I begin with a personal statement. A couple of years ago, I campaigned for the sustainable development requirement to be included in the Government of Wales legislation. Therefore, I was naturally delighted to see that achieved. It is a trick of history that I should propose the motion to adopt the sustainable development scheme. This is a satisfying moment for me. However, I also pay tribute to many people who have made an important contribution to this, especially Christine Gwyther and Carwyn Jones, who as Members with former responsibility for this issue have played an important part in the process. I hope that, Chris, in particular, will take great satisfaction from seeing the scheme on the statue if it is adopted today.

I return to the debate that we had two years ago about the sustainable development requirement being included in the legislation. At that time, it was not a forgone conclusion that we would have an amended piece of legislation. There was a statement about equal opportunities, which I and other Members would have liked to see, but it was not a forgone conclusion that something like section 121 would be included. This is a great tribute to the people who were involved in developing the legislation, particularly Ron Davies. They, and the Government, realised the great opportunity that the Government of Wales Bill gave us not only to secure devolution, but to secure legislation that encourages us to act differently.

It saddens me that we do not get enough coverage of how the Assembly deals with issues and how it tries to do so differently. When I go elsewhere in the UK, people who know what we are doing see this as an exciting opportunity for us. Sustainable development is an important issue in terms of working differently. Therefore, I give my heartfelt thanks to the people who had the foresight to include this in the legislation and face up to the points made at the time. It may seem strange, but it was suggested to me that a commitment to sustainable development might cause us lose our competitive edge as an economy, and that including it in the legislation would put Wales at a competitive disadvantage. I am glad that, two years on, that is not said anymore. People now realise that quite the reverse can be true. If we can get this right, it will not put us at a disadvantage; it will give us a considerable advantage.

I wanted to give that background because, over the past two years, I have seen a remarkable change in attitude, from traditional areas where you would expect a degree of support and in my dealings with business and the private sector. Many of those organisations are now signing up to sustainable development.

I am grateful for your earlier remarks. I place on record my tribute to a range of conservation organisations that were heavily involved at the time in lobbying the then Government to introduce this measure. I single out the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds. I suppose I should declare an interest because I pay an annual subscription to the RSPB, although I am not sure whether that counts as my gaining from it. However, I commend it for its work in framing the amendment and then in ensuring, when it eventually went through the House of Lords, that it was expressed with greater clarity. It did a superb job and it deserves recognition.

The charter that we produced was prepared with the RSPB’s help. It is important that a range of people and organisations are acknowledged.

As we take this scheme forward, we are operating in a more positive framework and environment where people can see the benefits of linking social, economic and environmental issues. We are trying to mainstream this initiative in terms of what our partners do. It is very much about having a healthy and flourishing economy. It is important that the message goes out that this is not in competition with a healthy and flourishing environment. Indeed, the chairman of Shell UK has said that:

‘Companies not interested in sustainable development issues will not survive long’.

Those are interesting and salutary words.

What does the scheme say? I will not go through it in detail, but I hope that it is presented in a clear and common sense way that people can understand. It is important that people understand that the words are supposed to be translated into action. The scheme says to us, as an Assembly, that it is important that we mainstream this policy and principle in everything that we do. In this scheme, we are committed to reviewing all our existing policies and programmes over five years and ensure that all our new programmes take sustainable development into account. It is about integration and linking strategies as well as realising that we need to push specific policies and issues such as biodiversity, integrated transport and Objective 1 funding; many of the issues that you debate in Committees. They must be integrated and linked. In particular, we must review planning guidance and ensure that is done in accordance with the scheme. We must look at how we work. It is about working with organisations and people at every level, and the Assembly must give the lead.

As a starting point, and to put a bit of reality into this—excuse me, I am suffering from a cold, so if I use the odd tissue now and again I am not crying or overcome with emotion, it is just the usual bug. We must be realistic about our situation in Wales. In many ways, we start from a low base. We have low rates of recycling, which we mentioned, high carbon dioxide emissions and a series of indicators that are not particularly good. We know that Wales’s economy has been dramatically transformed, but it has still not broken through the barriers of having high wages and a new, clean economy. We are still dependent on a comparatively small number of manufacturing firms and we have comparatively high rates of chronic sickness and inactivity. We also have low wages, but they are not so low that we could sell ourselves overseas—nor would we wish to I might add—as a cheap labour economy. Instead, we must sell ourselves on the basis of the quality of our environment, workforce and society. We have some wonderful advantages and riches of which to take advantage. We have riches in terms of our visual environment, our coastal and marine environment, and riches in terms of some of the experiences from which organisations have learnt.

