 Felly, yn ymddyngosol, yn ddylai'r cyffredinol, oherwydd rydyn ni'n rydyn ni'n rydyn ni'n gweithio i ddweud yma i ddim yn cymryd y Llyfrgell Llyfrgell. Yn gyflym yn ymddangosol, ynaint gwahoddiad yn ymddangosol, ac rydyn ni'n ymddynt yn ymddynt gyda'i ddim yn ymddangosol, oherwydd sy'n ddim yn ymddangosol, oherwydd ymddynt ymddynt yn ymddangosol. That's clear, thank you very much. O'r ffordd, gweld y Ffwrdd Cymru Argrifent Yma yn 2017, a dwi'n ymwybarth y Ymwybarth i'r ffwrdd honno y Penedigol. Mae'r byd oedd yn ymwneud ond yn ymddiol, oherwydd mae'r cyllideb yn unig o'r riliadau cyllideb yn ymgyrch. Mae'n meddwl i'n 60 ymddir yn Llef. Ond yn yw'r ffordd, wrth i'n ddiol, y cyfnod i'r sefydliadau amser. Felly, nawr, rwy'n cael eu cyfnod, sy'n ymwneud y cyfnod, ynglynthau gyda'r prydysgol a'r prydysgol yn ymwneud yma yma yw'r prinsipol sy'n gweithio'r cyfnod yn Ynglyn yn ymgylch ar y 70 yma. Rwy'n cyfnod, mae'r ddweud, yn gweithio'r gweithio a'r bethau i'r prydysgol yn y cyfnod yma yw'r cyfnod yma yw'r cyfnod o'r pwyloedd yma yw'r gweithio'r cyfnod yw'r cyfnod o'r pwyloedd cyfnod o'r pwyloedd, reinforcements of architecture art, or history, where the religious, or secular, archaeological sites, groups of buildings which, as a whole, are historical, or artistic interests. Whilst we have been protecting ancient monuments since 1882, like Stonehenge, it's worth remembering that England's listing system was born out of the very same conflict and resulting destruction that triggered the first draft protocol of the Hague Convention in 1948. On the 18th of November 1940, at the height of the London Blitz, a special meeting was held attended by Lord Reef, the then Minister of Works, and representatives of REBA and the SPAB, which resulted, firstly, in the establishment of the National Buildings Record in 1941, which is now part of our own archives, which had the task of recording by photography historic buildings in the most vulnerable towns and later areas. And secondly, what was to become a heroic salvage scheme administered by the then Ministry of Works, which saw 300 architects dividing England and Wales into 12 regions and then sub-regions, working by committee and using their local knowledge to draw up what is sometimes referred to as the Modern Doomsday, a list of over 120,000 entries over the next 25 years, which formed the basis of our current national heritage list. But, importantly, in 1941, the lists were not created just to satisfy the curiosity of academics and civil servants, they were created because the lists were being submitted to the air raid precautions controllers, who were tasked by the Ministry of Home Security with reporting any damage to the listed buildings. Whilst only a few lists were completed before the bombings of 1940-41, they provided valuable information during the Bidah periods in 1942, which targeted the historic towns of Exeter, Norwich, York, Bath and Canterbury. It was really thanks to the salvage scheme that many historical buildings were saved from demolition and given temporary repairs to limit further deterioration. In the intervening years, the ministries have changed, and in 1983 many of the functions were passed to an arms and body then English heritage now historic at England. But throughout the purpose has remained constant. We protect, champion and save the places that define who we are and where we've come from as a nation. There are over 400,000 statutory protected and registered sites, and I'm looking towards my colleagues. I think that's the correct terminology because the numbers vary depending on what you're actually talking about. So 400,000 statutory protected and registered sites, buildings and recs on our National Heritage List of England. This one here was our 400,000th building. It's the Raleigh Cycle Company in Nottingham, which was listed Grade 2 by DCMS, which was the world's leading manufacturer of bicycles when the head office was built in 1931. At its largest, the company produced over one million bicycles a year across a 60-acre site. But what this also means is that as a listed building, even at Grade 2, so the lowest rate of listing, unconcented destruction, extensive damage, or demolition of the building is now a criminal offence for this building, which could result in either a hefty fine of which there's no limit to what the judge can impose, or two years imprisonment for an owner, or up to ten years of imprisonment for criminal damage by a third party. It is also sobering to think that 70,000 protected heritage sites are subject to criminal damage or antisocial behaviour per year. That equates to 200 attacks per day. One particularly memorable case, though, centred around a bungled plot to force the demolition of a Grade 2 listed building by accidentally launching it. One called February Night in 1991 at around 2.40 a.m. Local residents were shaken from their beds by an enormous explosion. A young quarryman had slightly overestimated the amount of explosive needed in his commission to cause structural cracks in a Victorian Methodist chapel and managed to collapse a large portion of the front elevation. Owner and quarryman were detained, prosecuted, and both received prison sentences. The key point here, before turning our minds back to the hate convention, is that at the national level in England we have a heritage protection system that both identifies our historic assets, our categorises our buildings by level of importance Grade 1, 2 star, and 2, schedules our archaeology and protects our wrecks. And we have a legislative framework that criminalizes damage to protected historic sites, which is enforced. Tim mentioned the National Police Chief's Council Heritage and Cultural Property Crime Working Group. I'd love to see