I now call for questions from the party leaders. The leader of the UKIP group, Neil Hamilton.

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. It’s clear now that the failure of the Prime Minister’s cynical, opportunist snap election gamble has thrown the whole Brexit negotiating process into confusion, perhaps exacerbated by the fact that she’s appointed 16 Remainers to her Cabinet of 23. And, in particular, this throws perhaps more into question than previously the nature of our border controls post Brexit. I’m wondering where the Labour Party now stands in this process, because I’m sure the First Minister will have seen that both Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell have said that the Labour Party is formally committed to taking Britain out of the single market and the customs union, whereas Keir Starmer has said he wants to negotiate a new form of single market agreement, and Barry Gardiner, the shadow international trade Secretary, has criticised Mrs May for taking single market membership off the table right from the very beginning. So, can the First Minister tell me whether he is now a Corbynite or whether he is a Starmerite?

Well, what we do know from the election is the hard Brexit that is espoused and promoted by UKIP is dead. People were asked to vote on a particular version of Brexit—specifically asked to vote on that—by Theresa May, and she did not get that mandate. So, what happens next? We have put forward, together with Plaid Cymru, a White Paper that suggests a way forward as far as Brexit is concerned. I have today written to the Prime Minister, reminding her that it takes more than words when it comes to seeking engagement with the devolved Governments. I welcome the words of Guto Bebb, for example, where he recognises the reality of the situation—that a sustainable Brexit can only happen if the devolved Governments are fully part of that process, and I hope that the small group in Whitehall that have been trying to control this take note.

I read, of course, the Government’s White Paper on Brexit, which, effectively, isn’t in favour of border controls at all in any meaningful sense. My interest in this is on the impact of unskilled and semi-skilled labour being imported in uncontrollable numbers and the effect that that has upon working class wages. Now, the Bank of England has published a substantial report on ‘The impact of immigration on occupational wages: vidence from Britain’, the conclusion of which was that a 10 per cent rise in the proportion of immigrants is associated with a 2 per cent reduction in pay in the semi- and unskilled services sector. I struggle to understand why the Labour Party, of all parties, is prepared to countenance a situation where working class wages are driven down so that, for many people, the minimum wage is the maximum wage.

The greatest threat to people’s wages is continued austerity—that is the greatest threat. I wonder if he would make it clear what his position was on the minimum wage, for example—whether he supported its introduction by a Labour Government, and whether he supports the need for greater focus on policing the minimum wage, and whether he would see an increase in the minimum wage to the level of a living wage. Those are the ways to protect people. Yes, it is important to protect people, and not just our own people, but people from other countries, from exploitation, and that needs more resources to be put into the policing of that. But there’s no doubt that the greatest threat to wages is a Tory Government that is bent on austerity.

I notice that the First Minister neatly sidesteps the question. UKIP did actually support the introduction of the minimum wage, and, certainly, we support policing it effectively, because the law of the land should be obeyed. And it’s no answer to the problem of wage compression to say that we will take strong action against employers who are breaking the law. What is of more concern is that the average wage rate at the bottom of the income scale is being driven down for more and more people. And there are hundreds of thousands of people who are on the breadline who are forced into even more precarious situations as a result of uncontrolled immigration. Surely, firm control of unskilled and semi-skilled migration from the European Union, which can be controlled from the rest of the world under existing law, is a vital necessity for ordinary working-class people.

First of all, again, he misses the point about border control. If you want to have border control, you have a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic. There is no other way of doing it, unless you want to put British border agency officials in the Republic’s airports and ports, and that is a strategy fraught with problems, if I can put it diplomatically. That situation has still not been properly resolved. But, for me, the issue of low wages is driven by the austerity we’ve see for the past seven years, the fact we haven’t seen real increases in pay, the fact that we’ve seen people who are in work lose in-work benefits. We used to say—and the Secretary of State got himself into trouble on this—to people, ‘If you get a job, your income will increase’. That is no longer the case because of the fact that those at the top of the income scale have received more money through tax cuts and those at the bottom have received less money through the reduction and loss of in-work benefits. That’s what the focus should be on—making sure that those people who are working hard, working long hours, get the support they deserve, and they haven’t had it over the last seven years.

The leader of Plaid Cymru, Leanne Wood.

First Minister, the NHS is our most cherished public service. All of us rely on it and it’s the single largest spending commitment in the Welsh budget, which reflects its importance to our people. Are you satisfied with the financial governance of the NHS?

Yes, I am. There are issue that arise every year from the boards, but they’ve been given a three-year timescale within which to operate when it comes to producing their budget. But, of course, we would always want to see more funds made available to the Welsh budget through the ending of austerity in Westminster.