Over the last few years, there have been many examples of good practice. Some of those examples are on display in the milling area and I hope that Members take advantage of the opportunity to learn about the work of organisations such as SPARC, the Groundwork Trust, the Dyfi Eco-Valley Partnership, the Arts Factory in Ferndale, Trawsfynydd Community Trust, Powys Farm Futures and Assembly initiatives such as Safe Routes to Schools. An enormous richness of experience exists in Wales, some of which was developed prior to us discussing sustainable development, but much of which has been encouraged by the fact that we use that kind of language and terminology.

I am pleased to say that we can do our bit through grants and other regimes to try to pump- prime and encourage the practice of sustainable development. I want to say encouraging words about that. There are many examples in Wales from which we can learn. There are things that we can do at the local level. I want to stress that action at the local level is key to making this transformation, because people can identify with initiatives for improvements within their local communities. For example, I hope that our Communities First initiative will be a good pilot for sustainable development. Among the wishes to tackle deprivation, I hope that we will clearly conceive how communities can use objectives on sustainability to help them achieve that.

We also have large-scale initiatives at the national level, such as Objective 1 funding and developing a waste strategy, which are about providing jobs as well as helping the environment. Those are good vehicles for developing sustainable development policies. As a small nation, we can take advantage of those initiatives and share our experiences.

What does the motion say? What will we do once this scheme has been approved? There are three important things that we must do. One is to put the indicators in place. We hoped, initially, that they would be part of the scheme, but because we had considerable responses to the consultation, I agreed to extend that time and it is right and proper that we do that. It is important that we get this right. We are happy to support a seminar on this, which Groundwork Wales, RSPB Cymru, WWF Cymru and others have arranged. Over the next few months, it is important that we put those sustainability indicators in place.

We also need to look, as part of the motion, at the structures that we have in place for mainstreaming sustainability. I know that has been a concern for many. However, the scheme is now in place and we have a clear view of where we want to go. We need to look at the political and administrative structures for achieving that. In terms of the political structures, I was one of those people who fervently supported the idea for a sustainable development committee, a bit like the Committee on Equality of Opportunity. However, after 18 months in the Assembly I am not so sure. It is a sensible option, but I want to consider other options, because I would like to find a vehicle that involves all Members so that everyone feels that they are involved, because that is important. This issue does not only concern the Environment Committee, but all Committees, such as the Education and Lifelong Learning Committee, the Economic Development Committee and the Agriculture and Rural Development Committee. Whatever Committee Members sit on, they can play a part. It is important that all Members feel that they understand and own this concept and can translate it to their local communities. Over the next couple of months, I want us to discuss structures and consider the options that can be put in place.

Third, I want to make an important administrative point about the organisation. This can never be about one or two people in the sustainable development unit achieving everything, although they have done a miraculous job. I pay tribute to that small group of people who have worked so hard, including the officials and agencies, such as the Environment Agency and the Countryside Council for Wales. A lot of outside support has helped us to reach this point, but it is—

I will quickly mention a few other points.

It is important that I say a few things. Cynog is not here, but I particularly wanted to cover one point for his benefit.

This is an important scheme and it is a critical day for this—

I will be as quick as I can and refer to the main points.

The action plan will be developed over the next couple of months. I mention the challenges, because it is important that we realise that there are some real challenges. We are not camouflaging the difficulties.

While, perhaps, reassessing our indicators on quality of life, it is important that we do not simply consider GDP, but other quality of life indicators. I would like us to develop that. It is also important that we look at Wales in the global setting and consider our international obligations and how that affects us. We need to take that on board. It also means making different decisions in different ways.

I made a commitment that I would cover renewable energy. I propose that as well as taking a fundamental look at planning guidance, which will feed into the energy strategy, a small group is set up of those that are directly involved, such as the wind energy producers and environmental groups. They can then work on producing a technical advice note. I hope that the chair of the National Assembly sustainable energy group might want to be part of that. That is for him to consider. However, if we can crack this in the next few weeks we can move from a reactive to a proactive situation, which is what everybody wants. I am keen to see many places developing green energy and other forms of renewable energy. I give a commitment that we will endeavour to produce that document in an inclusive way. Also, you have my commitment that I want this mainstreamed throughout the Assembly. I hope that when we next review ‘Betterwales.com’ we can amend it and include some of these points.

