The following amendments have been selected: amendment 1 in the name of Paul Davies and amendment 2 in the name of Jane Hutt.

The next item on our agenda is the Plaid Cymru debate, and I call on Adam Price to move the motion.   

Motion NDM6085 Simon Thomas

To propose that the National Assembly for Wales:

Calls on the Welsh Government to prioritise:

(a) protecting Wales from the immediate fallout of Brexit; and

(b) closing the prosperity gap between Wales and the rest of the United Kingdom by:

(i) creating a Wales development agency for the 21st century which will sell Wales, our products and ideas to the world in order to grow Welsh businesses and boost our exports;

(ii) establishing a national infrastructure commission for Wales to plan, fund and deliver our nation’s transport, telecommunications, energy and green infrastructure; and

(iii) increasing levels of procurement for businesses based in Wales.

Motion moved.

Diolch, Lywydd. This debate, in the name of Plaid Cymru, focuses on probably, I think, one of the key challenges—the central challenge—for this Assembly, which is meeting the demands of the new economic topography, if you like, of the post-Brexit landscape.

The first pre-requisite for good policy is a common understanding: we’re all on the same page. I think that that is part of the challenge that we face in developing a new strategy, and understanding the scale of the challenge. The Welsh economy has probably faced, in the post second world war period, three great periods of economic change: in the immediate aftermath of the war, then the period from the 1960s, the late 1960s, the 1970s and 1980s of industrial restructuring, primarily through the decline of coal and steel, and then in the period post 1996, particularly with the period of the high pound and, actually, the accession of eastern European countries also posed particular challenges for us. Now, we’re on the cusp of an even bigger challenge, possibly. Globally, when we look at the environment’s secular stagnation, as it’s called, which is this kind of decline in the international economic growth rates, fiscal and monetary policy—the two big bazookas, as they’re sometimes called, of economic policy—seemingly exhausted, and rising global competition, in part driven by slowdown in domestic markets, even in China, it’s not an auspicious environment for us to be facing domestic challenges as well, but it is where we are.

If we think of those three periods in the post-war period, what you notice is an attempt to create a set of policies, a new economic policy paradigm that, to some extent, was successful: regional policy within the UK shifting economic activity around the UK in the aftermath of world war two; and, inward investment in the 1980s, where Wales did relatively well and sometimes, of course, achieving proportions of inward investment as high as 25 per cent of the entire UK. It’s the third period since 1996 when we have seen a precipitous decline in our relative gross value added share, or proportion. Of course, that period has coincided with the period of devolution. Devolution was meant to be the answer to Wales’s economic problems. The devolution dividend that we often refer to, at least on economic policy, has not delivered. I think that the Member for Llanelli was right on the money when he reminded us of that devolution dividend argument. He said, over the summer, that despite continued efforts, on that test, it has so far failed to fulfil its potential. So, it’s a challenge to all of us elected to this place that we now meet that test and that we come up with a new economic strategy that can meet the test of our times.

Now, that’s even more important of course in the context of Brexit, isn’t it? The need for an answer has accelerated even further. I must admit—and I’m trying to be fair and not hypercritical here—I’m not convinced by the response that we’ve heard so far from the Welsh Government. Yes, it is confusing. There are so many options on the table that you need a compass: Norway, Switzerland, Canada; Lichtenstein is a new one—of course, Lichtenstein is in the European Economic Area but did have a nine-year moratorium on free movement; reverse Greenland; customs union; World Trade Organization rules; and the continental partnership proposal, which has some merits and was suggested by the Bruegel think tank over the summer.

In a fast-moving scene, you need to show some flexibility and agility of mind, I think we would all accept that, and there’s certainly an opportunity as well for us in Wales—rather than simply going for a prêt-à-porter solution, coming up with a bespoke solution: a new idea for new times. But, that shouldn’t be a recipe for confusion. I think that that’s what we’ve had so far from the Welsh Government on the model that is in the best interests of Wales—the type of Brexit. Because, let’s be clear, the people of Wales have voted for Brexit, as have the people of the UK, but the door through which we exit is what we’re debating now, and there are different-coloured doors available to us; there are different thresholds; and there are different end destinations. It’s important that this National Assembly expresses what is in the national interest of Wales.

Unfortunately, I have to say, we heard from the First Minister three different policies in two days, sometimes in the course of the same session. In the European and External Affairs Committee, when challenged by my colleague Steffan Lewis, he said he did not support membership of the single market, but the rather more nebulous term, ‘access’. Well, who is against access, you know? When challenged on this question again by the leader of the opposition, he said he was, and had always been, in favour of membership of the single market—in that slightly patronising tone—and asked, ‘Where has he been? Has he not been reading the newspapers?’ [Laughter.] He then went on to say—[Interruption.] He then went on to say—[Interruption.] He then went on to say that he favoured—[Interruption.] He then went on to say that he favoured a free-trade agreement, or EFTA, but outside the EEA, because that would avoid a commitment to free movement—despite saying on Monday that he actually saw the EEA or the EFTA models as by far the most workable, and saying in the immediate aftermath of the Brexit vote that, actually, free movement was a red line as far as he was concerned. So, I’m completely confused. I invite a Minister, any Minister, to patronise me by all means. Maybe I would be a little bit wiser if you would intervene, if not now, and maybe we could have some clarity on what is the current position in terms of Brexit as far as the Welsh Government is concerned.

Moving on to the economic strategy, I have to say that confusion reigns here as well. We do still have a current economic strategy: ‘Economic Renewal: a new direction’. It was published in 2010. It still is, officially, the economic strategy of the Welsh Government. At the time—the clue was in the title, ‘a new direction’—it was meant to represent a step change in thinking, away from the old grant culture and towards, instead, a more strategic approach to creating the conditions for economic success, rather than the old school of, basically, economic success coming through the stroke of a ministerial pen and money being doled out to individual companies. It was also meant to be more strategic in focusing on some key sectors—a limited number of key sectors where we believed Wales had a particular competitive advantage: ‘smart specialisation’, as it is sometimes called in the jargon.

