Questions now from the party spokespeople. Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Adam Price.

Could we stay with the White Paper, Llywydd, and the recommendation on the regional map for Wales? It’s 20 years—I almost can’t believe it—since I was commissioned, along with Professor Kevin Morgan, by the Secretary of State at that time, Ron Davies, to redesign the regional map for Wales in terms of NUTS II, to create a Valleys and west Wales region, and an east Wales region, in order to engage with the most deprived areas and, in so doing, obtain Objective 1 status for Wales. This map does the opposite: it engages disadvantaged areas and the most prosperous areas. So, could I ask the Cabinet Secretary whether this is the map that he will use in discussing the future for any continuity in terms of regional funds? Also, is it the assisted areas map for Wales?

Well, of course, I remember that piece of work 20 years ago. I believe that I remember hearing the Member talking at a conference here in Cardiff about the work and what emanated from that work.

Mae’r map yn darparu tri ôl traed—tri ôl traed y dinas-ranbarthau i bob pwrpas—ac rydym yn dweud mai hwy a fydd yn gyfrifol am gyfrifoldebau datblygu economaidd. Yn yr ystyr hwnnw, mae’r map yn amlwg yn berthnasol i’r ffordd y byddai polisi rhanbarthol a pholisi datblygu economaidd rhanbarthol yn cael eu datblygu yng Nghymru ar ôl Brexit. Yr hyn nad wyf am ei wneud, fodd bynnag, yw cau pen y mwdwl ar y drafodaeth honno mewn unrhyw ffordd ar y pwynt hwn. Rwy’n credu bod angen llawer o ystyried pellach, llawer o ymgysylltu pellach â phobl yn y sector, ynglŷn â sut y caiff y polisi rhanbarthol hwnnw ei ddatblygu a beth allai daearyddiaeth hynny fod. Os ydym yn ceisio edrych ar rai o fanteision Brexit, yna efallai y byddem yn dweud y gallai mwy o hyblygrwydd daearyddol o ran y modd y defnyddiwn y cyllid fod yn un ohonynt, ac yn sicr mae hwnnw wedi bod yn bwynt a wnaed yn y pwyllgor monitro rhaglenni, lle y mae trafodaethau ar bolisi rhanbarthol y dyfodol eisoes, yn ddefnyddiol iawn, wedi dechrau.

I’m grateful to the Cabinet Secretary for his considered response. Now, we heard in the Economy, Infrastructure and Skills Committee this morning some concern expressed by the Bevan Foundation, for example, and by Professor Karel Williams, that there is an overdependence on the model and the map, which is, in the south, based on the city regions, and, in the north, based on the growth deal for north Wales, and the risk of actually diluting the focus on those most deprived areas in the northern Valleys, for example, or the north-west of Wales. Will he look at the alternative ideas that are being proposed by the Bevan Foundation in terms of creating an enterprise zone for the Valleys, and by my own party in terms of creating a new version of the Development Board for Rural Wales and also a development body that is purpose-built for the Valleys?

Well, Llywydd, I have a great interest in the work of the Bevan Foundation. Professor Karel Williams’s work was part of the discussions in the PMC back in Merthyr in February, where the debate was about place.

Sut y gallwn gael ymdeimlad o le yn y ffordd yr ydym yn llunio ein polisïau datblygu economaidd rhanbarthol yn y dyfodol sy’n ystyried y mannau hynny lle y ceir y crynodiadau mwyaf o anfantais, heb ei wneud mewn ffordd sydd i’w gweld yn ynysu’r cymunedau hynny rhag posibiliadau sydd i’w cael gerllaw neu o gwmpas eu ffiniau? Ac roedd yn drafodaeth ddiddorol iawn, gyda chyfraniadau gan yr holl sectorau gwahanol o amgylch y bwrdd ynglŷn â’r ffordd orau i ni fapio dyfodol, yn ddaearyddol ac yn gysyniadol, sy’n ein galluogi i ddod o hyd i ffordd o ystyried anghenion penodol iawn y rhai sydd â’r anghenion mwyaf heb eu hynysu, fel y dywedais, rhag cyfleoedd y mae angen iddynt fod wedi’u cysylltu â hwy ac a fyddai’n gwneud gwahaniaeth i’w dyfodol pe bai gennym gyfres wahanol o syniadau ynglŷn â sut y gall polisïau sy’n seiliedig ar le weithredu’n fwy llwyddiannus yn y dyfodol.

