Diolch. Well, across the globe, slavery has been a grim and evil reality throughout most of human history. Slavery across Britain itself long predated Roman occupation and continued over many centuries afterwards. The Britons, i.e. Celts or Welsh, and Anglo-Saxons frequently kept slaves, as did the conquering Vikings, with the victor enslaving or selling the vanquished. A gruesome history also shared by many tribes and kingdoms in Africa and elsewhere.

By the time of the Norman invasion in 1066, 10 per cent of the British population were slaves. In the eighteenth century, hundreds of companies engaged in the transatlantic slave trade, shipping Africans to Caribbean colonies. Our relationship with slavery is long, complicated and intricate, and the ancestors of most people living in the UK today will have had some involvement with this. Does the Minister share my view that we must learn from the past if we're not to repeat its mistakes, that it is essential to preserve the culture and heritage of Wales, and that we should highlight history not erase it?

How does the Minister respond to the report's reference to plaques and its finding that many commemorations, be they public monuments, statues, public portraits or the names of public buildings, places and streets, are often without any accompanying interpretation? Does the Minister agree that plaques should be attached to historical monuments containing an explanation with full context, so visitors or passers-by can make their own judgments? Individuals who were memorialised can be complex, and we're glad to see recognition in the report that,

'Many had complex personal histories embodying significant changes of circumstances or views through their lifetimes.'

Does the Minister agree, and if so, how will she ensure that this attitude is consistently applied and carried into the future? For example, the report mentions Mahatma Gandhi, a hugely influential figure in the campaign for Indian independence. There's a statue in Cardiff Bay, not far from the Senedd. Although Gandhi subsequently transformed himself and abandoned racism, quotations taken from his writings and statements whilst working as an attorney in South Africa before he went back to India in 1915, include racist quotations in which, for example, he called Indians 'infinitely superior' to black Africans. In 2018, the University of Ghana removed a statue of Gandhi on this basis.

How does the Minister respond to the report's investigation of figures such as Christopher Columbus, who had no connection to Wales or Britain, on the grounds that he was highlighted as needing examination by campaigners? As the report states:

'The culpability of several of these individuals in slavery or other abuses is open to debate and interpretation. Several shifted their positions considerably as they considered issues in depth or as attitudes changed around them.'

Although the report states that William Gladstone's statues have been criticised by campaigners on the grounds that his father profited from enslaved plantation workers, it adds,

'He appears to have had no culpability in slavery personally and he became one of the leading reformers of the nineteenth century.'

How do you therefore respond to calls for statues of figures such as Gladstone to be removed, where Gladstone was a Liberal statesman who served as British Prime Minister four times and called slavery,

'by far the foulest crime that taints the history of mankind'?

The report also states:

'The record of H.M. Stanley is stained by his alleged actions and the consequences of his known actions in Africa, but his personal culpability is a matter of ongoing dispute.'

Although his reputation was damaged by his role in establishing the Congo Free State for Leopold II of Belgium, evidence shows that Stanley was unaware of Leopold's true intentions and was never implicated in the atrocities that were perpetrated against the native people. Further, his letters and diaries at this time recall his loathing of slavery and the slave trade. In fact, when I was a guest at the unveiling of his statue in Denbigh in 2011, I heard first-hand from a Congolese delegation sent over to the unveiling, who told me of their love and appreciation for him. How therefore do you respond to the public vote in Denbigh, which led to the statue being kept by a 471 to 171 margin? Do you agree that local democratic decision making such as this is preferable to any decisions imposed top down from Cardiff Bay?

Finally, as we acknowledge the complexity of history, does the Minister agree that it is important to remember the anti-slavery stance that Britain took, where, for example, the slave trade Act in 1807 abolished the slave trade, and, following this, the UK Government used both the Royal Navy and treaties to persuade other countries to end their own involvement in slavery?