What happened, of course, is that there was a change of administration and the thinking behind the strategy somehow got lost. So, the first thing that has happened is that three additional sectors were added, some of them rather large, like construction. In fact, somebody worked out that probably 90 per cent of businesses in Wales are actually part of the target sectors. Well, that’s not targeting, is it? That’s not prioritisation. We’ve seen the slow re-emergence of the grant culture, of the principal policy lever of the Government basically being that stroke of the ministerial pen, and micro-managing the economy. Picking winners, the evidence is quite clear, is fraught with difficulty. What Government should be doing is concentrating on those areas where we have a competitive advantage and investing in skills and infrastructure. Yes, in particular developments with particular companies and sectors, but doing it using a cluster approach rather than just doling out money in the old-fashioned way.

Yes, we’ve had city regions as some kind of half-hearted attempt to have a spatial strategy after the previous administration ripped up the spatial plan. But where does that leave the Valleys? Where does that leave rural west Wales? Where is the strategy there? Again, there is a vacuum of ideas, unfortunately, at the heart of the Government’s economic strategy currently. We’ve suggested actually creating, to fill that vacuum, targeted and focused development agencies in order to get the kind of strategic leadership that we have lacked so far from the Government. The obsession that underlies the Government’s policy is jobs. Job target numbers—which actually, often, are specious, as we have found out—actually aren’t, at a national level, the key problem now with the Welsh economy. I mean, the Government of course points out that the Welsh unemployment is lower now than the UK unemployment rate. So, it's not that we're doing worse on unemployment that explains our poorer economic performance; actually, it's at a much deeper level. It's about competitiveness, it's about productivity. It's not the number of jobs, it's not the headline count. It's the quality of jobs, the types of business sectors, the number of start-ups and the entrepreneurial culture that we need to create in order to create the businesses of the future. That's where we should be investing, rather than in this old-style, headcount, press-release-driven approach to handing out free money to businesses, which, as, sadly, we've seen, often don't deliver on the jobs that were promised. We've seen a number of examples of that recently: Universal Engineering, Kukd, Kancoat, et cetera.

We realise that failure is part and parcel of the economy, but when we're talking about public money, we need to make sure that we are investing it where it will have the greatest effect, particularly when we saw in the competitiveness figures out today—it's sobering reading, isn't it? Out of 379 local authority areas, Wales has five in the lowest 10, in the bottom 10: Carmarthenshire, Caerphilly, Ceredigion, Merthyr Tydfil, Blaenau Gwent, right at the bottom. And, again, the cupboard is bare at the moment in terms of economic policies from this Government that are targeted at those areas. The Circuit of Wales, of course, is an inspiring idea that I would urge the Government to stop prevaricating on. That's a project that has been seven years in the making and promises to be transformational in that area. That's the kind of thinking actually coming from the private sector, where the public sector, unfortunately, by changing the goalposts constantly, is holding us back.

We’ve presented our own ideas in our programme for opposition. I think it's a positive move, and maybe it says something, actually, when we’ve yet to see the programme for government. We’ve had the programme for opposition. There are more ideas coming from the opposition benches currently than are coming from the people that have their hands on the levers of power. That has to change if we’re going to actually change the economic state of Wales. We are very much supportive of the idea of creating a national development agency. We created a template that the world copied through the Welsh Development Agency—a fantastic brand, but a model in terms of how you develop and restructure an economy. Of course, we want to do it for the twenty-first century. We're not about actually staying with the policies of the past. That's the problem, I think, with the Government going back to this grant aid obsession. We want a WDA for the twenty-first century. The Government, through the innovation advisory council, is consulting with business—and I understand there's a very positive response—on the idea of creating a national innovation agency. Is that a quango? We often get the criticism, ‘Oh, you just want to create quangos’. Well, it's an arm’s-length body that has expertise, that actually speaks the same language of business, has a particular focus, and will get on with the job.

And the same is true of our proposal to drive up infrastructure investment in Wales. We saw the news from the Scottish Government that they are bringing forward plans to drive up infrastructure investment by £4 billion next year. That's the kind of leadership that we need, and the Government needs tools to be able to do that, people who have the expertise in terms of funding infrastructure investment, in terms of managing large-scale projects. That will never be within the Welsh civil service, and that's why creating a national infrastructure commission is so important.

The Deputy Presiding Officer (Ann Jones) took the Chair.

And finally, I think the Government needs a massive injection of creativity, some big ideas that can inspire Wales. We saw over the summer the cancellation of the Wales bid for the Commonwealth Games, but what have we put in there to replace it that will actually inspire our country and create the foundations for a different economy? About the same time as the economy Secretary was announcing that, Manchester announced an ambitious bid to bring the World’s Fair, the Expo, the Olympics for business, if you like, and industry back to these islands for the first time since the Great Exhibition of 1851. That is the biggest event in the world—20 million visitors they’re expecting there, double the size of the Olympics. Think what that could do to the Manchester economy in terms of promoting an image of its city and its region, but also in terms of investing in its business. That’s the kind of thinking that we need from this Welsh Government. They did the Commonwealth Games; now they’re going for the Expo. What are our proposals from the Welsh Government for Wales?

Thank you very much. I’ve selected the two amendments to the motion. I call on Nick Ramsay to move amendment 1, tabled in the name of Paul Davies. Nick.

Amendment 1—Paul Davies

Delete sub-point (a) and replace with:

‘working proactively with the UK Government and other devolved governments ahead of the triggering of article 50 and the subsequent negotiations.’

