Thank you, all, for bringing this report to the floor of the Chamber. I took part in the joint scrutiny session that informed part of the creation of this report. I don't mind saying that, in the nine years that I've been an Assembly Member, I've found the process of budget scrutiny to be one of the least satisfying elements of my work as an Assembly Member. Trying to connect spending decisions with targetless ambitions and then with outcomes—following the money, basically—I find it all but impossible. I just hugely hope that my colleagues in the Finance Committee and the Public Accounts Committee find it a little bit easier. That's why I wanted to be part of this scrutiny panel on that occasion. 

I think we should worry that the Welsh Government's commissioned report by the Wales Centre for Public Policy said that integrated assessments are only 'potentially' applied to significant investments. That came as something of a surprise to me. I would expect them to be applied to all significant investments. Obviously, we heard what Lynne Neagle had to say on the reluctance, shall we say, to introduce CRIAs in all budget decisions, particularly the most serious of them. But essentially I wanted to get some sense of how impact assessments actually influence spending decisions. Because when I had the culture and heritage portfolio, the impact assessments done at that time routinely came back with the information that failure to invest would impact negatively on young people and people from deprived backgrounds, but the investments weren't made anyway, so I concluded that probably the same impact assessment results were found for other policy areas. I was just interested to see how Welsh Government weighed those two competing assessments, if you like, to decide who was going to be the loser. But, actually, after our scrutiny session, I'm afraid I was none the wiser on how that actually worked, and I draw Members' attention to recommendation 3 of the report. 

I also hoped to discover how investment from, say, the education budget might affect other policy areas and impacts there. I'm not quite sure I got clarity on that really from this session. For me, it's a live issue, because with my portfolio I'm seeing the tension between the education and the local government main expenditure groups, for example, when it comes to how successfully schools are funded. I also wanted to attend because of the poor experience I've had as an Assembly Member of impact assessments produced by local authorities in my region, particularly in relation to school closures and potential sales of land. I'm sure others here have had very good advice from commissioners about how to challenge those impact assessments, but they seem to me to be routinely ignored, so I think this might be something that this Assembly may want to consider for debate in the next term. 

The clash between the Welsh Government and commissioners about the depth of assessment demonstrated in integrated impact assessments is something I think that we as Members need to take very, very seriously. This is a scrutiny issue and it is up to us, not Welsh Government, what we see. I know clerks will be cringing when I say this, but I really think, Welsh Government, you publish all, please, and we will decide what it is that we scrutinise. Because at the moment, as we heard, the perception is that the integrated assessments don't provide effective analysis, and a first step in improving them, if Welsh Government is determined to proceed with this particular methodology, is that these assessments must be co-produced. The process must satisfy commissioners and Assembly Members in terms of their purpose and their balance, because we do accept we can't have absolutely everything. 

Finally, Members, we passed the Legislation (Wales) Bill yesterday, and I imagine we can expect, in some time, some consolidation of legislation under the general banner of the well-being of future generations. However, despite unhappiness about policy being tested more than once—and I understand that—I think we need to be just alert to what we might lose during the process of consolidation. Being married to a farmer, believe me, I completely get the frustration of the same activity being assessed time and time again from a slightly different viewpoint, but if we attempt to thin out the bureaucracy in the process, which is what I think is part of what the Welsh Government is trying to do with the integrated assessments, and it's a welcome principle, really, we need to be mindful of the loss of significant detail, and I would be very guarded against integrated impact assessments automatically taking priority over individual assessments, which can capture, perhaps, more specifically detail that might be deeply significant. It's quite possible, for example, that a CRIA might pick up such a significant impact that it should have greater weight than an impact assessment that's been holistically put together. We're talking about something very significant there. And it seems to me that that was the essential worry of all the commissioners that gave evidence to our panels. 

Finally, Dirprwy Lywydd, we really must be cautious about thinking this is a process under which things might be hidden, because it's already pretty opaque, and I look forward to hearing from the Minister on the future generations commissioner's comments that progress to date has not been sufficient. Thank you. Diolch.