another breath be hugely complicated as well if it's trying to be captured by one overarching scheme? I think that a more detailed explanation of how that might happen would be appreciated.

I really do welcome the focus on quality food and food production. We have a very good story to tell here in Wales and, obviously, the original consultation didn't really spend much time talking about what the productivity of the industry might be. I think that's a welcome change in tone that has been brought forward.

What we've found in the environment committee is the danger or the vulnerability of the tenanted sector, and I do think that any scheme that comes forward does need to obviously reflect on the tenanted sector here in Wales. A third of land in Wales is under the tenanted regime, and it is important that it is actually the person who's delivering the public goods that receives that money, I would suggest. There are many clever surveyors out there and many clever agents out there who will, no doubt, find one way or another of developing a scheme around this. But I do hope that the Minister can give us some comfort in the formation of her schemes that her department and her officials are looking at making sure that the principle has to be that the person delivering the public goods element will be the recipient of the support from the Welsh Government.

The modelling and impact assessment that you talk about in here is welcome, but it would be good to try and get an understanding of the time frame that you're working to, given the very tight time frame that we're talking of. As I understand it, little or no modelling to date has been done on many of these proposals, and I know, again, if I refer to my experience on the environment committee that has looked at this, that has been an area of concern that we have looked at.

At the start of the statement, you talk about the contribution of farmers, foresters and other land managers. I'd be grateful to understand who you're referring to when you talk of 'other land managers' because they are ultimately going to be eligible, I assume, for support under this. At the moment, there's about 16,000 or 17,000 recipients under the common agricultural policy. Potentially, if we do not get an eligibility criteria into this scheme, evidence that we have taken points to the fact that you could potentially have as much as 40,000 to 45,000 recipients under the scheme. Just logistically, that's going to be a huge management exercise, just introducing all those new recipients. But also, whatever quantum of money that is made available will be spread that much thinner and maybe not achieve the goals, aims and aspirations that you're looking to achieve.

I think it's really important that we look at this as a positive journey that ultimately can reduce and rectify some of the issues that we've had under the common agricultural policy. If implemented correctly—and, as I said, the tone has changed in this statement, to reflect the importance of food production, productivity and skills, and the vital role that agriculture and farmers play in developing the rural economy—then, we can have a successful outcome. And I do welcome the change in tone in the statement and the accompanying notes that have come with it.