[R] signifies the Member has declared an interest. [W] signifies that the question was tabled in Welsh.

I now call on Steffan Lewis to ask the second urgent question.

Will the First Minister make a statement on the implications for Wales of the Prime Minister’s proposed EU law repeal Bill? EAQ(5)0189(FM)

At 6.10 p.m. on Saturday evening, I was telephoned by David Davis, the UK Government’s Brexit Minister. He phoned to inform me that a Bill would be brought forward, repealing the European Communities Act 1972. It’s been over-spun as the great repeal Bill, as it’s described now. What he said to me was that, as part of that process, he wished to ensure that what is already law in the UK jurisdictions that comes from the EU is maintained despite the repeal of the European Communities Act. In principle, there are no difficulties with that, but, of course, we have to see the detail, and we reserve our position until that detail is clear.

Diolch. I thank the First Minister for that answer. Of course, it’s the mood music around the tabling of the idea of a European repeal Bill that is perhaps an inevitable part of a hard Brexit scenario and which has deeper and far-reaching consequences. I’m quite concerned about the nature of the way in which the Prime Minister made her announcement and, indeed, the way that the First Minister of this country was informed of that decision. I wonder if he can elaborate further on whether there will be a requirement for this institution to adopt a parallel process in terms of a European repeal Bill for European law that is to do with devolved matters, or whether instead there would be a requirement for this institution and other devolved Parliaments to consent to the UK legislation.

In addition, there is rightly growing concern that the so-called great repeal Bill could be more of a great power grab, enabling Westminster to centralise power and prevent repatriated powers from being devolved to this place. What action is the First Minister proposing to prevent that power grab from happening? This repeal Bill proposal poses wider questions now about our national future and the nature of our political union with the United Kingdom. Will he take this opportunity to define clearly what he means by ‘a more federal union’ and how his plans to deliver that can work within the framework of the announcement made by the Prime Minister earlier this week?

We are told in addition, alongside this announcement, that the Welsh Government will not have a seat at the negotiating table with the European Union. On this point, can the First Minister confirm or deny that his demands for a seat at the table were indeed a demand for a seat at the table, or does he have a different definition? In light of the announcement by Theresa May, will the First Minister further consider another u-turn on a Welsh veto of the final Brexit settlement? And, finally, now that the UK Government is signalling its intent for the hardest possible Brexit, will he now reflect on what his own Government can do to defend the national interest, and, particularly, to defend our place in the European market?

There may be a need for an LCM, but until we see the detail, it’s difficult to give a definitive answer on that. We reserve the right, of course, to decide whether to support that LCM or not, depending on what emerges. At this moment in time, what seems to be happening is that the UK Government wants to make sure that what is already in law, as a result of the EU, is not lost as a result of the repeal of the European Communities Act 1972. That may need an LCM. As far as this place is concerned, we wait to see what the detail of that is.

In terms of negotiation, we have an established procedure. For example, in the field of agriculture, where it’s been long established, the four Ministers come together and look to agree a common line, as far as the UK is concerned, in the Council of Ministers. That’s exactly the kind of process that I would expect to happen on this occasion. A lot of hubris has come from the Conservative conference about the UK Government, in effect, trying to say it has the sole role in terms of negotiation. It is in the driving seat, but it would be unwise in the extreme for the UK Government to try to force through a Brexit solution that was opposed in Scotland, Wales and, particularly, Northern Ireland, where such a solution has dangers in terms of it being seen as forced on that part of the island.

And so, at this moment in time, I think it’s fair to say the UK Government itself has no real idea what it wants to do. I think he is correct in his analysis that there is a tendency towards hard Brexit solely because they can’t think of any other way of doing it. All the talk that the EU would be flexible, that there would be flexibility in terms of freedom of movement, that there would be a free trade agreement in place and that there wouldn’t be tariffs, that’s all gone out the window. And my great fear now is that we end up in a situation, which some Conservative politicians seem to be happy with, of a hard Brexit with tariffs. David Davis himself has said, ‘Well, you know, if tariffs happen, it’s £2 billion for the Exchequer’, forgetting, of course, the effect on manufacturing industries particularly, and of course the fact that it would be consumers who would have to pay for those tariffs.

So, from my perspective, the engagement so far with the UK Government has been acceptable. We’re in no different a position to Scotland; Scotland has made a lot of noise, but the reality is it’s in no different a position to us. But, what is absolutely clear is that ourselves, Scotland, Northern Ireland, and Gibraltar—who fear very much the effects of Brexit—do have to make sure that our voices are heard, and I intend to make sure that that’s exactly what happens.

Well, clearly, this isn’t about a great power grab. As you yourself have said, you want to be involved and engaged alongside the other devolved Assemblies and Parliaments, and the UK Government, whilst not having, as you also acknowledged in September, an ultimate veto. But, given that the great reform or great repeal Bill, as announced and as we understand it, will convert the body of existing EU law into UK law and that UK parliaments will then be free to amend, repeal and improve any law they choose, how will you during the term of this Assembly—bearing in mind that exit is likely to happen during the term of this Assembly—engage with bodies such as the Bevan Foundation, which says that a post-Brexit Wales needs a rethink of economic policies, or the Farmers Union of Wales, which says that we must recognise the opportunity to shape a future that suits Welsh agriculture, and all the other bodies expressing similar views, so that you’re ready in, potentially, 2019 to start bringing forward appropriate legislative programmes that meet the aspirations and needs identified by these organisations?

Well, the Member is unfortunate in his choice of words, because what he described at the very beginning is a power grab. What he said was that these matters would now be dealt with in UK law. Well, UK law doesn’t actually exist in reality. But, secondly, it is not a matter for the UK Parliament in its entirety in terms of what happens with EU law. Much law is devolved, and it will be wholly unacceptable for the UK Parliament to have a role in terms of dealing with devolved administration in any of the devolved nations. That is a matter entirely for this institution, and those who are elected to serve in it.

He mentions farming. This work is already ongoing. The Minister has met with farming unions on a number of occasions. But, again, the uncertainty we face is that we do not know whether there will be any money available for farming subsidies post 2020. That certainty has not been given.

For me, the issue of tariffs looms very, very large. Many, many businesses have expressed to me their great concern at the possibility of tariffs, and their great concern about the possibility of diverging regulatory regimes, if that were to happen in the future. The reality is, if there is free and unfettered access to the European market without tariffs, then that would be immensely helpful. There’s no question about that. That, for me, is an absolute red line as far as Wales and Britain are both concerned. If, however, there are tariffs, then that will mean that much of what we produce will become uncompetitive. We will find ourselves in a position where a market that’s bigger than America and Russia combined is not as open to us as once it was, and I don’t think economically that makes any sense at all.

What does worry me is that there are some on the right of the Conservative Party who seem to think—and I don’t mention him, because it’s not something that he’s said, but I’ve heard Peter Lilley say it, John Redwood and Patrick Minford, who’ve all basically said that we should have tariff-free access for all manufactured goods and all food. That would destroy farming, I’ll tell you that now, and it would destroy our manufacturing industry. The quid pro quo would be access to new markets for financial services. In other words, as long as the City of London’s alright, then no-one else matters. That can never be an acceptable situation to any of us in Wales. It’s not a view shared, in fairness, by everybody in his party, but it is nevertheless a view that I’ve heard expressed by many on the right wing of his party.

I thank the First Minister.