Amendment 1 moved.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. It was good listening to those ideas. I’m not sure I’ve got much time left to give any of my own ideas as well; it was quite a long opening. But I’m pleased to move the amendment in the name of Paul Davies on the order paper. Can I say in opening that it’s always good to hear the spatial plan, the Wales spatial plan, reinvented and referred to? I would beg to differ, Adam Price; I don’t think it was ripped up. I think it left in Andrew Davies’s briefcase some years ago and we haven’t heard it mentioned since. But it is a good example of the way that, at any point in time, you have one economic policy and that can be the economic policy of the Welsh Government for a given amount of time, but then it is dropped and we move on to something else, and then something else further down the line. Whilst that works over a period of 50, 60 or 70 years—the point you made towards the start of your speech—I’m not sure that that does work over the shorter time that we’ve had in devolution. I think that the Welsh Government does need to look at that, and to look at a more sustainable policy over the medium term that will give the stability that the economy needs.

Whilst there’s no doubt that we do need to protect Wales from the immediate fallout of the Brexit vote in terms of replacing the EU funding that will undoubtedly be lost, at least as far as it comes from Brussels, the Welsh Conservatives believe that it is imperative that we work with the UK Government, and indeed other devolved Governments, ahead of the triggering of article 50 and the subsequent negotiations. This, we feel, should be on the face of the motion, which is the reason for our amendment.

We’ve long argued that we need to close the prosperity gap between Wales and the rest of the United Kingdom, as indeed Plaid Cymru seem to agree with. Of course, European structural funds have for a long time been seen as key to doing this, and they have had a part to play, but let’s not forget, back at the outset of devolution when this was first founded, back in those days, I think it was Rhodri Morgan who said that Wales would only need one phase of European structural funds and that would deal with the issue. So, it’s not just a case of receiving structural funds or funding from wherever it might come. It’s a question of that being best spent, and it’s a question of those funds being invested in a way that makes the Welsh economy and the regional parts of the Welsh economy such as west Wales and the Valleys more sustainable, and puts it on a more sustainable footing in a way that those areas can generate their own wealth so that they are not so dependent on the grant culture that Adam Price alluded to in future.

The motion mentions the WDA and Plaid Cymru want to create or recreate a Welsh Development Agency that is fit for the twenty-first century. That’s a key point. It cannot simply be a matter of recreating the old 1970s WDA model, the 1980s WDA model. We cannot and should not seek to turn back the clock, no matter how attractive that might sometimes appear in some quarters. It simply won’t work. That said, the loss of the WDA brand was in retrospect a mistake. No, the WDA was not perfect, but it was recognised across the world as the image of Wales, and it did do a great deal to attract inward investment here that would otherwise not have come. However, we do acknowledge that some of those investors were short term. That they clearly were. They came, they took the grants, and moved on, and that was not sustainable. Any new model of attracting investment must focus on aftercare and not just as an afterthought, but as a key part of the original package. I know that there is a degree of aftercare at the moment provided by the Welsh Government. I’m sure that the Minister would make that point. But Welsh Conservatives believe that this should be overhauled and bolstered with speed of response to businesses’ concerns and clear lines of communication placed at the heart of the new arrangements. We came up with a model called Destination Cymru. There are other models out there. I know that Plaid Cymru have come forward with their own proposals as well. But, yes, absolutely, our aim as a country must be to grow Welsh business and boost our exports.

Turning to the national infrastructure commission, while there can be no doubt that the importance of developing infrastructure has been too often overlooked since the advent of evolution, I’m pleased it’s now in the title of the Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Infrastructure, and that’s a welcome development. I think I would say we need to be sure that the infrastructure commission, if we have one, does actually deliver what we want, and that we get the right model from the start. But I do agree that the idea of bringing transport, energy and green infrastructure together at the outset is a good one. Too often we’ve seen the usual silos of Government where departments work in isolation and interaction doesn’t happen.

Can I say, finally, point 3 is arguably, I think, one of the most important points of the debate—procurement? Yes, we need to increase levels of procurement. No-one argues against that. We’ve had numerous debates in here over the years and I’ve argued for a much more robust public sector procurement strategy. How will that strategy look? Well, that’s to be decided. But we need to make sure that the Welsh Government doesn’t just talk about a national procurement strategy, but that we have one that really works and that is weighted towards home-grown, local Welsh businesses and not just to the larger businesses that it has been pitched to too often in the past.

Thanks very much. I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government to formally move amendment 2, tabled in the name of Jane Hutt.

Amendment 2—Jane Hutt

Delete sub-point (b)(i) and replace with:

‘selling Wales, our products and ideas to the world in order to grow Welsh businesses and boost our exports;’

Amendment 2 moved.

I move formally.

Thank you. Llyr Gruffydd.

There’s no doubt, of course, that the next few years are going to be challenging. But I think the real challenge is to ensure that we emerge stronger at the other end than we are at present in terms of our economy here in Wales. As the shadow Minister with responsibility for education and skills and so on, it is clear that we must make full use of the potential we have in Wales to build a stronger economy on those firm foundations in terms of creativity, innovation, enterprise and so on, as Adam mentioned, and to use this opportunity that we have now to create an improved regime.

In a recent discussion on apprenticeships here in Wales, the point was made, of course, that employers are obviously crucial to any successful apprenticeship scheme, and we must ensure that employers are an integral part and ready partners to step forward to play their part in this. But the one thing employers don’t like, of course, is inconsistency, is programmes that appear then disappear, and then things change and after a year or two the goalposts are moved. They need consistency and they need continuity.

The programmes that we have in Wales, of course, are very reliant on European funding in terms of apprenticeships and workplace training. The tendency is that they are two or three year schemes, because of the fact that those conditions come from Europe. Is there an opportunity here now, for example, to create programmes that are longer term and to think differently, rather than us having to change so often, and that we create that more consistent landscape that is more in keeping with the involvement of the business sector, which will mean that we manage to develop more of those skills and more of the expertise that we need?

