Questions now from the party leaders. The leader of the UKIP group, Neil Hamilton.

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. Diane Abbott, the shadow Home Secretary, has announced that Labour plans to recruit another 10,000 police officers in England and Wales, which would mean an extra nearly 1,000 in Wales. But, she was rather sketchy about the cost of this proposal, first of all announcing that it was going to cost £300,000, which would be an average salary of £30 for a policeman. Secondly, it went up to £8,000 a year—£80 million. Perhaps the First Minister could give his own view of the credibility of this policy, and what the actual figures are.

I think it’s hugely important we see more bobbies on the beat, more police officers—10,000 of them. I think people will certainly support that. He asked the question of where the money comes from. Quite simple—£300 million a year over the course of five years; £2.7 billion is the pot that will be created by reinstating the previous levels of capital gains tax. So, £1.5 billion, with £1.2 billion left over. Those are the maths.

Well, the First Minister is obviously not aware of what happened last time capital gains tax was increased, in 2010. Because, in 2010, the rate of capital gains tax was raised from 18 per cent to 28 per cent. And, whereas, before 23 June 2010, it raised £8.23 billion a year, after 23 June 2010, it raised £3.3 billion a year. So, actually, there was a cut in the revenue of capital gains tax of £4.9 billion a year. So, how is this increase in policing numbers going to be paid for with reduced tax revenues?

Well, it simply takes the rate back to what it was before—from 20 per cent to 28 per cent on the higher level, and from 18 per cent upwards on the lower level. That’s the way in which this will be paid for. That simply means reinstating a tax rate that was there before, not something that is new.

The point I was making to the First Minister was that, as a result of raising the rate of capital gains tax, the revenue raised from the tax fell, not increased. So, consequently, the tax base was reduced because people can postpone realising capital gains. In fact, the people most likely to want to realise capital gains are pensioners who can’t afford to live on their incomes. So, this is actually a tax increase that is aimed very largely at people who can least afford to pay it. [Interruption.] But perhaps the illiterate financial plan that has been put before us by the Labour Party is part of the overall plan that he committed himself to, in my presence in a television studio in Cardiff just a couple of weeks ago, of increasing borrowing by £500 billion a year. Does he really think that the credibility of the UK Government in international financial markets is going to be enhanced by such a stupid policy?

Neil Hamilton and UKIP—soft on crime. You heard it here in this Assembly for the first time. Not supportive of policy to increase the number of bobbies on the beat, to increase the number of police officers in our communities.

We’ve explained how this will be paid for—by reinstating the previous rate of capital gains tax. I do not see his point about pensioners losing out because of capital gains tax. I don’t know if he’s talking about inheritance tax or if he’s got the two confused, but I do not see how that works. Capital gains tax affects those people with most money. It’s only right that those people with most money are asked to pay more in order to fund our police officers on the street.

There’s never been a cheaper time to borrow money on the world financial markets. The Labour Government of the 1940s did this, built the health service, built the welfare state and rebuilt the British economy from a far worse position than the Tories did.

Individuals know that if you want to buy a house, you have a mortgage. You pay that mortgage off over 20 to 30 years. You have an asset at the end of it that you’re able to use as you want. They don’t understand that in the Conservative Party. A lot of them, of course, never had mortgages. They don’t know what the concept is. They get things given to them on a plate. So, from our perspective, we know the public understands that you borrow in order to create and asset that is then worth far more. That’s worked for individuals, it’ll work for Britain and that’s the kind of vision we want—a vision that rebuilds Britain, not one that lets it drift.

Plaid Cymru leader, Leanne Wood.

Diolch, Llywydd. First Minister, in June last year you said that Labour had no chance of winning a general election. Why have you abandoned ship?

I’m not sure I understand that question. I do know that Labour has a better chance of winning the election, perhaps, than Plaid Cymru does. But, from our perspective, we will work hard as, indeed, I know her party will, to maximise as many votes as possible between now and 8 June.