I have already indicated to Plaid Cymru that I am happy to support amendments 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. The European regional innovation grant application is a good idea and we will take that forward. We do not have an identified sum of match funding for it at the moment, but it is sensible to apply for that grant. I am not prepared to support amendment 6. It is not that I do not agree with the spirit of the amendment; I disagree with its wording. We need to sit down with local government and agree on a system that it is happy with.

I turn now to David Davies’s amendment. Sometimes I am lost for words. In this case, I will try to put a few together. I do not know how you have missed this, David, but we have been doing what the amendment calls for throughout this year. Planning guidance review has taken place, the planning forum has reported and we talk constantly in Committee about mainstreaming sustainable development in planning guidance. We are doing that now. Amendment 7 is superfluous. I accept it in spirit, but it is superfluous.

I propose amendment 1. At the end of point 1 add:

I propose amendment 2. At the end of amended point 1 add:

I propose amendment 3. Add at the end of point 2:

I propose amendment 4. In point 3 of the motion after ‘practical options’ add ‘within three months’.

I propose amendment 5. After point 4 insert new point 5:

I propose amendment 6. After new point 5 insert new point 6 and renumber accordingly:

Hoffwn gydnabod, ar ran Plaid Cymru—The Party of Wales, ymrwymiad Sue Essex i’r mater hwn a hefyd y gydnabyddiaeth a roddodd i’r rhai a weithiodd yn y maes hwn yn y gorffennol. Cydnabyddwn hefyd y modd y mae datblygu cynaliadwy wedi dod yn ganolog ac yn ganolbwynt i weithgareddau’r Cynulliad.

Croesawaf y cyfle i drafod y cynllun datblygu cynaliadwy drafft oherwydd gall y Cynulliad fod yn flaengar ar y mater hwn. Mae’n holl bwysig bod y Cynulliad yn flaengar nid yn unig yng Nghymru ond yn Ewrop. Mae hefyd yn gyfle inni weithredu yn gynhwysol. Yr oedd hynny’n ddelfryd i lawer ohonom wrth inni ddechrau yn y Cynulliad. Mae’n bwysig ein bod yn glir ynghylch beth yn union yw datblygu cynaliadwy. Fel y dywedodd Sue, nid rhywbeth y mae a wnelo â chynllunio neu â’r amgylchedd yn unig ydyw; mae’n egwyddor a ddylai fod yn rhan o holl weithgareddau a meysydd polisi yn y Cynulliad.

Mae angen inni ddatblygu economi gynaliadwy a chynnig gwasanaethau cynaliadwy i bobl Cymru. Mae’n rhaid i ddatblygu cynaliadwy fod yn greiddiol i bob peth y mae’r Cynulliad yn ei gyflawni. Dylai digwyddiadau’r wythnosau diwethaf fod yn symbyliad inni sylweddoli pa mor bwysig yw datblygu cynaliadwy. Dylai’r problemau sydd wedi codi o ganlyniad i’r newid yn yr hinsawdd, megis y llifogydd, fod yn rhybudd i ni. Os na fyddwn yn newid ein ffordd o fyw, byddwn yn wynebu problemau enfawr.

Bwriad ein gwelliannau a gynigwyd ar 14 Medi oedd sicrhau ein bod yn sefydlu’r strwythur a fyddai’n caniatáu i ddatblygu cynaliadwy fod yn greiddiol ac yn ganolog i bolisïau a gweithgareddau’r Cynulliad. Felly, croesawn yn fawr y ffaith y bydd yr uned datblygu cynaliadwy yn symud i brif uned bolisi y Cynulliad. Mae hynny’n holl bwysig. Mae’n cydnabod bod datblygu cynaliadwy yn ymwneud â phob maes polisi sydd yn dod o dan awdurdod y Cynulliad.

Bellach, mae gennym gynllun datblygu cynaliadwy drafft. Mawr obeithiwn y bydd y Cynulliad yn unedig yn ei gefnogaeth i’r cynllun. Yn sicr, mae Plaid Cymru—The Party of Wales yn ei groesawu. Croesawn hefyd y ffaith ein bod wedi cael cyfle i gyfrannu ato. Gobeithiwn ein bod wedi ei gryfhau drwy ein cyfraniadau. Cydnabyddaf yn arbennig gyfraniad Cynog Dafis a’i awgrymiadau cadarnhaol ac adeiladol ar gyfer y cynllun drafft hwn.