But one doesn’t get the feeling from Welsh Government that that strategy is in place and that it is robust and muscular—certainly in these first few months after the referendum. I’ve referred in the past to the fact that the Minister for skills stated—fairly enough, if truth be told—that she was going to continue with many of the programmes that are reliant on European funding, because the pledges have been made that the funding will be provided from elsewhere, although, of course, some of those individuals didn’t perhaps have the right to make those pledges. But the attitude is quite positive in that regard: we will continue, because, if we don’t, what will we do? We’ll be in stasis. But, on exactly the same day, another Minister, responsible for agriculture, announced that she was postponing some of these programmes because of the uncertainty. Well, there you have two departments taking entirely different views on the same problem there. Certainly that, to me, highlighted the fact that there was no specific strategy and no meaningful approach by the Welsh Government to the situation that we find ourselves in.

Of course, international students make a very important contribution to our HE institutions in Wales. We know that the expenditure of international students supported over 7,000 or almost 7,500 jobs in Wales in 2015, and that the impact isn’t only in those areas where there are universities but in other areas of Wales as well. One job is created for every three students from outwith the EU, and one job is created for every five students coming to Wales from within the EU. There’s £203 million in payments from international students to Welsh universities. The personal expenditure of international students is over £300 million. There is a risk, of course, in light of the referendum, that we will lose that important relationship we have, and that image we have of being a nation that opens our arms to international students to bring their skills and expertise to us.

And of course it’s not only the direct economic consequences of that, but it would also cost. Think of all these people then going back having made trade and international connections for Wales. It would cost you a fortune to try and create that in some alternative way. And the comments of Theresa May and Amber Rudd on the possibility of restricting the number of student visas in order to meet pledges on immigration, to me, are of huge concern, and certainly create further uncertainty, which will be damaging to that sector.

The importance of research and development is, of course, another prominent issue. It is central to any real economic strategy, and the return on investment there can be very substantial indeed. And we have seen those figures. In 2014, it was estimated that totals of £716 million had been spent on research and development in Wales, and that represents 2.4 per cent of the total UK research spend. There’s been an old argument on the need to increase that and ensure that we get our fair share. Well, there’s an opportunity here, with that shifting landscape, for us to actually make up for the underinvestment that has happened in the past.

Interestingly, too, the private sector contributes some 55 per cent to that total, higher education some 40 per cent, and the Government 5 per cent. So, there may be scope to increase that. But, certainly, the economic topography is changing, and we must ensure that it works to our benefit, despite any challenges.

Thank you very much. Simon Thomas.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I think, in bringing forward this debate, and, earlier this week, in publishing our programme for opposition, Plaid Cymru was responding to a real need that we have now in Wales. I think it’s fair to say that those in power, and those responsible for calling the referendum on the future membership of the European Union, did not prepare for this scenario in one shape or form whatsoever. They certainly didn’t prepare for what would be the implications of this scenario for devolved administration, and a devolved Government here in Wales. I think we’ve seen a lot of that over the last few months, and it has been disappointing that the Welsh Government has not responded in a coherent way—as has been pointed out already by Llyr Gruffydd, and Adam Price—and I hope that that will improve now we have the Cabinet Secretary responsible for the sub-committee that is responding to this challenge.

But Plaid Cymru is certainly ready for it. We didn’t want this scenario, but, as the party that represents Wales, and wants to seek to represent all parts of Wales, we want to make sure that we take the best opportunity from this position. And if the kaleidoscope has been shaken up—and I didn’t really want to quote Tony Blair, but there we are—if it has been shaken up, then we need to make sure that the pieces reset in a way that makes sense for our economy, our society, and our environment. And I think Adam Price has set out already how clearly we are prepared to do that. We will, obviously, work with the Welsh Government. We already have arrangements in place with the Welsh Government to try and deliver on some of these ideas, but we also want to seek to lead the Welsh nation in how we respond to the situation we’re in.

There are two things that I particularly want to mention here this afternoon. One is around our future as an energy nation, and the second is how we can respond from the point of view of food production, environmental services, and our farming communities. There is no doubt that we’ve gone off the pace in what we’ve done as a nation in the last 10 years as regards energy and renewable energy. We sit in Cardiff Bay, in a capital city created by carbon energy—created by coal, mainly—and yet we haven’t had the devolution dividend that Adam mentioned in terms of renewable energy either. At one stage, we were ahead of the game, but only this week, the Committee on Climate Change said that Scotland is now leading the way for the UK as regards dealing with climate change, and is ahead of the game with renewable energy.

We have 1,200 miles of glorious coastline—which some of us will be seeing next week in New Quay, with the committee—deep sea ports, which are extremely important for energy development and capture, and Welsh waters that could be worth, just for marine energy alone, £3.7 billion to the UK economy by 2020. Cardiff Business School has estimated that we could have 1 GW of capacity developed in the next two decades. And central to this, of course, is the potential of a tidal lagoon in Swansea bay, and, from that, other tidal lagoons being developed in the Severn estuary.

I understand the Government is meeting with Charles Hendry, who’s leading the review of tidal lagoons on behalf of—he hasn’t been sacked by Thereasa May yet; everyone else appointed by Cameron has been sacked by Theresa May, but he hasn’t been sacked yet. So, if he’s still there next week, and the Government does meet with him, I hope they really impress that this review has to take on board how important this infrastructure project is for Wales, in terms of our building skills capacity, in terms of what we are ready to do with Tata Steel, and the deep port at Port Talbot as well, and, indeed, how we can develop our renewable energy through a bay lagoon. I’ll certainly give way to Huw Irranca.

Thank you, Simon for giving way. Your point is very well made. In fact, there is a parallel with the investment that went into the areas around Hull and Grimsby. Prior to 2010, £60 million was put into port expansion there in order to enable the expansion of offshore wind, and it is happening, and Siemens are located there; they have manufacturing capability as well as everything else. This could be our equivalent in Wales, and we need to, without holding up the begging bowl, actually say to them, ‘This is good for the UK as well, but it’s particularly good for Wales.’

