I think we can all agree that there is an issue that needs to be addressed when it comes to tourism, and that is its impact on local communities. The importance of the tourism industry to Wales is undisputed, but we must avoid the type of extractive tourism that uses Wales as a resource. We all share the ambition of seeing Wales as a top-quality sustainable tourism destination, but this development must happen with and not to the communities it most impacts.

The key word here for me is 'sustainable'. The current iteration of the sector is putting a strain on our natural resources, our landscapes and our local infrastructure and services. In 2021, Eryri, the Brecon Beacons and Pembrokeshire national park authorities saw increases in illegal camping, littering and human waste on paths and in car parks. If tourism is not managed correctly, it will cause erosion to our paths, we will see more litter and pollution in our landscapes.

Turning to the motion, first, on the non-domestic rates and occupancy threshold increases, in so many communities in Wales, the purchasing of residential homes to use as second homes or Airbnb-style holiday lets is pricing out local people from their own communities and undermining the Welsh language. We come back to that key word, 'sustainable'. For me, for Wales to be a world-class tourism destination, the culture of our local areas will be key to achieving that, so pricing out our locals, in my view, is counter-productive. Let's be frank here: in some of our rural communities, we are seeing gentrification. There are no two ways about it.

On the increase to occupancy, the decision hasn't been made yet as to increasing the occupancy threshold. The consultation has ended, but no final decision has come, and, as Tom Giffard rightly pointed out, the Wales Tourism Alliance, UKHospitality Cymru and PASC UK have acknowledged that an increase should happen. One of their own recommendations in their consultation response recommends that the Welsh Government increases the threshold from 70 days to 105 days. We're not at the end of the road yet, but we must address the loophole that we in Plaid have been highlighting for some time.

On the tourist levy, this isn't a new idea, as Tom Giffard again rightly pointed out. There are countries across the globe that use a tourism levy, for example, Austria, Belgium, Bhutan, Bulgaria, the Caribbean islands, Croatia, the Czech Republic, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Malaysia, New Zealand, the Netherlands, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, Switzerland and the United States. I could go on—