Mae’n bwysig ein bod yn sicrhau bod y cynllun drafft yn cael ei weithredu. Pa mor dda bynnag yw cynllun, os yw’n gorwedd yn segur ar silff, nid yw fawr o werth i neb. Ein gobaith yw y caiff ei weithredu. Dyna pam yr ydym wedi cyflwyno’r gwelliannau hyn. Yr wyf hynod o falch bod Sue yn barod i gefnogi pump o’n gwelliannau, ac yn croesawu ysbryd y chweched. Yr wyf yn barod i dynnu’r gwelliant hwnnnw’n ôl, ar ôl yr addewidion a roddodd i weithio gyda llywodraeth leol. Mae’n bwysig ein bod yn cydlynu’r hyn sydd yn digwydd o ran datblygu cynaliadwy mewn llywodraeth leol â’r hyn sydd yn digwydd yma yn y Cynulliad. Hefyd mae’r pwynt am hyfforddiant yn holl bwysig, ac yr wyf yn falch o dderbyn ei hymrwymiad ar hynny. Tynnaf y gwelliant yn ôl fel arwydd o ewyllys da a chydweithrediad.

I will refer to the scheme itself in English because the scheme is only available in English. We welcome the scheme, it is greatly improved, and I have already referred to the contribution that we as a party have made to it. I endorse everything that Sue said about the people who have worked diligently on preparing this scheme and bringing it forward to the Assembly.

In particular we welcome the fact that the sustainable development scheme will form the overarching framework for all the Assembly’s work. We hope that this will really impact on policy and decision-making in the Assembly, and not simply be bandied about as an empty phrase.

We welcome the positive language used in this scheme. It is vital that sustainable development is not seen as an obstacle to overcome and a barrier to other developments. We note especially section 5C, point 5.4, where the document states

This says clearly that sustainable development is a great economic opportunity for Wales, as well as an environmental and social opportunity. We emphasise that there are real opportunities here for Wales to develop differently, which will be good economically, environmentally and socially.

We are pleased to see included a recognition that the Assembly’s sustainable development policies cannot be seen in isolation. This is a truly global issue and I warm to Sue’s references about our international responsibilities. I hope that that will be included in the indicators when they come before the Assembly. We have an obligation to contribute to international targets and to work with our European partners in this.

We are also pleased that the establishment of a sustainable development panel is included. I have some sympathy for Sue’s references to the need for a cross-cutting committee. I also see this sustainable development panel as being central to developing this scheme. There is work to be done here on defining exactly how this will operate, but we believe that having an advisory panel of experts on sustainable development will be crucial to the scheme’s success.

Another section of the scheme that we welcome is 4.2, where the key environmental limits noted are climate change, bio-diversity, minimising harmful emissions and promoting the sustainable use of natural resources. These are the four key aspects and they should be given greater priority over other environmental considerations, such as the landscape, although that is also important.

I thought I had 10 minutes to move the amendment.

I kept to five minutes last time.

I will quickly go through the amendments.

On the first amendment, I am grateful for Sue’s reference to the importance of the European grant. We have an excellent sustainable development scheme, but it is important that we create a mechanism that ensures that it moves forward. This grant, although not a large amount of money, could be as much as 3 million euros, which is about £2 million. If we were successful, it would mean that Wales would lead the way in Europe. It is important that we see the Assembly as being innovative in Wales, as well as throughout Europe. Therefore I am glad that we will apply for that grant and that we have the administration’s support.

Amendment 2 notes the need to include these two key documents, ‘Betterwales.com’ and ‘Building Excellent Schools Together’, within the list of key strategic policies. Amendment 3 emphasises the need to implement the scheme, as does amendment 4. On amendment 5, it is important that we can ensure that all Ministers are scrutinised on how they respond to sustainable development. It is not just a matter for Sue to respond on behalf of the administration and the Ministers. Many of us have had difficulties in trying to table questions to other Ministers about how they respond to sustainable development and their responsibilities for it. We will withdraw amendment 6.

