I thank Eluned Morgan for her kind words and for pointing out how busy we were and then asking us to do more work. [Laughter.] I think that’s a very appropriate way forward. I think, on the first point, if I can say, through the Presiding Officer, if there’s been one positive thing that’s come out of this first statement, it’s clear that we’ve had members of different parties, all demanding, or at least requesting, more information on the budget process to scrutinise the Welsh Government and I think that, in itself, has been a valuable way of airing these things because this is about better information for better decision making. This is not when we’re looking at the budget process through committee, certainly, and this is not about a necessarily party-political approach; this is about key questions that she has raised and, as she said, that the Institute for Fiscal Studies has raised as well about where the burden falls. She will know from the report—and I was interested to go to the briefing from the IFS—that if we, for example, were to protect health in Wales by 1 per cent or 2 per cent, the cuts in local government would then shoot up into the scale between the 10 per cent and the 12 per cent and up to 17 per cent. It looks quite frightening. These are the main choices that have to be made.

We, surely, as an Assembly and in our committee structure, should assist the Government at least in finding the information to make those choices and for exploring, together with the public, how those choices are made. Eventually, once the decision is made by Government, it’s the Government that’s accountable for that, but as a committee we should throw as much light on it as possible.

On the relationship with the Public Accounts Committee, the Chair is a member of the Finance Committee at the moment, of course, which helps things. She will know, from this morning as well, that we, as a Finance Committee, are responsible for the actual revenue or rather the estimates of the Auditor General for Wales. So, we have a relationship there. But, broadly, I would agree with her—I think the Public Accounts Committee looks at value for money. It’s a retrospective learning process, which is very useful of course, and extremely, sometimes, headline-grabbing, in the way that it does that, and that’s inevitable, whereas I think we have a far more forward-looking, planning kind of approach. I think both of us—both committees, that is—need to work together in that way.

I think the final, main point that she was making, of course, is in terms of mid and long-term planning, demographic changes. That’s not just for the Finance Committee, but all the subject committees will have to be doing some of that work as well. But I agree that we should be looking at it in those long terms. It does turn around whether we’ll get a financial framework that is robust enough for this Assembly to approve a legislative consent motion for the Wales Bill. That’s what it boils down to. We know that we are reliant on Welsh Government to negotiate with Westminster on that. The Scottish Government took a long time, or rather Westminster took a long time—I don’t know quite who to blame, but they took a long time. We had confirmation in committee this morning, in a public session, that the Minister meets monthly at least with the Chief Secretary to the Treasury. So, there’s a process ongoing, and I agree with the Member that the Finance Committee should give its views on that process in order to help and inform and show and demonstrate, particularly to Westminster, that as an Assembly as a whole, we have a stake in this as well.