You’re absolutely right. I agree, and of course, we have the deep ports, and the Haven in Pembrokeshire as well, where construction can be taken immediately out to sea without the UK investment that was needed in the north-east. That was seen as regional development, but it also opened up the north sea for offshore wind, and that’s been very successful. I think that’s a very good example, and any pressure that can be brought now in the next couple of crucial weeks to ensure that the tidal lagoon is seen as a huge potential for Wales—. We can be, again, a world leader in energy, renewable energy, and I would like to see this opportunity—whether we want it or not, this is our opportunity to use it to recast our nation in that way.

The second aspect is around agriculture and the environment, and whatever we’ve thought in the past of European agriculture rules, there’s been a clear tendency over the last 10 years to move away from supporting merely paying for food production into a situation where we support the whole environment and food production and processing as part of that. We have this opportunity, rather than, as Llyr Gruffydd mentioned, going through every five or six years, recasting our programmes, to have a very much more long-term view of how we can use these resources now to support our rural communities, but also to achieve more effective, more sustainable and, indeed, more environmentally productive food production. Certainly, Plaid Cymru is consulting our farming communities at the moment, and I hope that anyone who is interested in contributing those ideas will join with us in doing that.

The key to how we move forward is the unresolved question of whether we have some kind of access to the single market through some kind of free trade arrangement, which could include tariffs, or membership of the single market. Adam Price mentioned that we’ve had at least three different policies. I asked the environment Secretary in committee this morning which policy the Cabinet actually had, and I think it’s fair to say that the Cabinet has no policy. The Cabinet has no policy at all regarding whether it’s membership, or access or whatever. Now, we can see that these are difficult times, and uncertain times, but I think we need to see a vision, and I think we need to see the Welsh Government setting out very clearly where it wants Wales to remain. Plaid Cymru is clear and I’m quite clear; I want, long-term, Wales to be a member of the European Union, because I want Wales as an independent country willingly participating in a union of other countries working together for the environment, and for society and for the economy. If that’s not to happen now—and I accept the result of the referendum, of course—but if it’s not to happen now, then what are the steps we’re taking to protect Wales in the meantime, and secure access, which is vital, to that single market for our farmers?

We’ve talked a lot about economic strategy this afternoon, and I wish the Cabinet Secretary well in developing a new economic strategy for the Welsh Government. I think we are in uniquely challenging times, and I think it’s a timely moment to look at the economic strategy generally. So, I wish him well in that, and I commend him, actually, for seeking input from the people of Wales on their economic priorities for the future. I know that there is a school of thought that prefers economic strategy with declamatory statements of certainty, but I think we are not in that territory in the world at the moment. And I know, from conversations across the house, that many of us will be looking to have consultations in our constituencies about those priorities to feed into that strategy, and I think that is a positive thing for us all.

On the question of inward investment, I’ll echo what has been said many times by the Cabinet Secretary and the First Minister about selling Wales to the world. Obviously, it’s essential for us at this time to be communicating that we’re an open, trading, outward-looking economy, and that is absolutely fundamental to the success of the economy in future. Clearly, how that pans out will depend on the relationship we ultimately have with the European single market. But I just want to say that, in addition to that focus on inward Investment, I think we also need to look at the support we give to our foundational economies in Wales—those sectors where demand is growing, which are located in our communities, which are less internationally mobile, maybe, and which offer and can continue to offer employment to many, many thousands of people in our communities, if you’ll forgive my obsession with jobs for the moment. Those sectors are care, housing, energy and food. I think we also need to make sure that our policy addresses the needs of those sectors. That will require concrete choices in policy terms in the months ahead. For example, how do we fund some of those 100,000 apprenticeships that we’re looking at? For what sectors are we going to target that support? So, there are genuine policy questions around that.

I’d also endorse the work that’s underway in relation to the national infrastructure commission. It seems to me that one of the important things in the post-Brexit world that we’re heading towards is that we draw inspiration and, indeed, draw comparison with countries not just in Europe, but beyond Europe as well. So, I would hope that the Cabinet Secretary would consider pointing to that commission individuals with substantial experience of infrastructure, not just in the UK and not just in Europe, even, but beyond that as well.

I just want to say one final thing, which is about the support—. Many people who supported Brexit will have done so with the opportunity in mind to cut back on some of the valuable workplace rights that we have by virtue of our membership of the European Union. The European Union is a source of many rights that workers in Wales regard as absolutely fundamental. They’re a platform for modern work practice, for supporting family life, for clamping down on discrimination and I hope that we don’t see across the UK a pressure to move away from a settlement that protects the Welsh workforce and I hope and expect the Welsh Government will advocate a post-Brexit economy, if you like, which has a skilled, productive workforce at its heart.

It’s a pleasure to take part in this extremely important debate, and I pay tribute first of all to those who have already spoken. Adam Price has opened the debate very well, telling us about the landscape now following that important vote that we had recently and that has changed everything, namely Brexit.

There is a major challenge in front of us. Many of us have mentioned that challenge, but fundamentally we want to respond with confidence and Wales has to go for it, indeed, and has to make every effort to make the best of where we find ourselves at present, and not just to continue mourning a result that we didn’t necessarily want.

But we have to be adventurous and ambitious, and on these benches we’ve told you about the measures that we would like to be put in place. I would like to thank Nick Ramsay for his contribution and to Jeremy as well, talking about the infrastructure commission. And of course, we need to have an infrastructure commission that has real teeth to get to grips with the challenge in front of us. We need a commission that can do things; not a kind of consultation committee but a body that can borrow, that can plan and that can make arrangements and can go for it to pursue this infrastructure that we all want to see in terms of transport and green issues, and so on, as is noted in our motion.

