I hope it's very clear to everyone, to Members in the Chamber and to our stakeholders, that we have listened and we have taken note of the consultation responses. I wanted to make it very clear last year that it was a meaningful consultation, and I hope that is appreciated that we have changed several of the proposals. You mentioned not using the term 'land manager' any more; farmers are farmers. They told me they want to be called farmers. Some farmers want to be called food producers, some don't, but I think, generally, farmers want to be called farmers, and, obviously, there are land managers who incorporate our foresters, our contractors, and we'll use that term as well.

You asked some specific questions about the two schemes. So, what I made very clear last time was that we would be ending the basic payment scheme and we would have these two schemes and how they were made up was part of that consultation. Again, what came back was that it was thought that it would be better to have an integrated policy. I think you're quite right what you say about food production, and I said that in the statement this afternoon: they can be mutually reinforcing, they don't have to be mutually exclusive. And at the current time, farmers are producing food with those public goods but they're not being paid for the public good, and we want to turn that around and make sure they do get paid for that.

I don't think I used the term 'working group'. What I said was we want to co-design the policy going forward. And, again, the farming unions in particular and some of the environmental organisations have made it very clear they want to continue working closely with us on that. You'll be aware that straight after the referendum result three years ago I set up the ministerial Brexit stakeholder group—the roundtable group. That meets regularly. That will continue to meet. I've made it very clear to them that I still need their advice and for them to be critical friends, and they're very well up for that.

I think another area where we will want to see that co-design going forward—. I mentioned that the consultation will probably be launched at the beginning of July, and then, soon after, we need to look at how we're going to do that co-design. I'm sure you'll remember that last year we had a lot of engagement sessions with farmers and other stakeholders, where officials went in a room, were asked lots of questions, absorbed lots of comments. I don't want to see that with the second consultation; I think it will be much more of a workshop, where everybody will have to work very hard, and we'll be very interested in everybody's ideas. So, that's my kind of early thinking around that.

You asked about the timelines, so I mentioned the consultation will go out, hopefully, early July, certainly ahead of the Royal Welsh Show. It will run again for 16 weeks. I like that long consultation, particularly over the summer, so it'll probably be the end of October. We'll have started looking at the co-design during that period. Again, we had an independent organisation looking at the consultation responses from last year. I would guess that we would do the same this year, which will probably report to us in the spring of next year. So, that's the sort of timeline I'm looking at.

It's been very difficult to do an impact assessment for the reasons I outlined in the oral statement, but Members today will have seen this document, 'Agriculture in Wales'. That's the start, if you like, of the impact assessment. This is building up the capability to be able to do the modelling and the impact assessments going forward.

You asked about funding. As you know, the UK Government has said that we will have the funding until 2022. This Government said that they would ring-fence it—the previous First Minister did and the current First Minister also did in a previous capacity—and as far as I know, that has not changed, but we don't know what the budget is. At the moment, it's zero, so to ring-fence zero isn't going to be very helpful for anybody. But, realistically, we do need to ensure that we don't lose a penny. We were told that we wouldn't, as you know, and we're certainly holding them to that and to that promise.