Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I speak in support of the second supplementary budget and the Finance Committee's report. I agree entirely with the Finance Committee's recommendations, and would welcome more detail around how significant new allocations within the supplementary budget have been prioritised. I would, however, go further and ask: what are the projected outcomes of this expenditure? Because we talk a lot about the money going in, but we don't often talk very much about what we're actually going to achieve by it.

We are agreeing to see additional money for health—£146 million revenue, £41 million capital. I think we've reached the stage where additional money for health in the annual supplementary budget is just something we've come to expect. The deficits were just gone through by Neil Hamilton, so I will not go through them. I'll just go to Betsi Cadwaladr, £75.9 million predicted deficit, and Hywel Dda, £88.3 million predicted deficit. I ask this question: are they underfunded? is that where the problem is? Are they badly managed? Or is the health board structure fundamentally wrong? Or is it a combination of all three? Unless the Cabinet Secretary can give me another reason, I can see nothing outside those three to be a reason why they're having those problems, and they're fairly substantial problems. 

I agree with the Finance Committee when it acknowledges the constraints of financial transactions funding, and I agree that we urge the Cabinet Secretary to continue to explore all avenues to utilise the available funding, and I think the Cabinet Secretary is committed to doing that. 

Can I quote a Westminster document? In 2012-13, the UK Government introduced an additional type of capital funding in order to boost investment, the so-called financial transactions capital. Financial transactions capital transactions do not strictly add to capital expenditure per se, as they are not regarded by Her Majesty's Treasury as spending transactions. The distinguishing feature of financial transactions capital is that the funds can only be deployed by the public sector as a loan to, or equity investment in, a private sector entity. 'Private sector' is defined by Office for National Statistics classification guidance and is determined by where control lies, rather than by ownership or whether or not the entity is publicly financed.

Transactions capital cannot be used for building new schools, cannot be used for building new hospitals and, under the current ONS classification, cannot be given to housing associations for building houses. This is a self-imposed Treasury rule that allows expenditure, but not to add it to the total capital expenditure of the Government. It makes no sense whatsoever that it's treated as a loan, but it does constrain the ability of the Welsh Government and us as an Assembly to spend money on the things that we want to do. 

Finally, on student loans, the committee noted the increase in non-cash revenue relating to the student resource accounting and budgeting charge in relation to student loans rose by £300 million in this supplementary budget. Can I give a prediction? Another £300 million next year. While this additional non-cash allocation is provided by Her Majesty's Treasury to cover student loan debt and is not money that we could actually spend on anything else, I would hope everyone would share my concern that the percentage of the student loan book that is anticipated not to be paid back, and hence written off, is increasing annually. This is a problem that will not go away. Tuition fees were a huge mistake, but increasing them to £9,000 was a disaster.