I wanted to talk briefly about the part of our motion that talks about increasing procurement levels for businesses based in Wales, and of course it’s fair to note, as others already have—Nick Ramsay, mainly—that we’ve had several discussions over the years about public procurement in this place. We all agree that it’s an excellent idea for us to be able to increase levels of public procurement for companies here in Wales. Of course, it makes common sense, and yet, we’re less than successful in implementing and achieving that aim, because indeed in the potentially difficult days ahead of us we do need to get to grips with every tool that we have. And we do have to increase the levels of public procurement for businesses based in Wales. When you look at the Welsh economy at present, 25 per cent of our wealth comes from the private sector. Now, 75 per cent of Welsh wealth comes from the public sector, and we need to get to grips with that.

And, of course, using the public sector is a very easy way to alleviate that. At present, in the public sector—in our local government, for example, where they want to provide food for schools and hospitals and so on, the level of procurement there is over 50 per cent for the private sector. So, the public sector is doing its bit in helping the private sector, but we need to do more. Some 98,000 posts at present in Wales stem from the fact that over 50 per cent of the procurement contracts at present are based in Wales-based companies. But we need to increase that level from 55 per cent to 75 per cent, and we should be able to do that by thinking adventurously and smartly about how we set our contracts—with smaller companies, as Nick Ramsay said, and not always going for the major companies, and pursuing that ideal that promoting the economy locally here in Wales is important, that looking after social standards here in Wales is important, and, of course, environmentally, it makes common sense to keep our businesses here in Wales.

There are all sorts of intelligent and reasonable reasons for increasing the level of procurement here in Wales, and we have an opportunity now to use rules that perhaps haven’t been used often in the past to get to grips with this, because there is a significant challenge ahead of us. Because, ultimately, value for money means, in my view, more than going for the lowest price every time. Thank you.

Well, Dai Lloyd has told us not to mourn the situation, but I have to say that I am still in mourning. I am still in mourning for those areas of rural Wales and our agricultural industry that now don’t know what their future holds.

Rwy’n dal i alaru dros y bobl hynny yn y cymunedau tlotaf a fyddai wedi tybio bod yr arian hwnnw yn dod iddynt, ond sydd bellach heb unrhyw syniad a fydd yn dod. Ac rwy’n galaru yn fwy na dim dros y wlad rwy’n ei charu lle rwyf wedi gweld rhaniadau’n ymddangos a lle gwelsom wyneb hyll anoddefgarwch yn ein cymunedau. Gwnaed addewidion a thorwyd addewidion. Credaf fod yn rhaid i ni fod yn ofalus iawn hefyd ac mae angen i ni wrando. Mae angen i ni wrando ar bobl Cymru a anfonodd neges atom. Maent wedi anfon neges atom, a rhan o’r neges honno oedd eu bod am adfer rheolaeth.

Rydym bellach yn byw mewn gwlad lle mae’r Bitcoin yn fwy sefydlog na sterling. Rydym yn byw mewn gwlad lle gallem weld 40c yr awr yn cael ei dorri oddi ar y cyflog byw oherwydd effaith gadael yr UE. Rydym wedi gweld tai a chyfranddaliadau bancio yn cael eu torri, ac rydym wedi mynd o fod yn bumed economi fwyaf y byd i’r chweched economi fwyaf, ac wedi colli ein statws AAA. Ond poenau cychwynnol gadael yr UE yn unig yw’r rhain; mae yna faterion nad ydym wedi dechrau rhoi sylw iddynt. Faint o ddeddfwyr â sgiliau ychwanegol fydd eu hangen arnom, hyd yn oed yng Nghymru, er mwyn datglymu’r holl offerynnau statudol sydd wedi eu hymgorffori yng nghymhlethdod ein deddfwrfa ein hunain? Pa mor hawdd fydd hi i bobl o Iwerddon lanio ar ein glannau yn Abergwaun, Caergybi a Doc Penfro? Pa mor hawdd fydd hi iddynt?

Rwy’n meddwl bod Prif Weinidog Cymru yn gwneud y peth cwbl gywir: ei gwneud yn glir mai’r hyn rydym ei eisiau yw mynediad di-dariff i’r farchnad sengl, heb unrhyw rwystrau technegol eraill ychwaith. Rwy’n credu ei bod yn bwysig ac yn arwydd da iawn ei fod wedi mynd i’r Unol Daleithiau i ddangos o ddifrif ein bod yn dal i fod yn genedl sy’n edrych tuag allan. Ond mae’n fy nharo mai’r ffordd fwyaf pwerus o werthu ein gwlad mewn gwirionedd yw gofyn i’r bobl sydd eisoes yn gwneud busnes yma i weithredu fel llysgenhadon ar ein rhan, gan mai hyn a hyn yn unig y gall gweision sifil ei wneud yn fy mhrofiad i, ac os caf ddweud, hyn a hyn yn unig y gall gwleidyddion ei wneud. Yr arbenigwyr go iawn yw’r bobl sy’n gwneud busnes yma, ac nid oes rheswm pam na allwn ofyn iddynt fod yn llysgenhadon ar ein rhan. Mae’n digwydd yn y Swyddfa Dramor a Chymanwlad, nid oes rheswm pam na allwn ofyn i bobl wneud hynny yma.

Y peth arall sy’n rhaid i ni ei wneud yn glir yw na allwn dderbyn gwlad lle byddem yn waeth ein byd fel rhan o’r Deyrnas Unedig o gymharu â bod wedi aros yn yr Undeb Ewropeaidd. Pa fath o neges y mae hynny’n ei roi i ni, y bobl sydd am aros yn rhan o’r Deyrnas Unedig? Nid yw’n ymwneud yn unig â’r cronfeydd strwythurol, mae’n ymwneud ag amaethyddiaeth a thaliadau gwledig, mae’n ymwneud ag arian i’n prifysgolion, mae’n ymwneud â gorfodi rheolau ar safonau amgylcheddol a safonau ar gyfer defnyddwyr. Rydym wedi clywed heddiw fod y Sefydliad Astudiaethau Cyllid wedi amcangyfrif y gallai Cymru golli dros £500 miliwn o arian o ganlyniad i hyn. Rhaid i ni beidio â derbyn hynny. Mae’n rhaid i ni ymladd bob cam o’r ffordd. Ac rydym yn gwybod hyd yn oed pe na baem wedi bod yn gymwys ar gyfer y cam nesaf o gronfeydd strwythurol Ewrop, yna byddai rhyw fath o fecanwaith tapro ar waith. Rydym eisiau’r arian hwnnw hefyd. Rydym eisiau’r arian hwnnw hefyd ac mae angen iddynt glywed hynny’n uchel ac yn glir yn y Trysorlys.

