We now move to questions from the party leaders, and, first of all, leader of the UKIP group, Neil Hamilton.

Thank you very much, Presiding Officer.

Bydd y Prif Weinidog a minnau yn gallu cytuno ar un peth o leiaf—sef llongyfarch athletwyr Cymru ar eu perfformiad yn y Gemau Olympaidd ac ar ennill cynifer o fedalau aur. Nid wyf yn disgwyl iddo gytuno â mi, fodd bynnag, y dylai ef a'i weinyddiaeth gael y llwy bren am arllwys dŵr oer ar siawns Cymru o gynnal y cais i gael Gemau'r Gymanwlad yma yn 2026.

Well, the cost involved is some £1.5 billion. At this moment in time, that is a cost that would mean that there would be no money to support major events for the next decade in Wales, pretty much. The Scots were able to host the games at a cheaper price because they didn’t have to build as much as we would have to build. We’d have to build a new athletics stadium, build a new velodrome, build a new pool or extend the pool that we actually have at the moment. So, the capital costs are actually huge, which is why, of course, it makes it very difficult for the Commonwealth Games to go to smaller countries these days. What we wanted was to put in an all-Wales bid—that wasn’t looked at favourably—or indeed to launch a joint bid with cities in England. But, again, that’s not possible under the current rules that operate with Commonwealth Games bids. What I’d prefer to see in the future is to explore ways in which we could bid with other Commonwealth countries in order to host the games.

Well, of course I accept the point about the capital costs of improving Wales’s infrastructure, but that’s justifiable in its own right. We’re talking here about probably something in the order of £1 billion to £1.5 billion amortised over 10 years in the first instance. In the context of a Welsh Government budget of £15 billion a year, we’re talking about peanuts. [Interruption.] What I’m asking the First Minister to do is to raise his sights and raise his game and promote Wales to the world through the exploits of our athletes. And what we need is action from our Government to match that in improving Wales’s sporting infrastructure so that we can host the games in 2026.

I don’t think 10 per cent of our budget is peanuts, with respect to the Member. There’s a significant opportunity cost. For example, we’ve been hugely successful over many years in attracting major events to Wales. We have the Champions League final coming next year and the women’s Champions League final, we’ve had the Ryder Cup, we have the speedway every year, we’ve had the Rugby League World Cup, the rugby union world cup, we’ve had major cricket matches—and all this is done with money. That money would no longer be available for any of those events if we were to host the Commonwealth Games.

It’s much better, to my mind, that we use that money to bring in events such as those. The Champion’s League final, for example, is an enormously useful way of promoting Wales. It’s the largest single sporting event in the world. If we were to go for the Commonwealth Games, the money wouldn’t be there to attract events like that in the future.

Well, I’m sorry to say that the First Minister seems to have a rather static view of his functions as First Minister. Why don’t we take a more dynamic view of these projects? Other countries do and they can see the advantages of raising our aspirations. This is in a long line of projects that the Government has poured cold water on: M4 improvements, Circuit of Wales, and now the Commonwealth Games bid. These are all projects that are too difficult, too hard. Kick them into the long grass. Ultimately—do nothing. Well, it’s not good enough to have a do-nothing administration here in Cardiff Bay.

Well, the Member seems to have a particularly delusional view of money, if I may say, because it is a significant financial commitment that it would have involved and it would have meant that we would not have been able to host many, many events in the future. It would have a knock-on effect on our capital budgets. It’s much better to look at investing in grass-roots sports, yes—in building up infrastructure, that much is true. We need, for example, to look at a velodrome with seats, which we don’t have. We need to look at the national pool—it doesn’t have seats. There’s a diving pool that needs to be improved in the future. But the costs he’s talking about are huge. From the perspective we have taken, we’ve looked at all the options for the Commonwealth Games, looked at hosting the games with somebody else, and those options were closed off to us. It’s much better, then, that we’re able to use that money for events such as the Champions League final, which will actually broadcast Wales to a huge audience around the world.

Leader of the opposition, Leanne Wood.

Diolch, Lywydd. First Minister, the terms upon which we leave the European Union will define the future of the Welsh economy and indeed all of Welsh politics. You’ve said that Wales should have a veto if the Brexit deal isn’t a good one for Wales. Now, it’s one thing to call for a veto, but what we need to see now is vision, and people are looking to you for that comprehensive, detailed, inspiring vision of what Wales looks like after we leave the European Union. Fighting for what we’ve already got in terms of funding isn’t sufficient, as that would just deliver the bare minimum, and it’s just not good enough. When, First Minister, can we expect to hear your vision as to what a new Wales will look like after we leave the European Union, or don’t you have one?