We are happy to agree with David Davies’s amendment 7, but as Sue said, it is already included in the scheme. It has already been enacted in the Assembly, therefore it is superfluous. However, we are glad to see the Welsh Conservative Party’s commitment to sustainable development. It may, in part, make up for all the bad news about sustainable development during the 18 years of Tory administration between 1979 and 1997. We welcome the scheme, and we hope that you will support our five amendments. I warmly endorse the scheme and hope that it will be unanimously supported.

The Conservative group has always had a commitment to sustainable development and to the environment in general. I say to the previous speaker that I developed a personal commitment to the environment during the many years I spent surfing the south Wales coast. The commitment from the Conservative party is much more consistent than that we have seen from Plaid Cymru. On the one hand, it has been trying to placate hauliers by claiming that it wants to decrease fuel duty, and on the other, it is trying to placate the green lobby by saying that it wants to increase it. I saw the previous speaker doing virtually both these things in a recent television debate recently.

Do you accept, David, that at no time have we said that fuel taxation should be lowered? We have talked about stabilising the price of fuel at a time when prices are high, therefore your accusation is unfounded and misleading.

I will not get into a debate with you about this, but I have not been misleading about our own policy on fuel. I suspect that many of the hauliers with whom you have been dealing have been misled by what you have said. That aside, I re-emphasise the Conservative commitment to protecting the environment. The recent floods were a timely reminder of what can go wrong and what is happening to our climate at present because of policies that have been pursued by governments all over the world for decades. Hindsight is wonderful. I am sure that nobody realised what damage was being done. Those of us who have the privilege of holding political office, have a duty to do all we can to try to reduce the damage.

What concerns me about this scheme is not so much the sentiment, because, by and large, we agree with everything in it. However, in the words of Nye Bevan, it is a sermon. It is a good sermon, but it is a sermon nonetheless. Prior to the last election, this Government wore its green credentials on its sleeve. Tony Blair in 1989 suggested that the greenhouse effect was one of the most serious problems that we faced—

This Government in the context of this room surely means the Government of Wales, not the Government at Westminster, whomever it may be.

This is such a wide issue, that when I talk about the Government, I refer to the Government in Westminster and in Cardiff, because both have a role to play in this.

Can you make that clear?

I have made it clear. Tony Blair talked about the greenhouse effect before the last election, but subsequently his Government—in Cardiff and in Westminster—has failed to reach the low standards that it has set itself. For example, it has set itself a target of producing 10 per cent of all electricity by 2010 from renewable energy sources, but nobody in the industry thinks that that is possible.

There is a lack of action in pursuing policies that will put into effect the worthy sentiments in this document. I will focus on two of these. The first is the waste strategy. One of the biggest contributors to the greenhouse effect is methane gas, 90 per cent of which comes from landfill sites. I will give credit where it is due and acknowledge that the Minister for Environment and the administration are trying to reduce the amount of waste that goes into landfill sites. However, the present policy is not working. The problem is that not many companies will recycle waste. Whenever landfill tax increases, as it does every year, the companies in that business increase their prices as well. Therefore, we are not reaching a situation where less is being put into landfill and more is being recycled, because the current policy does not allow that to happen.

If we are to have a more sustainable waste policy, landfill tax must be redistributed to local authorities so that it can be put to proper use instead of filling up the Treasury’s coffers. I understand that the Minister for Environment said in the Committee yesterday, and perhaps she can clarify this afterwards, that she accepts that and believes that this policy must be adopted. However, it is not happening at the moment and I ask you to redouble your efforts in asking your colleagues in Westminster to allow that tax to be redistributed.

I now turn to my amendment. I was astonished at the Minister’s words. She appeared to say that she supported the amendment, but what it called for was already happening and therefore it was not necessary and she would not vote for it. However, my amendment calls for sustainable planning policies to be the number one priority and for sustainable development to be the priority when planning policy is made. I do not care how many reviews are going on in the Assembly at the moment: that simply is not happening. There is nothing sustainable about allowing bulldozers to go over large swathes of countryside and for them to be concreted over. We are destroying the countryside for future generations and, more pertinently at the moment, we are creating a situation where houses are being built on flood plains against the advice of groups such as the Environment Agency. That has happened 25 times in the last year alone in Wales.

Does my colleague agree that the administration could set ambitious targets for building on brownfield sites. Why will it not do so?