Ond yn anffodus, rwy’n credu’n wirioneddol y gallai’r bleidlais hon fod yn argyfwng i Gymru. Nid wyf yn gwybod os yw’n hynny eto. Ni fyddwn yn gwybod hyd nes y byddwn yn gwybod canlyniad y trafodaethau. Ond rwy’n meddwl bod angen i ni wrando ar yr hyn roedd pobl Cymru yn dweud wrthym, ac rwy’n meddwl eu bod yn rhoi neges i ni am effaith globaleiddio ar eu bywydau. Rwy’n credu eu bod yn dweud wrthym eu bod am gael rhywfaint yn fwy o reolaeth dros eu bywydau, ac rwy’n credu bod angen i ni gynllunio sut rydym yn grymuso’r bobl sydd eisiau adfer rheolaeth, a chynnig cyfleoedd go iawn iddynt gymryd rheolaeth yn eu cymunedau dros eu bywydau eu hunain. Yng Nghymru, fel mewn mannau eraill, byddwn yn gweld cynnydd enfawr yn nifer y bobl sy’n hunangyflogedig. Beth sydd ei angen arnynt? Sut y gallwn eu cefnogi yn y cymunedau hynny? Oes, mae angen i ni feddwl am strategaeth economaidd a strategaeth ddiwydiannol. Gadewch i ni edrych ar lefydd fel Ffrainc. Sut y mae eu cynhyrchiant gymaint yn well nag yn y DU? Mae yna fodelau gwych i ni eu dilyn yn rhai o’r gwledydd hynny. Ac mae’n rhaid i mi ddweud wrthych, yn ystod fy amser mewn diwydiant roedd yn amlwg iawn i mi, rydych chi’n iawn, nad yw pobl yn cael eu hysgogi i fuddsoddi yng Nghymru oherwydd grantiau. Nid dyna beth sy’n eu denu yma. Yr hyn y mae pobl ei eisiau yw amgylchedd sefydlog, rheoliadol ac economaidd. Rwy’n ofni mai dyna un peth nad oes gennym mohono ar hyn o bryd. Dyna ran o’r broblem rydym yn ei hwynebu. Felly, mae’n rhaid i’r strategaeth economaidd hon ystyried y ffaith fod hynny’n anhawster i ni ar hyn o bryd.

Rhaid i ni feddwl hefyd am swyddi’r dyfodol. O wythnos i wythnos, o fis i fis, o flwyddyn i flwyddyn, bydd technoleg yn cael gwared ar swyddi ac yn gwneud swyddi’n ddiangen yn y gwledydd hyn. Gadewch i ni geisio edrych ymlaen i weld sut swyddi fydd y rhain. Mae’n rhaid i mi orffen drwy ddweud bod rhan ohonof yn dal yn flin a rhan ohonof yn dal yn drist ac yn galaru am ddyfodol pan na fydd fy mhlant yn rhan o’r Undeb Ewropeaidd.

Thank you very much. I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government, Mark Drakeford.

Diolch yn fawr, Ddirprwy Lywydd. Can I begin by thanking all those who’ve taken part in what has been, I think, a thought-provoking and constructive discussion, which will be helpful to us all as we struggle together to think our way through the circumstances in which we find ourselves in Wales in the post-Brexit era? I’ll begin by thanking Adam Price for his contribution. I enjoyed the start of it especially. I think his reference to policy paradigms, and the way in which we have faced previous challenges by thinking again the strategies and the practical actions we need to take in order to meet those challenges, were helpful to us even in the tough times we face and even with the blow to confidence that setting out in a different direction can bring. I think he demonstrated that we have faced those challenges in the past and by applying ourselves to the circumstances of today we are capable of meeting them in the future. His general point, and the general point that lies behind the motion, is incontrovertible isn’t it? We have to think again and we have to fashion our future anew in the circumstances created by the vote on 23 June.

Those circumstances, as Nick Ramsay said, are highly uncertain and in order to meet that uncertainty we have to shape Wales’s future alongside others. I spent part of my morning in a discussion with the new Scottish Minister responsible for negotiating from the Scottish perspective in the Brexit discussions. We shared ideas about how we can shape inter-governmental machinery and how we can create an agenda in which, where we have common and overlapping interests, we work together to pursue those ambitions. That’s why the Government side will vote for the amendment moved by Nick Ramsey this afternoon. We need a distinctive future for Wales but not a separate future; a future in which we can work together to create some common benefit for the people who live in Wales. And when we do that, Dirprwy Lywydd, I think from the perspective of this side, then we don’t think that the best way to fashion that future is to look back to solutions that may have had their time in the past. The Government amendment, which we put in front of the Assembly this afternoon, makes clear that we have ambitions for the Welsh economy in the world, but we can’t achieve those ambitions by trying to take off-the-peg solutions that have had their day.

It’s clear as well, Dirprwy Lywydd, that in any response to Brexit, we are involved in an unfolding story, not some sort of short-term sprint. And Eluned Morgan’s contribution I thought was an excellent account, both of some of the drivers that we will need to draw on in shaping that future but the breadth of the issues that we have to encompass in trying to put together a distinctive approach to fashioning Wales’s future. We have to be able to do that, not immediately in the here and now—because the bits of the jigsaw around us that we rely on in order to fashion a future for Wales are themselves not set. They are not set at Whitehall, they are not set yet at Europe either. The Juncker state of the nation—

Will the Member take an intervention?