We had a perhaps less considered dialogue a few days ago across this Chamber on the question of the balance of investment by Welsh Government across our regions, and let me emphasise that there is nothing I would say that would be anti-Cardiff in any sense, but would the Cabinet Secretary be willing to commission research so that we have statistics to look at the gulf that exists and has been there over a period of decades in terms of investment by Welsh Government in the various regions?

And, finally, in focusing on a golden opportunity for the Valleys, I’m not going to ask him to tell us what the Welsh Government’s decision will be, but this is part of his remit, could the Cabinet Secretary tells us whether any decision or any announcement on the Circuit of Wales will be affected or impacted by Welsh Government rules on purdah within local government, which will come into force in 10 days’ time? As it is an announcement of national importance, perhaps it won’t affected by purdah.

Chair, I heard the exchanges in the Chamber yesterday between the leader of the house and the Member in relation to investment in different parts of Wales. There is a lot of information already available on patterns of investment over recent years and I’m sure that information can be made available. I am myself more focused on making sure that we make the right investments for the future and that we invest our scarce capital resources in a way that secures prosperity for all, right across Wales.

As to the question of the Circuit of Wales, I know that my colleague Ken Skates has embarked upon what he has already promised to this Chamber, which is a period of scrutiny of the final plans that have been received from the Circuit of Wales. He will want to do that with a proper sense of due diligence and it will have to take the time that is required to do that job. I’m sure he’s aware of the purdah issue, but he will be focused, I’m sure, on making sure that the plans that have been submitted are subject to the right level of scrutiny so that he can make a recommendation in due course to the National Assembly.

The Welsh Conservatives’ spokesperson, Nick Ramsay.

Will the Cabinet Secretary update us on any inter-governmental discussions on the roll-out of tax devolution in the wake of the agreement on the fiscal framework?

Well, thank you, Llywydd. Since the fiscal framework was signed between the UK Government and the Welsh Government in December, I’ve continued to meet with the Chief Secretary to the Treasury. I met him last in Edinburgh in a quadrilateral meeting between finance Ministers, at which fiscal devolution in all parts of the United Kingdom was discussed. Two aspects, I suppose: how we make the system we’ve now agreed work effectively; what things we need to see on the horizon that we might want to put on future agendas for work between us.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. As you know, there was cross-party support for the fiscal framework and we welcome its implementation. This morning, in Finance Committee, we took evidence from the Office for Budget Responsibility on the next big challenge—accurate forecasts of Welsh tax is no easy task. I’m sure you agree accuracy is vital, because the forecasts will be used to make future block grant deductions. What discussions have you had with the OBR about forecasting and how do you envisage working with them in the future to ensure that forecasts are as accurate as possible?

Well, Llywydd, I met Robert Chote, the head of the OBR, in Cardiff just before Christmas to discuss the work of the OBR and how it can capture data that are important to us in Wales. But, as Nick Ramsay will know, one of the key things that we secured in the fiscal framework was an independent stream of advice—independent of the OBR—that would come particularly from a Welsh perspective should we need to deploy that as part of the fiscal framework agreement. Part of the agreement was that we would secure independent scrutiny of the Welsh Government’s forecasts for the near future and I was pleased to issue a written statement to Members a few days ago, confirming that Bangor University has been successful in securing the contract to provide that independent oversight.

Thank you. The OBR—and others, indeed—have identified that, in recent years, growth in income receipts has been significantly lower in Wales than across the UK, due in part to issues like the raising of the personal allowance threshold and the shifting of the burden higher up the income scale, with lower incomes forming a greater proportion of the Welsh tax base. It’s vital that forecasting is tailored to Welsh needs and I’m pleased with the answer that you’ve just given as to how you’re trying to achieve an independent view of Welsh tax needs and Welsh forecasting.

As I said before, it’s vital that we do have accurate forecasts. It’s vital that we don’t have a one-size-fits-all solution to that. In the absence of a Welsh fiscal commission, how do you plan to ensure the highest input of Welsh data and Welsh experience over the years to come into the process of forecasting, which is so vital in terms of the amount of money we receive in the block grant?

Llywydd, let me begin by agreeing with the general points that Nick Ramsay is making—the importance of having good, independent oversight of the process and accurate data that give us the best possible and reliable outcomes. Economic forecasting is an art, not a science, and the OBR—with its resources that we will never be able to match—you will know that, in a six-month period, its forecasts are able to move very significantly in some very important areas.

