5. 4. Statement: Brexit and Devolution: Securing Wales's Future

Part of the debate – in the Senedd at 3:26 pm on 20 June 2017.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Andrew RT Davies Andrew RT Davies Conservative 3:26, 20 June 2017

If I may invoke the name of the former First Minister, Rhodri Morgan, I do know full well that in previous Assemblies there was that consensus and there was that political will to engage across the political divide back when he was First Minister, around the Government of Wales Act 2006 and around the constitutional changes that were happening in the Assembly in its early days. I do draw your attention again to the offer that is made to you to reach out across the political divide and have that discussion, because it is a little rich, reading this statement today, when the actions you’ve undertaken reinforce that polarisation that you profess to abhor in politics, if you actually want to try to reach a consensus on some of these major issues that do need resolution across the whole of the United Kingdom.

We all want to make sure that when we do come out of the Brexit negotiations, the deal that emerges is a deal that reinforces the ties that make this union of ours so great—the union of the United Kingdom—but that it is a union that is fit for the twenty-first century and not one that is looking back to a way that these islands might have been governed in the 1950s and 1960s. I stand ready, as does my group and my party, to make sure that that does happen. Ultimately, we will succeed if we work together in that aim.

I would also ask the First Minister to confirm exactly what the agreement is that Plaid and the Labour Government have reached, because as we saw in First Minister’s questions, there clearly is a difference. If you can’t get that simple basic starting point right, what credibility, what weight, can be given to the White Paper and the document in particular that you have brought forward? That can be a basis for discussion—in fairness, there was an agreement there, but anyone who witnessed that discussion here in First Minister’s questions was left bemused, to say the least, that there is such a chasm that seems to have opened up between two parties that put their signature on a document that you, in this statement, constantly refer to as the basis for the negotiating position.

So, could you use your response to me today to give complete clarity as to exactly where that agreement lies and what the understanding is, from your point of view, as to what that agreement will deliver around the single market and access to the single market?

I would also like very much to understand what part of the Lancaster House speech that the First Minister disagrees with, which the Prime Minister brought forward. She endorsed 12 principles that are the negotiating principles that were started yesterday in the negotiations, and on this side of the house, we believe those are 12 principles that need to be taken forward in the negotiations that will clearly put those negotiations on the footing that they need to be to offer a sound tramline for us to develop the agreement that we want to see at the end of these two years. And I do notice in this entire statement—. In fairness, you are referring to your own document, but surely the document should have some reference to what the UK Government’s key negotiating lines are. And those 12 principles are fundamental to the negotiations as they proceed.

I endorse entirely what you say about the Joint Ministerial Committee, and I’ve said this before that it is not an organisation—. Not that I’ve ever sat on that committee, but, in fairness, observing it from afar, and observing references made by politicians from across the political divide, it is clearly not fit for purpose, and it is not a vehicle that can actually deal with the dispute resolutions and the discussions that will follow after Brexit and the agreement. And I do believe that we do need greater coherence in developing a more robust framework for the devolved administrations and the UK Government to work through. And I’d be grateful to understand whether the First Minister sees any light and progress along the road to making sure that we do have—and I will call it the JMC at this point because that’s what we’ll understand it is—a successor body to achieve the outcome that we want, once the Brexit negotiations have concluded.

I agree entirely with the First Minister that there is a positive future for this country, but it does depend on politicians rising to the challenge and rising to the opportunities that lie ahead. And on this side of the Chamber, we certainly will be rising to the challenge, and rising to the opportunity that is there. And, again, I reiterate the point that I hope that other politicians, from whatever political persuasion, will do exactly the same.