the afternoon for that one. That includes the Police, the Crime Prosecution Service, and Historic England. All this stands us in extremely good stead for implementing the hate convention. International precedents for prosecution for destruction of cultural heritage do exist. As we saw earlier, in 2016, Ahmad al-Faithi al-Mahdiqi was convicted and sentenced to nine years' imprisonment for the intentional destruction of nine Orsylians and a mosque in Timbuktu, a UNESCO World Heritage Site in Nal. He was tried and found guilty of destruction of cultural heritage as a war crime. However, he was not tried under the hate convention. He was tried under the Rome Statute at the International Criminal Court in Hague. The big difference is that with the hate convention, the legal binding is at the national level, in our case through the 2017 Cultural Property Armed Conflicts Act, which means that the trial would be in a British court, not the ICC in Hague, and our penalty for destruction in times of armed conflict by others or British nationals is up to 30 years' imprisonment. It has now been just under two years since the act came into force in England, and it might be worth recognising some of the successes that we've heard about today. We have a cultural protection fund, which has projects all over the world. The establishment of the Military Cultural Property Protection Unit and the fact that we have finally actually went by the hate convention being amongst the most notable. And now we should think about things that we're still working on. For Historic England, we are and have been focused on three key areas in terms of domestic implementation. The first was tackling the tricky issue that Emma just explored, which was the general protection category. Now, if you remember Emma's slide, there was a slide with a triangle which showed where the decision making happens in a military context. At the bottom of the triangle, so at the lowest level in the military command, that is where the general protection sits. Now, the general protection is actually the category where there's no obligation for states parties to specify what they consider to be cultural property. Now, we decided in the UK that whilst there's no obligation to do so, that we would need to explore this further. So, the reasons for that were that owners and custodians need to be made aware and able to make the necessary steps to ensure that their emergency planning has taken armed conflict into consideration. The second reason is for our armed forces to know where not to stand and store their munitions in the event of armed conflict here in the UK. Thirdly, was for armed forces of other countries so that they know where not to put a bomb. Fourthly, to make legal enforcement a degree simpler. After wide consultation across the UK, our act was accompanied by the categories granted, not binding or exhaustive. But it's a good start and it's worth noting that England's 19,000s get from the archaeologists in the room that the scheduled monuments which are not explicit in those categories are mostly covered by other categories. In early 2018, the first export of England's heritage data, which actually amounts to around 80,000 individual items, even though it's 18,000 categories, were submitted to the UK military database and by extension to NATO. The data points are specific and include the geospatial information. This is an ongoing task and we are now exporting on a quarterly basis. So I suppose the question is, could we be doing more in this area? I think it's important that we continue to press UNESCO to take more responsibility in this area and instead of it being optional for state parties to identify cultural property, it should be obligatory and shared mutually through some kind of system at the UN level instead of ad hoc as we are obliged to do at the moment. The second was exploring the idea of the enhanced category protection, which again I mentioned earlier. There are currently only, I believe, eight member states of the 129 states parties of the convention who have submitted 17 sites to the enhanced list, all of whom are world heritage sites. Nevertheless, this is something that we are exploring with partners initially in terms of the process for identifying what these might be. The special category, which has been mentioned a number of times today, is currently not a priority for us on the advice of UNESCO and evidence by the expert reviews and the lack of take-up. The third is the rather tricky issue, apologies, of the use of the new shield emblem. The practical challenges, and I've said this many times before, the practical challenges of using the emblem are real. Permission for the use of the blue shield emblem rests with the Secretary of State. At the moment, if only the Grade 1 list of buildings in England wanted an emblem on the outside of their building, as the guidelines suggested, it would mean 9,322 listed consent applications going to local authorities across England for 9,322 listed decisions on size, placement, material fixing, and types of the emblem to the building. As the Grade 1, this would also mean 9,322 requested historic emblem for advice. In addition, there would be 9,322 individual applications to the Secretary of State for approval for use of the emblem. We're looking at alternative processes. Before releasing you to the delights of perfectly clean coffee, I wanted to mention also that the Imperial War Museum have their cultural hunger tax season. For those of you who haven't seen it yet, there's the What Remains exhibition, which covers some of the points that we've raised here today, which was co-curated by the Imperial War Museum and Historic England, and one's till the 5th of January. Thank you very much.