On Friday, it was announced that four of the 10 NHS organisations have failed to break even over the three-year financial period. Now, we know that three health boards have been placed under targeted intervention, and a fourth is being monitored. You mentioned that you introduced three-year budgeting in order to try to solve those problems, but we are still seeing these deficits emerge over that three-year period. First Minister, under your watch, are NHS finances sound?

Yes, they are. Four organisations out of 10 were unable to meet their three-year duty. We’ve been open about the particular challenges those organisations are facing, and it’s why they’ve all been escalated under our NHS intervention arrangements.

A situation where four out of seven health boards aren’t meeting your targets isn’t one that can be described as financially sound. This is about how the NHS is being managed, it’s about supporting the staff and the patients of the NHS by ensuring that the service is in good financial health. It’s about health boards meeting the statutory duties that you have set out.

Now, in March, your health Secretary said that the four health boards in question would not be bailed out. He also said that he was, quote, ‘pretty certain that NHS services wouldn’t be cut as a result of these deficits’. Now, being pretty certain doesn’t fill me with confidence, First Minister. What we need today is a cast-iron guarantee. So, can you tell us: when will the NHS finances improve? Is it still the case that you won’t bail out struggling NHS health boards? And as the Government responsible for the Welsh NHS, will you guarantee that deficit repayment plans for these health boards won’t result in cuts to our health services?

No services have suffered as a result of these deficits. We have ensured that these organisations have sufficient cash to meet their normal commitments, and we manage their deficits within the overall health budget, subject to audit confirmation. The overall health budget was balanced in 2016-17. Now, through the intervention arrangements, we are working closely with those organisations to address the governance, management and service issues that underpin their deficits and we will not shy away from taking firm action with these organisations if that is what is necessary.

No guarantees.

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

Thank you, Presiding Officer. First Minister, one of the stories that came through at the general election and, because of the campaigning, didn’t get the coverage it deserved was the lack of this Government’s ability to meet its commitment from 2010 that all cancer patients in Wales would have a keyworker. Can you explain why, seven years on, so many cancer patients are not getting that key worker identified when they get the diagnosis in Wales?

One of the messages of the general election was that people didn’t want the Welsh Conservatives. I mean, I’m fairly surprised he actually raises it. I do wonder how much more he can take of being replaced as a leader on programmes, but he asked a question about cancer key workers. That is something that we’re still working towards to make sure that everyone has that key worker. He will see that the amount of money that’s gone into cancer treatment has increased over the years.

You can have the pot shot, First Minister, but people would’ve listened and heard that you didn’t give an answer why people don’t get a key worker. So, you can carry on with the pot shots, but people who get a cancer diagnosis deserve all the assistance they can get, and as someone who’s lost family members, along with other Members in this Chamber, we welcomed that commitment that the Government made at that time in 2010. But as Macmillan has identified, at least a third of patients do not get that key worker when they get the diagnosis. It’s a simple question, First Minister, and instead of being flippant, can you give a serious answer as to when that target will be met?

I believe I did give a serious answer, and like him, I’ve lost people close to me, and indeed, I’ve seen my wife deal with cancer. It affects so many of us, but the cancer implementation group, which is responsible for the delivery of the cancer delivery plan, has identified the key worker role as a priority. As such, work is being undertaken currently to develop a set of standards and associated measures to review the progress that health boards and trusts are making in the provision of key workers, as well as other priority issues. It’s also important to note that the cancer patient experience survey provides a good picture of the situation in Wales. No other major health condition has such a large-scale survey assessing patient experience, and we do know that the response has been good in terms of people’s experience of the treatment they have received. The 2016 survey results will be published later this year.

Again, on the second time of asking, I still have not got a date when cancer patients and people connected with cancer services will know when this commitment is going to be met. It is a fact that Public Health Wales have said it’s not mandatory for them to collect the data to identify where the shortfalls are in the system. So, you can read all you want from your script, First Minister—you made the commitment in 2010. Public Health Wales just say one basic point: it’s not mandatory to collect the data. How can you genuinely say that you know you’re progressing in meeting this target? I do put the question again to you: when will you hit that target here in Wales and will you now make it mandatory for Public Health Wales to gain those data so that we can see progress on meeting that goal? We support you in this measure—we want to see it met.

Well, I can’t go beyond the answer I’ve already given to him, namely that that work is ongoing. He asks the question, ‘When will that work be complete?’—I will write to him with a date on that—he’s asked me that specific question—but this is something that we want to see implemented in the future.