In the very same week that you said Labour had no chance of winning a general election, one of your senior front bench MPs in Westminster resigned and derided your leader, Jeremy Corbyn. You’ve now appointed him as your election co-ordinator for Wales. We’ve seen five different shadow Secretaries of State for Wales from the Labour Party since the last UK election—four in the last 12 months. Not only have you abandoned ship, you’re all squabbling over the lifeboats. First Minister, this is gross incompetence. Do you really expect people who have trusted your party for so long to have any confidence in your party’s ability to defend Wales?

We did last year. Welsh Labour showed that it could defend the people of Wales last year and the Welsh people voted as they did, and we’ll continue to do the same this year. From our perspective, we will be standing up for Wales in Westminster. We do not want the Tories to walk all over Wales.

Such complacency. First Minister, people need a national party of Wales that is going to protect this nation’s interests, a party that will defend this institution, that will protect Welsh jobs, people’s pensions and our NHS. Labour is in no fit state to defend Wales and so the national party of Wales is Plaid Cymru.

Tomorrow, there will be yet another vote on scrapping zero-hours contracts. It’ll be the seventh time we’ve had a vote on this. Six times, Labour and the Tories have voted together against Plaid Cymru’s proposals to end zero-hours contracts. Tell me, First Minister, are you going to make it seven times tomorrow? Will you again vote with the Tories against Welsh workers and against the Welsh national interest?

Well, it’s always been a myth in Plaid Cymru that Plaid Cymru stands for the Welsh national interest. If that was true, they’d be doing far better in elections than they are. And I do deplore the idea that, somehow, one party has a monopoly on patriotism or in terms of defending Wales’s interest. Now, I know that, inevitably, over the next few weeks, we’re going to have questions in this Chamber that affect the general election; we all know that. But I do think people deserve to have questions asked to them about what's going to happen if you're in Wales in the Assembly. Zero-hours contracts are an issue. We do not support zero-hours contracts. She’s trying to suggest that, somehow, in principle, we think they’re a good thing. We don't think they’re good thing, but for any number of reasons over the past few occasions she has known that there have been issues surrounding what Plaid Cymru want to do that would, in some instances, jeopardise the passage of legislation because of the lack of clarity over devolved competence. And the reality of the situation is that we have led the way when it comes to getting rid of zero-hours contracts: we've done so in Government, we've done so in organisations that are funded by Government. She has talked; we have done.

Leader of the opposition, Andrew R.T. Davies.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. Can I first of all welcome the new clerk to the Assembly? This is her first First Minister’s questions, and I look forward to working with you over the coming months and years that you fill the role that was so admirably done by Claire Clancy. First Minister, you have just said that you want questions asked of you that are relevant to this place, and I do want to draw on the auditor general's report last week about the Circuit of Wales and the funding of the Circuit of Wales, and, in particular, the points that the auditor general drew on about Government money—Welsh Government money—being used to buy a motorcycle firm in Buckinghamshire that went bankrupt. Is that a good use of Welsh taxpayers’ money: £300,000-worth of Welsh taxpayers’ money to buy a motorcycle company in Buckinghamshire that then went bankrupt? And, if it isn't a good use of Welsh taxpayers’ money, will you apologise for that?

Look, we've just had a report last week where the cancer drug fund was shown to have wasted £1 billion of public money. So, I'm not going to be lectured on that by the Conservative party. [Interruption.] He asked the question, and the answer is quite simply this: whenever we have a project like the Circuit of Wales, there will be risks. Those risks have to be managed acceptably. The Circuit of Wales is still in play. We’re looking to see whether a model can be produced in order to take the project forward, and we think the people of Blaenau Gwent and the people of Wales would expect us to do that. Inevitably, whenever there is any kind of project there is risk. Banks do this. When banks lend money, they acknowledge there’s a level of risk, but that risk has to be acceptable. It’s the same for Government.