Yes, of course.

I’d be grateful. You’re quite right to say that there are many more pieces of the jigsaw to be put together till we’ve got the full picture, but one of the principles that, as I understand it, the Welsh Government stood on in June was that access to the single market was critical and it was goods, services and people that were the basic tenets of its position. That position seems to have changed over the summer. Can you confirm that there is still, at the heart of the Welsh Government’s thinking, the belief that it should be goods, services and people and not just goods and services?

Well, I think the First Minister made it clear yesterday, Dirprwy Lywydd, that in the run-up to the referendum the Welsh Government unambiguously put in front of the Welsh people our belief that Wales’s future was best secured within Europe, and the terms of trade in Europe are that you have free movement of goods, services and people. Those terms have changed. The vote on 23 June means that we cannot simply go on saying today what we said then. And what the First Minister said yesterday is that we all have, in a democratic sense, a responsibility to put our own views and our own beliefs about what is best for Wales’s future—and there’s no reason why any of us should change our minds about that—but we have to factor into that the message that we had from people in Wales who took a different view to that of many people in this Chamber.

Will you take a further intervention? Minister, will you accept that the question of freedom of movement of people wasn’t on the ballot paper? I’d just ask, are you aware of the research carried out by the Wales TUC, which asked people, in the Valleys particularly, why they voted to leave the European Union, and that this question of the free movement of people or immigration was put at No. 6 or No. 7? People’s chief concern is jobs, trade, good-quality jobs. So, would you be prepared to look at that research and perhaps revise the Government’s position on this question?

Of course, anybody would be willing to look at that research. We will never know, in a definitive ranking sense, what were the reasons that motivated people to vote the way they did on 23 June. My own more sobering experience of knocking doors in parts of Cardiff—

Look at the evidence—[Inaudible.]

There’s more than one sort of evidence, Dirprwy Lywydd, and evidence of what people say to you directly when you’re in conversations with them is not to be dismissed. On the doorstep, when I am trying to persuade people to vote for Wales’s future to be in Europe, then I can assure you that issues of immigration and free movement were very, very regularly and very prominently reported to me—[Interruption.] All I am saying, and all the First Minister said, is that we would be foolish to brush that aside as though it didn’t matter at all and we can push ahead without attending to them.

Will the Cabinet Secretary give way? He’s been very generous—

Maybe for the last time.

Yes, I’m very grateful to him. But, on the specific point raised by the leader of the Conservative group yesterday, the Welsh Government, in setting out its six key principles following the Brexit vote—not before, but following—said that freedom of movement was a key principle, a core principle. When did that change?

The Member is wrong to put it in those terms. The position of the Welsh Government is that we have to evolve the position that Wales takes in response to the developing debate. I’ve been the Minister of health in this Assembly. I don’t need anybody to convince me that our ability to go on providing core services for people in Wales depends on our ability to attract people from around the globe who are willing to come and make their futures here in Wales. There’s nothing in the Welsh Government’s position that is antipathetic to that, but we cannot, at the same time, pretend that the world that we occupied on 22 June is the world that we find ourselves in today. We have to accommodate our ambitions and our wishes for the future of Wales to the realities in which we find ourselves. That’s why, as a Government, we took immediate action following the vote on 23 June, calling the British-Irish Council, meeting the new Prime Minister, fresh and funded measures to provide confidence to business, actions to accelerate the draw-down of European funding and, alongside those immediate measures, we understand that there are a set of actions that will be needed to secure the future of our economy and all that goes with it.

Those were very important points, I thought, that Simon Thomas made about energy, renewable energy, and how we will fashion our patterns of support for people who work and live in rural communities in the future. I look forward to chairing the new advisory committee, established by the First Minister, which will have its first meeting later this week. I’m sure that much of what has been discussed today, the ideas that have been contributed, will feature in those discussions, together with all the other ideas that we will be able to draw from the wider interested community beyond this Chamber.

That’s why Jeremy Miles’s point was so important, and it’s important in relation to some of the questions that I’ve been asked. In relation to the economy, Ken Skates, as the Cabinet Secretary responsible, has begun by asking, not simply businesses and organisations, but people who live in Wales, people who cast their votes, people whom we failed to persuade to cast their votes in the way that we would like them to have cast them, to ask them for their ideas and for their priorities on how we will fashion the economy in the future, because we need to include their voices in this conversation, if we’re to have the success that we wish to have. The Secretary for the economy has already announced plans to develop the Welsh development bank and a Welsh infrastructure commission. He is getting on with the job of making Wales more prosperous and secure—ambitious, as Dai Lloyd said, and willing to break new ground in response to new circumstances, but determined to go on being an outward-looking nation, trading and communicating with others and committed to delivering a fair, prosperous and secure future for Wales.

Thank you very much. I call Adam Price to briefly respond to the debate, please.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. May I thank everyone who contributed to that most useful debate? Other than thanking you for your contributions, I have very little time to do much else. There was an element of an agreement across the parties. It was good to see Nick Ramsay supporting the need for an infrastructure commission. I agree with Jeremy Miles on the importance of the foundational sectors that Karel Williams has been doing some interesting work on. I agreed with the spirit of Eluned Morgan’s comments. That is, if I may summarise: the pessimism of the intellect and the optimism of will, in quoting Gramsci for the first time for me.

It won’t be the last time, I’m sure.

But in terms of the Cabinet Secretary, I’ve a great deal of respect for him, but I was disappointed that we didn’t get more clarity on the policy and view of Government. I do sense that he isn’t to blame for that. I do think that the policy is being made on the hoof, unfortunately. There is no accountability to the Cabinet, seemingly, to date, and certainly not to this Chamber, and that simply isn’t good enough. We must come together with a vision for Wales in the current climate, and I’m afraid that we haven’t seen that from Government as of yet.

Thank you very much. The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Therefore, as a Member has objected, we will defer voting under this item until voting time.

Voting deferred until voting time.