Well, it’ll be a Wales that, of course, is still very much part of Europe, a Wales that looks outwards and continues to be successful in attracting Investment. That’s the message I took to the US last week. From my perspective, it’s hugely important that we have tariff-free access to the market in goods and services. It would not be to our advantage if tariffs were to be imposed. Yes, in keeping with the promise that was made by those in the UK Government now, we want to make sure that Wales does not lose out on a penny; that much is true. What needs to be explored now is what kind of model we need: is it the European Economic Area model, is it the European Free Trade Association model, is it a customs-union model, is it a free trade agreement model? Those are the four models that deliver at least partial access to the single market. The World Trade Organization model doesn’t work, to my mind, as far as Wales is concerned. But we do need to understand, first of all, whether the UK Government will keep to its commitment that the devolved Governments will be at the heart of negotiations, and not at the end of negotiations. It also means the UK Government itself has to work out what it wants. It’s talked about a bespoke deal; fine, but what are the elements of that deal that the UK Government sees as essential? For me, funding and access to the single market are fundamental. Without them, Wales would undoubtedly lose out. There needs to be an examination of what it means for freedom of movement as far as people are concerned. We know that many, many people voted to leave because of that issue, and that needs to be handled carefully in terms of the public view. The next steps are: the Cabinet sub-committee met yesterday to look at the initial challenges that Brexit presents, and the external advisory group that I’m putting in place will meet at the end of the month.

First Minister, that isn’t a vision. You’ve outlined the next steps, you’ve outlined what you’d like to see the Prime Minister do, but you haven’t told us what you want to see for Wales. Now, there have been mixed messages coming from your UK leader on this question of single market membership, and your own statements have not been much clearer either. You’ve called for free access to the European single market, you’ve also said that you want uninterrupted access, and last week, you said that you want to see a seven-year moratorium on the free movement of people. Well, I was in Brussels last week with a number of members from my team, and it was made absolutely clear to us that you can’t have complete free access without accepting the free movement of people. Now, access can include all kinds of costs, including tariffs—and we’ve heard today how that would be bad for steel—it could mean custom charges, all of which would be against Wales’s best interests. First Minister, do you believe that Wales should remain a member of the single market when we leave the European Union?

Yes; I’ve said that many times.

Thank you for the clarity on that point, First Minister. [Interruption.] You contradicted that position last week. So, finally, we have clarity and I’m grateful to you for that.

Last night, your Labour MPs—Welsh Labour MPs—voted against a Welsh legal jurisdiction. The amendments that Labour voted against were from your very own government and laws in Wales draft Bill. And that’s not the first time that it’s happened. When they voted against Plaid Cymru back in July, you said that the problem there was a matter of timing, and not a matter of principle. Why can’t you influence your colleagues in Westminster, First Minister?

Well, two things: first of all, I have probably lost count of the times I’ve said that access to the single market is hugely important for Wales and must be uninterrupted. So, for the leader of the opposition—

Access not membership. I asked you about membership.

[Continues.]—to say that, somehow, this is new, it’s clear she hasn’t been following the media or reading the papers for the past two or three months. So, access to the single market, for goods and services, on a tariff-free basis is absolutely crucial. I’ve been saying that ad nauseam. Secondly, of course, what happens in Westminster is a matter for Westminster. We have taken a view that a distinct jurisdiction, at the very least, is hugely important and, without that distinct jurisdiction, there cannot be a lasting devolution settlement for Wales.

The leader of the Welsh Conservatives, Andrew R.T. Davies.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. First Minister, last week, you were in America promoting what Wales has to offer to businesses that are looking to invest into the UK, and Wales obviously wants to get a big share of that cake. At the end of the visit, you chose to actually use a speech to talk about the break-up of the United Kingdom. It did seem rather odd, when you’re trying to promote the product to entrepreneurs who are looking to invest hundreds of millions of dollars into the UK—with a bit of luck—that you, on the Friday, were talking down the prospects of the United Kingdom. Can you explain why you used a trade mission as a platform to discuss the break-up of the United Kingdom?