I could not agree more. In England, John Prescott has set a target of 60 per cent of all new housing to be built on brownfield sites. Since that promise was made, it has not been kept, as is the case with so many other promises made by this Government. However, at least it was a worthy enough target to set, even if he failed to live up to it. On repeated occasions we have asked the Minister for Environment in this Chamber to come up with a similar target for Wales. The only answer we can get is that Wales is different so we should have different targets. In fact, no target has been set in Wales for development on brownfield sites. That is a great pity, not only because houses built on flood plains are more likely to get flooded—and we should not be surprised when that happens—but also because the area of run-off for water is less and the floodwater simply goes elsewhere.

We have proposed amendment 7 today because although we support the generally worthy sentiments in the scheme we do not believe that not enough is being delivered and that there is sufficient action. I hope that other Members will look carefully at the amendment, and if they, like the Minister for Environment, agree that it is a worthy amendment, I hope that they will support it. We would also like to see more action in other areas of sustainable development and more done to support the innovative companies that are springing up throughout Wales that could assist in this. For example, there is a company in Bridgend that uses ground glass as an aggregate, rather than sand. That is topical at the moment. In addition, there is a company in Monmouthshire that claims to be able to recycle waste as a fertiliser in a way that does not damage the ground. There are innovative companies throughout Wales and all sorts of action that are needed on these policies rather than worthy sentiments. However, we will support this motion and all the amendments. We call on other Members to do so.

I express my disappointment at the poor turnout in the Chamber for this debate. I hope that it is not a true reflection of the interest in this most important subject. I would like to put away my party political hat on this occasion and say a few non-partisan words as Chair of the Environment, Planning and Transport Committee and report back to Plenary, the Committee’s views on how we should promote sustainable development.

I welcome the moving of sustainable development into the environment portfolio. That makes sense and it is an important step forward in discharging our statutory duty for sustainability. I also welcome the motion’s call for the Minister for Environment to bring forward practical options to ensure that sustainable development is mainstreamed and promoted within the Assembly’s structures. I suggest that the Chair and the party spokespersons from the Environment, Planning and Transport Committee should be involved in drawing these up Without wishing to prejudice the resolution to investigate the feasibility of establishing a sustainable development committee, the Environment, Planning and Transport Committee has agreed that is should champion sustainable development and scrutinise activity across the National Assembly from the sustainable development perspective.

I note that the draft scheme states that sustainable development will be delivered through ‘Betterwales.com’. When we discussed the responses to the consultation, there was a strong, cross-party feeling in the Committee that the sustainable development scheme should be the overarching strategy of the National Assembly from which all others, including ‘Betterwales.com’, should flow. Sustainable development should not be part of ‘Betterwales.com’; it should be the other way round.

The scheme states that sustainable development provides the overarching framework for all of the Assembly’s work, which is fine and we welcome that, but the fact remains that the Assembly’s strategic plan is ‘Betterwales.com’, not the sustainable development scheme.

We feel that sustainable development should underpin all the National Assembly’s policies and that all bids for resources to deliver ‘Betterwales.com’ and the partnership agreement objectives should be assessed for their long-term sustainability. Therefore, I welcome the commitments in section 5A of the draft scheme to green audits and the greening of appraisal mechanisms and definitions of value for money. I also welcome the commitment in section 5B that key strategies such as the national economic development strategy, Communities First, the transport framework, the national spatial framework and also the European structural funds programmes should not only be underpinned by sustainable development principles but linked together by them.

It is important that the Environment, Planning and Transport Committee is fully involved in developing adequate indicators. We must have a broad consensus to ensure proper ownership by the whole Assembly of our unique, statutory responsibility to promote a sustainable approach to everything that we do in Wales.

The sustainable development scheme will be the most important thing that the National Assembly has begun to do for Wales and the world when, hopefully, we adopt it today. The national vision of a sustainable Wales set out in the scheme is inspiring and exciting: a vision of a just society that is confident and proud of itself, cherishes its heritage, cultural and natural, and has a prosperous and self-sustaining economy. That is a vision that I am sure—and I now know, having heard David Davies’s contribution—that all National Assembly Members will support. David’s comments were interesting in the light of the previous Conservative Government at Westminster’s refusal to develop, for example, a list of brownfield sites, thanks to which we do do not even know where they are, let alone able to build on them. However, to move on from that partisan point—

Is that not partly because of the actions of Labour councils across Wales?

It was a Tory Government action as far as I am concerned. However, I welcome your information if you can prove that it was the Labour Government’s fault—

Labour councils.

Labour councils. I doubt it very much.

