Well, let me answer Andrew R.T. Davies in two ways. First of all, Andrew, one of the major selling points that were put forward by those who supported the idea of leaving the European Union is that we would be free of those restraints in the future and that those decisions would come here to Wales, and that's what I am arguing for in relation to the shared prosperity fund. Those responsibilities have been here since 1999, and the other side of the European Union, those responsibilities should be augmented, not taken away.

You used a very important word in your intervention, which was 'by agreement', and if there were to be a proper discussion with the UK Government on how those funds might best be used—and maybe there are some UK-wide themes that we would wish to agree on with others—I'd have no objection to that. There's been nothing of that, I can absolutely assure you of that. There has been not a single occasion on which we have sat down around a table, with Scotland and the UK Government, to draw out exactly that.

On the new agriculture policy front, we are working closely with the UK Government and other devolved administrations, and it demonstrates that where that takes place, it is possible to draw out those things where we have common ground, and we know now that the majority of the framework that will govern agriculture in the future will be managed through non-legislative inter-governmental co-ordination. So, when it's done by agreement, progress can be made. We see very little sign of that in the shared prosperity fund area.

Very briefly, Dirprwy Lywydd, just to mention some final important themes in the report and in contributions. Absolutely, we recognise what Julie Morgan said about the need to continue to secure expertise in the administration of those funds, to simplify those processes, to make sure that we use European Union funds to focus relentlessly on equality and human rights, especially citizenship rights in the Brexit context—a point picked up by Jane Hutt when she talked about the socioeconomic duty. The report talks about the reform of Barnett and we agree, but it's been very difficult to bring others to the table. It seems particularly hard to me to see how Barnett could be used in any emergency budget that might be necessary in a hard-line Brexit.

In conclusion, Dirprwy Lywydd, the Welsh Government accepts all the report's recommendations. Its evidence provides a core part of our negotiating strategy to achieve the best funding deal for Wales. We will continue to adopt an open and evidence-based approach to those negotiations and I welcome the contribution that this report and this debate make to that whole process.