Well, Llywydd, as the son, grandson and great-grandson of a miner, it is my privilege to respond to the debate this afternoon, and I think, on the whole, what an excellent debate it has been. Nearly 40 per cent of the UK's disused coal tips are in Wales—40 per cent—and our communities are disproportionately affected by the coal tips. We know that there are nearly 2,500 disused coal tips, with 327 in the higher rated category. Now, these are interim categories and reflect the potential to cause a risk to safety and so are the subject of more frequent inspections. It does not mean they're an immediate threat, as Hefin David so well put it in his contribution. And it is the Welsh Government who are funding the Coal Authority to make these inspections, with councils carrying out the maintenance identified through the inspections. 

Now, the motion refers to 'high-risk tips', but we must be clear that being placed in a higher rated category is not the same as being higher risk, and the language we use is important. As Hefin David said, frightening people is irresponsible. And he pointed out the difficulties of prematurely publishing the locations of all the tips. Janet Finch-Saunders said that this was unacceptable. But, we have shared the information with local authorities and local resilience forums to help them to develop management plans. What would be unacceptable would be sharing this information publicly when all the work has not been done, and causing alarm, distress and worry, and, as has been mentioned, an impact on properties and causing a great deal of distress when many of these could be fairly inert tips. We've got to get this right. I found Janet Finch-Saunders's comments on that really pretty irresponsible and poorly thought through, if I may say. 

The subject of the trials was mentioned. Delyth Jewell asked when the alerts will be available on mobile phones to be rolled out. Now, we are trialling a range of technology, and 70 of the higher rated tips are included in the trials, and these go from tilt meters to satellite ground movement monitoring. These are going to run until about 2024. At the moment, it's envisaged that the alerts will be given to local authorities and not made public, because at the moment some of this technology is unstable, it is unreliable, it is being used for the first time. So, I think it's right that we make sure that it is accurate before we start making it widely accessible. 

Let me turn, if I might, now to the issue of the funding. Janet Finch-Saunders said that the Welsh Government is basically acknowledging its responsibility for the problem by allocating £44 million. I found this breathtaking, and I think one thing our mining ancestors would recognise this afternoon is which of the speeches was given by the Tory. I think there's just a fundamental misunderstanding of the emotional importance that this has for our communities. As both Heledd Fychan and Delyth Jewell asked, who benefited from this industry? Yes, our ancestors who worked in the mines benefited somewhat, but the profits belonged to the landed class, many from outside of Wales. The wealth benefited the whole of Britain, not those who worked for it. And it's only morally right that the UK Government recognises its contribution. And the fact we have a litany of Tories, from Simon Hart down, now washing their hands of it shows, for a reason, why they are seen as the party of England and not the party of Wales.

So far, we have spent £1.6 million on inspections. There's going to be a cost of £30 million to bring them up to standard, and a further £5 million a year to maintain them, and then a reclamation cost of around £600 million, and the UK Government has given us £9 million and thinks that's them done. I really would ask them to reflect on that. That is not the sharing union that we talk about, and the more they pull tricks like this, the more it undermines the case for the union. So, I'd ask them to think very carefully about how they play their part in dealing with this legacy of Britain's industry.

The impact of climate change has been talked about, and it really is a dramatic illustration of what impact changing weather patterns are going to have on our communities. The impact on these tips and the consequences for our communities could not be more profound. That's why we need to mitigate the impact of climate change, as well as adapt to the effects already locked in.

Janet Finch-Saunders also asked about the new supervisory authority and will it be independent. Certainly, that is our intention, but we are going to be consulting on this as part of our White Paper, and I hope everybody here responds to that.

There are a number of different reclamation options available in the medium term, and the best option will depend on the specific tip, including its risk status and proximity to sensitive receptors such as communities. An obvious example of a reclaimed tip site is the Spirit of Llynfi Woodland, where over 60,000 trees were planted. So, there is an opportunity here, as well as having to contend with the impact of climate change, of adapting and dealing with the impact of the nature emergency, too.

So, we have the opportunity to effect positive change in these communities, and any longer term programme focusing on reclamation will require thorough engagement with the local communities to explore the wider benefit options, and we have amended the motion this afternoon to accept that. We accept the spirit of the Plaid motion. We think the Tory one is fine so far as it goes, but it has a fundamental missing bit in not accepting that the UK Government has a role. There will be opportunities for our communities from this if we get it right, but if we get it wrong, Llywydd, we will not be forgiven.