So, even with very good data, and with very good resources, this remains an imprecise activity. I met the chair of the Scottish Fiscal Commission, Lady Susan Rice, when I was in Edinburgh a few weeks ago to learn from them as to how they have gone about securing that sort of advice. I’m still thinking with officials about the best way to provide that stream of independent oversight beyond the contract with Bangor, which is for the immediate future. Whether we need a full-blown commission for the level of fiscal devolution we have, I think is a question we have to be prepared to ask, but that doesn’t mean to say that there aren’t alternative ways in which we can secure the sort of assistance and independent input into this process that Nick Ramsay has rightly highlighted this afternoon.

UKIP spokesperson, Mark Reckless.

The Scottish First Minister has said that her Government is now to seek a second independence referendum. One of the challenges she will face is that, on a stand-alone basis, Scotland is running a deficit of some 9 per cent or 10 per cent of gross domestic product, compared to 4 per cent for the UK as a whole. It’s estimated, therefore, that an independent Scotland would have to fill a fiscal hole of some £15 billion to 16 billion. Has the Cabinet Secretary made any estimate of the equivalent figure for Wales?

Well, there are figures of that sort available for Wales, of course, but matters for Scotland, Llywydd, are a matter for the Scottish Parliament and then for the Scottish people to weigh up and come to a decision.

The Wales Governance Centre has helpfully recently published a report where it sets out total Welsh public sector spending by all levels of Government. The most recent year—2014-15—for which they have comparable data was £38 billion. That compares with total public sector revenues drawn from Wales of £23.3 billion. So, the report finds that Wales’s net fiscal balance was a deficit of £14.7 billion, almost the same as Scotland, despite a significantly smaller economy, which would leave a fiscal gap of 24 per cent of GDP. Given that gap, and Wales’s dependence on fiscal transfers from England, is it sensible for the First Minister to say that Scotland should be the model for Wales?

I’m sure the First Minister was right to point to the fact that there are many ways in which Scotland can be a model for Wales, just as there are many things that we do here that Scotland regards as a model that they can learn from as well. So, there are no points to be made of a sensible nature from that remark. What there is, as the Member says—and, from this Government’s point of view, we are a devolutionist Government that believes in being part of the United Kingdom. The reason we believe in being part of the United Kingdom is that we regard it as an insurance policy in which we pool our risks and we share rewards. I don’t believe that questions that appear to pit one part of the United Kingdom against another and to say that one part is being subsidised by another—I don’t think that’s a helpful way of thinking about things. The Member will be aware that the same report from the Wales Governance Centre says that Wales makes a greater fiscal effort per head of the population that any other part of the United Kingdom. We all make contributions, we all have needs that we are able to address, and I think that that is the most sensible way of trying to think about these matters.

So, £7,500, approximately, per head is raised in tax in Wales, compared to £10,000 across the UK as a whole. I’m glad to hear the Cabinet Secretary’s restatement and clarification that his party, at least, and the Government he leads, is a devolutionist one, because, in many of the actions of this Government, agreement is sought with a certain party opposite—and I’m never quite clear whether they are in opposition or supporting the Government, but their signature policy of independence for Wales is supported by a mere 6 per cent of people living in Wales. Now, the Cabinet Secretary spoke earlier about a quadrilateral meeting, and the First Minister has put great emphasis on the Joint Ministerial Committee sort of structure, but are we not in a very different situation? Not only did Wales, as England, vote for leaving the European Union, and did so by more than the UK as a whole, the situation we face is that Northern Ireland has no government, and it’s not clear when they will have a government, while the Scottish Government will, for the foreseeable future, be agitating for independence, seeking pretext for dispute, rather than trying to make the UK work. In that situation, should the Welsh Government not put a greater emphasis on bilateral meetings and negotiation with the UK Government to get the best result for Wales, as the Cabinet Secretary sought to do with the fiscal framework?

Bilateral contacts with UK Government are important. On the Brexit front, I met with the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union the week before last, and the First Minister met bilaterally with him last week. But these things are not, in the end, a substitute for the JMC process and, indeed, for a better, improved and substantially stepped up JMC process. The Scottish Minister for leaving the European Union said very explicitly to me that, despite the fact that they have a political set of ambitions that they hope to take forward in the way that the First Minister of Scotland has set out, Scotland intended to continue to be participating members of the JMC. Coming together in that way, where the four component parts of the United Kingdom share ideas and attempt to find common solutions to common problems, I think, is not to be sidelined by bilateral contacts. Bilateral contacts supplement them and are important, but they are not a substitute for them.