This is a national vision for the whole nation and, as Rhodri Glyn Thomas said, Plaid Cymru—The Party of Wales is proud of it. We are grateful to the Government of Wales for accepting so much of our input so far, including our amendments today. As we have mentioned some key individuals today, I would like to take this opportunity to pay a tribute to the achievement of Cynog Dafis. His contribution in promoting the concept of sustainability in the political life of Wales is unparalleled. The hard work of Cynog and many others has brought us to the point today when we take the first solid step towards making the vision of a sustainable Wales reality. However, we should be under no illusion about the challenges with which making this vision a reality presents us. It makes huge demands on us all as politicians, public servants, individuals, and as a nation. If the scheme is to be successful, we must all change what we do, what we use, how we live, how we think and how we make decisions. I feel obliged to sound a slightly cautious note. Clause 121 of the Government of Wales Act states that:

The ‘how’ will be in the action plan, which will be crucial. We are grateful to the Government for accepting our amendment 2, which means that we will have the action plan soon. It is crucial that its content includes a detailed plan, outlining how the Government will support the civil servants in learning how to mainstream sustainability into all policy. That is a key challenge, although I acknowledge what the Minister said about the progress that has been made, and we should not pretend that it will be easy.

Making sustainability a reality involved difficult, complex balances that we have often considered to be conflicts in the past; for example, jobs versus natural habitat and landscape versus renewable energy. Advising on those balances, in the interest of sustainability, presents the civil servants with huge challenges. I am afraid that we all know that the tradition of the British civil service, out of which the Welsh civil service is slowly growing, tends to be one of inertia and change minimisation. We must acknowledge that. If Welsh civil servants are to be able to mainstream sustainability, they will need a huge amount of input. There is a wealth of practical ideas on sustainability. The Government must ensure that civil servants can access them easily.

The opposition will give the highest priority to scrutinising this. To give a practical example, by the end of February next year, we will expect to see meaningful sustainability tests in the compliance section of every paper that goes to every Assembly Committee. If we do not get them, we will want to know why.

Finally, as the implementation of the scheme begins, I urge the Government to consider carefully how the full range of its actions, in the short term, are perceived. For example, I welcome what the Minister said today about renewable energy, and I am sure that Plaid Cymru—The Party of Wales will wish to participate fully in that group. However, I stress to her that the recent calling in of applications has affected adversely how sustainable energy companies are viewing their future in Wales. That is in the present, not in the future; we must address what is happening now. The Government must be careful in the broad context of sustainability never to be seen to say one thing and then do another. In wholeheartedly supporting this motion with our amendments, I can pledge the full support of Plaid Cymru to making this scheme work. When we adopt this scheme today, we will raise high expectations of Wales at home and internationally. The Government of Wales must not disappoint those expectations.

In Newport, 25 per cent of the land mass is comprised of sites of special scientific interest, with great pressure for urban and industrial development. That indicates that we must move towards a new mindset that does not pit jobs against the environment. Those two need not be mutually exclusive. We must move towards viewing these issues differently, and there has been a strong move towards brownfield development by the local authority in Newport.

There is a good recycling scheme in Newport called Waste Savers, of which Sue is aware. However, despite that and because of the growth of landfill in general, we are faced with a problem of growth rather than one of reduction, which indicates how much needs to be done. I suggest that the openness of the network of public paths in Wales is considered as one of the key indicators for sustainable development on the basis that the protection of the countryside and people’s respect for it depend on whether they have access to it and can use it. If people are allowed to use the countryside, they will value it and will be more inclined to protect it. It is good for health, socially inclusive and is an all-round winner for us. I ask Sue to consider that as an aspect of the key indicators.

I do not want to waste my limited speaking time, but I deplore the fact that we have only a short time in which to debate this fundamental and landmark document. However, I express the thanks of the Liberal Democrats to all those who were involved in developing this document. The consultation process has led to the creation of a landmark document. Today, we demonstrated that we have a Welsh radical heritage and that we are now in the position to lead the world on the basis of this document. It is particularly important that we have, at last, made progress from perceiving growth as being only economic to realising that there is a set of social, cultural and environmental indicators that are fundamental to improving the quality of life of the people of Wales.

We have covered a great deal of ground in previous debates, but this one is good because there is an acceptance of the need for good indicators. I would also like to see a commitment to getting more informed data so that those indicators can be realistic and so that the evaluation process can mean something to all of us.