What I didn’t say, of course, was that those in business were fat, lazy golfers, which is a theme of his party at the moment, the party of business. You couldn’t make it up, could you? That’s what one of the senior Brexiteers actually said. I wonder if he’s actually read my speech because I made it very, very clear that there were challenges as far as Brexit was concerned and I outlined a way forward with those challenges. I also said it was hugely important that the UK’s architecture was examined to make sure the UK is robust after Brexit and that is something I’ve said many, many times. The audience was hugely interested in that.

First Minister, it clearly came over that you were fantasising again about the break-up of the United Kingdom, which is something you spend a lot of time talking about these days, and as anyone who goes before an entrepreneur such as in ‘Dragon’s Den’ you don’t go and diss the product you’re trying to sell to them, First Minister. But one thing you could’ve done on your trade mission was go over to Detroit and actually speak at Ford headquarters to the directors there and the senior management team about the announcement that was made last week about the cutting back of production at the Bridgend engine facility. I think we should remember there’s still £100 million-worth of investment going into that engine facility, but this is a significant announcement on behalf of Ford on how they’re going to take forward the dynamics at that plant. Did you request a meeting with Ford, and if you did request that meeting, why wasn’t it granted?

Yes, we did request a meeting but we were told that it was now a matter for Ford of Europe and the meeting should be with them. So, the request was made to have a meeting with them.

In terms of the comment he made earlier on: it’s quite clear that he hasn’t read my speech, has he, in Chicago? Clearly, he’s just picked up on what—. When he said, ‘You gave the impression that you said a certain thing’, that’s code for, ‘Oh, I haven’t read the speech. I’ve picked it up from what I’ve seen online.’ Well, can I suggest he reads the speech? It was read with some interest by people who were there and he will see it’s not quite what he makes it out to be. Like him, I want to make sure the UK is intact in the future but it will need changes. It can’t carry on as it is when there are so many changes that will come down the line when we leave the EU. When I spoke to businesses in America every single one of them wanted to know what will happen next with Brexit—every single one of them. It was the theme as far as American investors were concerned. When I was able to say to them that my view was that it was hugely important that we have access to the single market on a tariff-free basis, it certainly gave them relief. They were happy to hear that because they’d not heard it from the UK Government. So, it’s hugely important that the UK Government now makes sure that it has a coherent view rather than, as we saw the Foreign Secretary doing this week, launching a pressure group that pressures his own Prime Minister into doing something. We do need to see coherence and unity in the UK Government for the sake of the people of Britain.

First Minister, I regret that Ford in Detroit weren’t prepared to meet you because, as I understand it, that’s where the decision about the investment was taken and they seemed to have passed the ball back to Ford of Europe on this matter. But there are three very legitimate questions that I hope your Government and yourself as First Minister have been interacting with Ford on and they are: how, going forward, can the jobs be secured with such a dramatic cutback in production at the plant? Also, what new lines, potentially, could come to the plant to secure the 1,850 jobs that are currently at the site? And it is fair to say the Welsh Government have put money on the table to retain jobs at the engine plant, at a level of 850 jobs, as I understand it. Obviously, there are 1,850 jobs on that site at the moment, so what assurances can you give around the discussions that the Welsh Government have had around future job security, around new products coming to the plant and, above all, about the future viability of the plant as a working entity within the Ford manufacturing capacity of the United Kingdom?

When I was at the plant it was made absolutely clear to me that tariffs were the issue. The plant is the most efficient engine plant that Ford has. The workforce there is excellent but they export every engine they make. It’s wholly export driven. Tariffs would mean a 5 per cent component tariff going to the assembly plant and possibly a 10 per cent tariff coming back in again to the UK. It’s a 15 per cent tariff. Nobody can cope with that. Many businesses in the States said the same thing to me: they’re waiting to see what happens with regard to what the UK does. I’ll be straight with him: I think if we manage to secure tariff-free access to the European market I think the problem is resolved. That is what business investors are looking for. They’re all European operations. They see the UK as part of a European operation. Anything that puts a barrier between the UK and the rest of the European operation is bad for the UK operation. So, the Ford workforce are excellent, they’re efficient, but they cannot be put in a situation where tariff barriers would interfere with the future viability of the plant, which is why I’ve been absolutely clear that whatever model the UK adopts—and there are four different models that could be adopted that give pretty much full access to the European single market—that the UK Government needs to declare that position now in order to give that certainty, not just to Ford but to all our investors from overseas.