Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for your statement. I think it's impressive that you've managed to turn around a Welsh Government response to such a hefty report as the Diamond review report in such a short period of time. I do welcome, as well, the consultation that will now flow from your response; I think it's entirely appropriate that there’s a wider opportunity for public discussion on the proposals that you have indeed outlined.

I am a little surprised that you've claimed that the Welsh Government is implementing with only minor modifications the full Diamond package. Certainly, you're stepping in the direction of implementing the Diamond package, but there's no doubt in my mind that the significant change that you're making to the upper income threshold for support by reducing it by £20,000 is going to have an impact on the squeezed middle, which Professor Diamond was determined to protect, and, indeed, the other panellists were determined to protect as well. And, in addition to that, you are of course rejecting a number of recommendations in terms of apprenticeships and higher-cost postgraduate course teaching subsidies. So, let's be real about this: it's not a wholehearted endorsement of the Diamond report; there are actually some things that you’re not going to immediately implement, and there are some things that you're downright rejecting.

Now, that's not to say that I don't welcome much of what you have said and much of what's in the Welsh Government response. I welcome the fact that you're looking at implementing this in the academic year commencing 2018. I think that that's an important deadline that we need to work to. I welcome the fact that you’re trying to get the system onto a more sustainable footing, and, of course, the reduction in that upper earnings threshold is an important way of achieving that. I understand, Cabinet Secretary, that the change in that threshold will save the Welsh Government around £40 million per annum once the proposal is fully implemented, and, of course, that saving is on top of the £48.25 million on an annual basis that Professor Diamond's original recommendations said they were going to save. And I wonder where that £88.25 million is going to be reinvested. The First Minister made a very clear commitment that none of that cash would be lost to the HE budget. I suspect that he’s going to be trying to sidestep some of those commitments that he’s made, because you and I both know, Cabinet Secretary, that we need to see some more investment into our FE institutions as well, and in terms of widening access to FE and giving some support to students in our further education system as well, particularly if that vision that we all share in this Chamber, which is to give further education parity with higher education, is to be absolutely realised. I'm also very pleased, of course, to hear the confirmation of support arrangements for part-time study and, indeed, the support for postgraduates as well. I think that they’re very important commitments.

You mentioned that there’s going to be a working group that is going to have a look at this issue of sustainability and whether to maintain the link in the future to the national living wage. I think that that’s very important—that those links are maintained—because what we don’t want to see is inflation eating away into the opportunities that students can have to have this support in the future. So, there has to be some way of index linking this support to make sure that it’s going to be there in full in the future.

But I am a little bit concerned to read in your response of wanting to control student numbers and regulate student numbers. That implies that there are going to be caps on students who are going to be eligible for support in the future, which will limit access to higher education and indeed will limit learner choice, which I think is very regrettable indeed. Can I also ask you, Minister, whether that is what you’re hoping to achieve—some sort of cap? Who is going to sit on these working groups making those decisions? Will they be cross-party? That’s been the nature of the approach to Diamond so far. I think it’s important that we maintain some cross-party working on these issues, and I would be very happy to nominate a Conservative representative should you give us an opportunity to.

I’m disappointed to see no guarantee of funding of a minimum of £5.8 million to Coleg Cymraeg Cenedlaethol in the next financial year. I know that there’s a review, which is ongoing at the moment, but that is a recommendation that you said you wanted to consult on, and you couldn’t guarantee that that money would be there in the future. I heard what you said in your statement. Perhaps you can just clarify what the situation will be in the next financial year and also going forward. I would appreciate that very much indeed.

I’m also a little bit concerned about the comments in relation to the intensity threshold, because one thing that I know that both you and I are passionate about is making sure that all the people of Wales who want access to higher education opportunities, including those who might have to, because of their situations or because of disabilities, for example, have lower-intensity courses. I wonder whether the outcome of your decision not to progress with lowering that threshold, as was the recommendation of Professor Diamond, will have a disproportionate impact on those individuals that may be disabled or perhaps have some learning needs or disabilities.

So, I do welcome the direction of travel. I think there’s an awful lot that is good in the response that you have published today, but I do think we need some clarity on these important issues, and I look forward to hearing from you.