There were a number of questions there from the Member. First of all, in relation to the Treasury’s announcement, what they have said is they will fund any projects signed off before the statement. There is a debate going on at the moment as to what ‘signed off’ actually means. So, it’s not hugely clear what the cut-off date is, although it’s clear what the commitment is. When he talks about pillar 2 and projects that are signed off after the autumn statement being assessed, that is Treasury speak for, ‘You will have to beg us for the money.’ What it means is we’ll receive no guarantees at all that money that previously would have come to Wales as of right will come to Wales at all, because the Treasury will act as a break on it, according to rules that the Treasury itself sets, and without any kind of explanation. That’s what they mean by that. So, we can give no guarantee at all that we will get a single penny after that sign-off period has gone. It will be, as the Treasury see it, on a case-by-case basis, and they’ll decide whether money that automatically came at one time will come in the future at all.

In terms of the European advisory group, I am aware that it cannot be composed entirely of people who were on the same side in the referendum campaign. So, there will be a need to ensure that people on there do reflect the divergence of views, not just one singular view as to the future. In terms of building confidence, well, he talks to me of ‘salesmanship’ as he put it, not mentioning that Brexit would have been the equivalent of somebody asking me ‘Well, how much is you product?’ and me saying ‘I can’t tell you that’ because every single business wanted to know what was happening after Brexit. Every single business wanted to know what my view was on single market access and for me to say ‘Well, I can’t say that, l’m not telling you’ would’ve looked—well, you can imagine what it would’ve looked like. So, it was hugely important to say to a US audience that the Welsh Government believes that unfettered access to the single market is hugely important. Every business I spoke to said that, because, as I’ve said before, their businesses are European operations not UK operations. If there’s a barrier between the UK and the much bigger operations they have in Europe it’s the UK that will suffer as a result. We need to avoid that at all costs.

In terms of the other issues that he raised, on pre-trade discussions, there’ve been lots of reports in the papers about countries approaching the UK. Iceland was the first. I’ve seen many, many others. The reality is nothing has happened yet and we would expect, of course, to be part of any discussions on free trade agreements. They take years to negotiate—10 years, usually, to negotiate. The suggestion that the UK could renegotiate 50-odd free trade agreements in two years—I can’t imagine that that would be possible, especially against countries that are experienced trade negotiators. So, we have to make sure that we balance what’s necessary with what’s actually possible. At the moment, the UK is still very much in the throes of putting together a negotiating team. It’s a long, long way from being in the position of being able to negotiate a free trade agreement with another trading bloc or country, which is why the theory of what I mentioned earlier on to the leader of the opposition is fine, but the practice is far more difficult at this moment in time.

In terms of the single market, yes, it has to be both ways and it depends who you are. If you are Aston Martin or Jaguar Land Rover, actually tariffs may not make that much of a difference to you. If you are BMW, actually—people will still buy BMWs tariff or not, if they come from Germany. But, if you are a commodity car maker like Nissan or Ford, it makes a big difference because that potentially adds hugely to the cost of the cars you sell, and you sell in bulk. So, the bulk commodity producers would suffer the most with tariffs, whereas prestige marks—bluntly, if you can afford to buy an Aston Martin, maybe 10 per cent on top isn’t going to be that difficult for you. But, it would make a big difference if you’re looking to buy a Ford in the UK compared to a Ford on continental Europe. So, we don’t need tariffs. We need to make sure that tariffs are not in place and I don’t think anyone argues proactively for tariffs in any event. Bear in mind that for the UK’s 60 million, the EU at that point will be 440 million. We’re not talking about two equal blocs here. We’re talking about ensuring that we get as much parity as possible, but it’s not as if we’re the same size.

In terms of the other issues that he mentioned, yes, market access is hugely important for farmers and, yes, there is the opportunity to reshape agricultural policy, but we need the money. If we haven’t got a brass farthing to pay farmers after 2020 we can have the best agricultural support system in the world but no money to pay for it. So, that has to be resolved across the UK by the four UK Governments. The last thing our farmers want—our lamb producers particularly—is a 15 per cent tariff on lamb being sold into the European Union. Yes, it is a prestige product but still it’ll have an effect on the sales within what is our biggest market for lamb. So, the future of farming depends on avoiding tariffs, as it does with manufacturing and any other sector of the economy and that has to be the bottom line. If we get to a position where the UK finds itself subject to WTO rules, it will make it more difficult to attract investment. Why would investors look at the European market and invest there in the UK rather than within the European Union where they can move their goods and services around without any kind of tariff barriers? That’s what we have to avoid in the future and, as I say, I don’t believe there’s anybody who has proactively argued for tariffs in any event. Let’s avoid them.