That is the most bizarre answer in six years that I’ve stood here I’ve received from you, First Minister. I asked you a simple question about Welsh Government money that was used to buy a motorcycle firm in Buckinghamshire that went bankrupt—£300,000 that the auditor general, in a report that he released last week—. And you've called for questions that are relevant to you in your role as First Minister, and you don't believe that you will need to explain that, or even apologise for that fact. Secondly, the report outlined how officials highlighted to Ministers that they believed that you would be in breach of state-aid rules by allowing the £7.3 million loan guarantee to be put in place and then drawn down. Now, officials gave that advice to Ministers. The auditor general could not find any evidence to contradict that advice that was given to Ministers. So, why did Ministers put the Welsh Government and Welsh taxpayers’ money at risk, and potentially for infringement proceedings by the European Commission because you’re breaking state-aid rules?

He doesn't understand the way state-aid rules work. Normally, when state-aid rules are breached, it’s the recipient that pays back, not the Government. From our perspective, we will assess the situation to see that the risk is acceptable. Two things that have to be made about the Circuit of Wales: firstly, the auditor general has not said that this is a project not worth supporting, nor has the auditor general said that the Circuit of Wales is a business organisation with no assets, contrary to his own MP, David Davies, and what he has said. Yes, in the course of the development of the Circuit of Wales, there is an assessment of risk. Decisions are taken to accept that risk if deemed necessary and then, of course, we move on to see if the Circuit of Wales can become a reality. That is what Governments do: to look at risk and make sure that risk is acceptable, because, ultimately, the prize might be one that is worth having. We’re not at that stage yet; we’re still working to see whether the Circuit of Wales can produce that sustainable model.

First Minister, the auditor general was very specific in what he was looking at, which was this tranche of money that Welsh Government has spent to date: £9.3 million. In anyone’s book, that’s a pretty significant sum of money. No-one is disputing that, potentially, the overall scheme could have a massive impact of regeneration. But you are accountable for the way money is allocated. I’ve highlighted you two examples in the auditor general’s report: (1) buying a motorcycle firm in Buckinghamshire that went bankrupt for £300,000—what bids will you accept if you are accepting bids like that—and (2) that you infringed state-aid rules by putting the loan guarantee in place, both of which of those examples you haven’t apologised for, or you actually haven’t discounted to say it is incorrect. What exactly can we expect from the Welsh Government, given that there’s a litany of examples, from Regeneration Investment Fund for Wales, where officials’ advices were totally ignored and Ministers just proceeded to dispose of high value land, where officials were discounted in the process, and the public lost out through losing money when overall sales were concluded in RIFW, and this is the same example, where public money has been put in jeopardy, as the auditor general has pointed out? How can we have any confidence that your Government is working positively to either form a positive conclusion on this agreement, or that you will end up putting more public money at risk?

No. The agreement is one that we would want to be positive. We’re not looking to put any more public money in; we’re looking to work with a private investor for the future. All these things are under discussion at the moment. But I remind the leader of the Welsh Conservatives that sometimes you have to take a decision in order to benefit people in the future. Last week, we saw the decision by Qatar Airways to fly a daily flight into Cardiff Airport. If he had had his way, that airport would be shut. It’d be closed down. He sat there questioning the fact that the Welsh Government had bought the airport. We’ve seen great passenger growth; we see Qatar Airways coming in—I was there over the weekend. There are huge opportunities—huge opportunities for Wales as a result of that. Let him apologise for the fact that he was willing to put 1,000 jobs at risk in the Vale of Glamorgan—[Interruption.]—in the Vale of Glamorgan by letting the airport close. On top of that, we have unemployment that is lower than England, lower than Scotland and lower than Northern Ireland. We have a situation where the five companies that have grown most in Wales over the past year are companies that we as a Welsh Government have helped, the fact that we’ve had the best foreign direct investment figures for the past 30 years. The reality is that we create jobs when the Tories destroy them.