On the rural factor, I am pleased that there is a healthy food policy, promoting school milk and healthy food in schools, which will give us a platform to show how we are taking action to improve our local rural economy.

This document offers an excellent opportunity for the people of Wales. There are so many strengths in it, that we can state with justifiable pride that we are leading the world and that we will improve the quality of life for the people of Wales.

I repeat other people’s regrets that we only have a minute to respond to this important debate.

In Gordon Brown’s autumn statement last week, he resisted immense pressure to give in to the fuel lobby. That is vital to sustainable development, before anyone mentions that it is not relevant to our work here. Gordon Brown announced new measures to encourage the use of more fuel-efficient cars and the use of low sulphur fuel, which will be available next year. That was in stark contrast to the behaviour of the opposition party, and I reject Rhodri Glyn Thomas’s statement because Plaid Cymru backed proposals to call for a 4 pence drop in fuel duty at its conference. That approach is, at best, equivocal. Plaid Cymru is trying to have it both ways. That is not helpful to the future of the debate on sustainable development. We must tackle these difficult issues and take a responsible long-term view, which, I am glad to say, the Government in London and the Labour and Liberal Democrat administration here is doing. I am proud of that.

It is important to engage the business community on this. Sue mentioned earlier that there had been progress, but I would like to see more engagement with the private sector because it has to be on board. Sustainable development is a reality, which can also give businesses a competitive edge and more should take that on board. I urge the Assembly to engage more urgently with the private sector to get it to adopt this scheme and to engage wholeheartedly with this agenda, which is vital to the future of all of us.

When Sue introduced this topic today, she said that it was difficult to attract the media’s attention to it. As I recall, it was more interested in fluffy stories than heavy duty ones. Sustainable development must concern heavy industry. Delyth mentioned the ultra low sulphur petrol that will be available throughout Britain from as early as next March and the Chancellor’s pre-budget statement looked forward to that. That petrol will be produced in Texaco, outside Pembroke Dock, so we are producing ultra low sulphur petrol for the UK and we are producing jobs in poor old west Wales, about which I am thrilled and proud.

Thank you for your contributions today, and at the Committee meeting. I repeat my thanks to everyone who was involved in promoting this issue. To those who worked in the roadshows and to voluntary organisations, universities and agencies. It is a co-ordinated exercise and I will plug our ‘Finding our Voices’ event in Builth Wells on Saturday, which the Assembly sponsors and which will consider sustainable development at a grass roots level. Many messages in this Chamber are about taking sustainable development to the grass roots and into the communities where it can be enacted, and ‘Finding our Voices’ will push that forward.

I thank Rhodri Glyn for withdrawing amendment 6 on local government and for respecting what I said on that. We will do our best to meet the three-month deadline, which means that no-one can be sick or celebrate Christmas. Therefore, I hope you will understand the spirit in which we have accepted that deadline.

On David Davies’s amendment, we cannot make a review of a review because the review is in place and is happening now. Sustainable development is at the heart of that review through the mineral planning guidance and other matters. On Richard Edwards’s point on ‘Betterwales.com’, we all accept that it will need to be reviewed and updated. As our ideas on sustainable development progress, we will be looking to amend ‘Betterwales.com’.

On Helen Mary’s point about cultural changes in the civil service, we have already engaged with outside organisations. It was exciting to have an exchange of ideas. We all know that this is not going to be easy and that making these changes will lead to difficult choices, decisions and priorities. That exchange with the outside world, in its various forms, was important to help to get us where we are now and it will continue to be important in terms of taking this forward, through the action points and the indicators. It was good to hear about the contribution of Christine Gwyther’s neck of the woods to sustainable development. On Delyth’s point about the private sector, I hope that structural funds along with other funding through the business and environment schemes will enable the private sector to explore the opportunities for sustainable development schemes.

Finally, during one of the interviews that I gave yesterday, I was told that people did not understand sustainable development and that it was a bureaucratic statement. However, I think that people have a better understanding than we realise. They are starting to make the connection between how they live now and what they want their children and grandchildren to inherit in the future. The concept of sustainable development may be expressed in difficult terms, but it is a very simple one. It is about the continuation of life in a healthy way for everyone sharing this planet and our environment. It is difficult, but exciting. As Mick said, it is exciting to think that we are at the cutting edge in this. It is a great opportunity and with everyone working together we can make huge advances. I thank everyone for their support and contributions.