The Welsh Government response to our report’s recommendations claims that it

'mobilised quickly following the result of the referendum to build capability across Government to respond to the challenges and explore the opportunities presented by EU withdrawal.'

However, we know from feedback received during Brexit-related Assembly committee visits to Brussels, Dublin and elsewhere that it is us, the committees, rather than Welsh Government, that led this engagement and this agenda. We welcome their following our lead.

In accepting our first recommendation in principle only, the Welsh Government states that a 'no deal' scenario would be catastrophic for Wales, but fails to commit to providing progress reports on its examination of various Brexit scenarios.

In her Mansion House speech last month, the Prime Minister stated that:

'We must not only negotiate our exit from an organisation that touches so many important parts of our national life. We must also build a new and lasting relationship while...preparing for every scenario.'

And, as she said in Florence,

'we share the same set of fundamental beliefs; a belief in free trade, rigorous and fair competition, strong consumer rights, and that trying to beat other countries’ industries by unfairly subsidising one’s own is a serious mistake.'

She also said that:

'A deep and comprehensive agreement with the EU will therefore need to include commitments reflecting the extent to which the UK and EU economies are entwined.'

Well, the end stage of negotiations were started this week, with the press reporting that UK-EU relations are a lot more normalised and that EU insiders think much of the detail and substance governing EU-UK future relations will actually be worked out after the UK leaves the bloc in March next year.

In accepting our recommendation 2 in principle only, the Welsh Government states that it has worked closely with its

'sector teams…to better understand the picture across each of the sectors impacted by the UK’s withdrawal from the European Union.'  

And in accepting our recommendation 3, it states that it has been working closely with

'a range of stakeholders, including businesses, farmers, trade unions, educational institutions, public services, the third sector, communities and the public…to build a detailed understanding of their priorities, concerns and vulnerabilities, while communicating the Welsh Government’s position on a range of Brexit issues and this activity will continue.'

However, as our report states, Michael Trickey from Wales Public Services 2025 told us:

'I don’t think we’re actually very much more advanced in our understanding of the implications of Brexit than we were a year ago.'

Both Mr Trickey and Dr Victoria Winckler, Director of the Bevan Foundation, recognised that any scenario planning that had been undertaken so far seemed relatively limited. Furthermore, Mr Trickey said that, although umbrella organisations were engaging with Brexit, the issue felt—quote—'very, very remote' at the level of individual delivery organisations.

Accepting our recommendation 4 in principle only, the Welsh Government states that

'Providing guidance to business and the third sector will need some further careful thought, given the diverse range of interests involved.'

However, the National Trust told us that they would like to see specific farm business planning advice relating to the various trading scenarios after Brexit. The Farmers’ Union of Wales called for the Welsh Government to

'quantify the possible impacts of different post-Brexit scenarios'.

And although the Welsh NHS Confederation of health boards and trusts e-mailed Members yesterday stating that it has been working with Welsh Government officials to consider and assess the scale of the impact for Welsh health and social care services post Brexit, the health and social care professionals we met at the Aneurin Bevan university health board in Caerleon told us that

'The lack of clarity and direction' in relation to Brexit

'makes contingency planning difficult, and as a result conversations around scenario planning have yet to begin.'

As the Welsh Government states in response to our recommendation 5, the replacement for EU structural funds must work within a devolved context. Notwithstanding this, of course, we also note that these funds were intended to close the relative prosperity gap, but, unlike many other recipients across Europe, this has widened in Wales.  

In accepting our recommendation 6, the Welsh Government refers to

'implications of Brexit for Government funded research and innovation in Wales'.

We must therefore welcome the Prime Minister's statement that

'The UK is also committed to establishing a far-reaching science and innovation pact with the EU, facilitating the exchange of ideas and researchers. This would enable the UK to participate in key programmes alongside our EU partners.'

We wish the Welsh Government well in its future engagement over this matter but hope that it will reconsider some of the aspects of its response and consider further the evidence we received. Thank you.