Diolch yn fawr. I'm pleased to contribute to today's thought-provoking debate, Cabinet Secretary, and to move the amendments in the name of Paul Davies. As the Cabinet Secretary has himself said, these are times of change for this institution and for Wales. We're about to see the introduction of the first new Welsh taxes in 800 years—how many times have we heard that in this Chamber over the last few months—when UK stamp duty and landfill tax are switched off and their Welsh replacements kick in in April next year. And the Welsh Revenue Authority will hopefully be fully operational by then and in place to collect those taxes.

As we know, the tax landscape will change again the following April with the introduction of the WRIT, the Welsh rate of income tax, and the significant revenue that will bring directly to the Welsh Government, although, of course, still being collected, in that case, by HMRC.

Of course, these taxes will replace existing UK taxes and will mirror them to a certain extent. So, today's debate is welcome, because, as the Cabinet Secretary has indicated, it does move us on from the arguments hitherto and initiates the discussion about potential new taxes over and above replacement taxes, what those taxes may look like and how they may be developed.

Now, critically, the public must be involved in this process, and I'm pleased that the Cabinet Secretary has recognised this. The public must have confidence in it and, more than this, they must feel a sense of ownership. After all, as we know, Government money is, at the end of the day, taxpayers’ money, and we should always remember that important fact.

Now, Cabinet Secretary, you've set out the enormous complexity of getting a new tax established. I was going to ask you exactly what you meant by ‘testing the machinery’, but I think you've given us a very clear indication of how complicated this process is, not just in us playing our role at this end of the M4, but also then looking at the other end of the M4 in the House of Commons and the House of Lords—and Huw Irranca-Davies referred to the previous LCO system; he knew how difficult that was. I think, at this early stage, it's probably understandable that there is the complexity, but I fully appreciate the fact that you feel there is a need to test all this to see how we can move forward.

Turning to the amendments, and amendment 1, the maxim that there should be no change change’s sake, which you yourself mentioned and which is lifted from your own written statement issued on 5 July, to which there was a link on the Assembly website, it also appears in many other documents and has been referred to numerous times, both by yourself and by your predecessor, Jane Hutt, when she has given evidence to Finance Committee over recent years. I think, listening to—. I couldn't quite work out whether you're supporting our amendment or not. I think you were, but I think you were interpreting it in a particular way, which is fair enough. I agree that it's a good maxim. I agreed with it when you said it to committee. I think it is important that, where possible, and for smoothness and for ease of transition, the structure of new taxes should not deviate from that of their counterparts across the border where it is beneficial for there to be a similarity.

As you recognised, this has moved on slightly, in that I’m suggesting it should also apply to new taxes—I suppose what might be called stand-alone taxes; the formation of creating those stand-alone taxes. And I think it is important that, as you yourself alluded to, we shouldn't just be looking to create taxes for taxes' sake and merely to test the system, but we should be looking to create taxes that have potential to really improve the lives of people in Wales and to add to the tax system, and I think that is your intention. You’ve clearly got an appetite to test this new aspect of the devolution machinery. That does, of course, need to be done cautiously and, as I said, any new taxes should be introduced for the right reasons.

If we’re looking for examples of taxes, then I suppose the plastic bag levy, as it was called—although it was not a tax, obviously, it was a levy, for the reasons of the day and the way that the Assembly worked in those days—I think would have met those criteria that you are now setting forward. I think, in fact, environmental taxes are probably the most obvious candidates for the testing of this machinery and the Welsh Government would certainly be right to focus on these and certainly having them in the mix in terms of testing the tax machinery.

It’s clear that the Welsh Government has the experience of legislating in this area in the past and, by and large, it seems to have worked—well, not fallen apart, at any rate, so that certainly would qualify as working.

Turing to the second amendment, Presiding Officer, I know I’m short of time, but, briefly—this is calling on the Welsh Government to make arrangements for an independent review of any new taxes to be completed within six years of their introduction. The importance of a review of the new Welsh replacement taxes, LTT and LDT, was discussed during Stages 2 and 3 of the legislating process. I think, although we didn’t get an amendment, for various reasons, on the books at that point in time, I know that you agreed with the principle of a broad review, after a period of around six years, into the way that new taxes are working. I think that this was a good principle and I think it would also be very wise for us to introduce this into the new stand-alone taxes—I can’t think of a better thing to call them. So, that’s why that amendment’s there. I hope that you will support the amendments and, as I say, we are more than happy to support the broad thrust of this motion.