Diolch yn fawr, Dirprwy Lywydd. Can I thank all those who've taken part in this discussion? Lynne Neagle, in her contribution, reminded us that what we wanted to do was to work together as three committees to shine the spotlight on this theme, and I think that the concurrent scrutiny session that we had, the report that we published, and now this debate are certainly helping to do that. I share your sentiment that we have a distance to travel before we can be confident that CRIAs are being fully utilised. And, of course, that's the point, isn't it? How can we be confident that they are being utilised? How is Government effectively demonstrating that they are being done in a meaningful and valuable way, and how, consequently, are things being done differently?

Thank you, John, for your contribution as well. I'm glad that you see this as a potential model for future work across committees. It isn't easy to do on a practical level, clearly, because of practical issues like certain slots that different committees meet in, but, of course, we had to hold a concurrent meeting. We couldn't hold a joint meeting, because we weren't able to do that under Standing Orders. We had to have three committees meeting at the same time in the same room with the same people giving evidence. So, I think there's something we need to look at there in terms of allowing us greater flexibility.

My understanding is that the Government is sort of moving to a culture where more than one Minister—or responsibilities overlap somewhat and they share some responsibilities. Well, I think we should be reflecting that in the way that we as an Assembly and as committees can show that kind of agility so that we are as effective as we can be in scrutinising Government.

Impact assessments need to be used at the earliest stage to be meaningful—yes, absolutely. And whilst we can do it annually, we'd like to remind us, of course, that there is a cumulative impact that we mustn't lose the view of and we have to be absolutely aware of that. And this certainly isn't the end of our work, as you said. This is going to be an ongoing process and it'll be a scrutiny process that will continue over months and, I'm sure, years to come. I'm sorry that Suzy Davies finds budget scrutiny one of the least enjoyable or least productive aspects of her work as an AM. I'm afraid that as Chair of finance I'm hoping that she'll be doing more of it as subject committees in years to come and that it's even more embedded into the work that all our committees do. And I too can relate to the frustration that farmers, for example, feel when they find the same activity being assessed from many different angles, but, of course, the key thing there is, if they understand why it's being done and what effect it has and that they can see that it has a positive effect, then I'm sure they'd be more forgiving of that, and hence, of course, our overarching conclusion in the report is to go back to those basic principles so that we're all clear and that we all have that clarity around why we're doing this, to what purpose, and what effect it's having.

It was one of the more striking interventions that Siân Gwenllian mentioned from the children's commissioner, which was, effectively, saying that this process isn't really having the effect that it should, it's very much an add-on, and it's therefore not surprising that we find ourselves needing to deliberate this here in the Chamber. The reference to New Zealand is interesting because, in New Zealand, they're using their budget process to drive these changes, whereas in Wales, of course, we've legislated through the future generations Act to try and drive this process. So, it would be interesting to compare and contrast at some point the different approaches here and there, and, of course, subsequently the different outcomes that are stemming from that.

There's not much—. Well, I don't think there's anything I disagreed with in terms of what the Minister said in principle, but, of course, the challenge, as we all know, is in relation to the practical application of those principles that we all want to see pursued. I'm glad that you're committed to an evolving approach as powers evolve in terms of taxation and borrowing. It's only right that the processes that we have to ensure that the impacts of our utilisation of those new responsibilities and powers are used to best effect.

Now, fundamentally, I think, we need to establish, therefore, shared expectation and understanding of how we assess budget impact and how that exists alongside other legislative requirements. We recognise, of course, that difficult decisions have to be made and we believe that the current financial climate makes the assessment of the impact of spending even more important than ever. But, you know, being honest about difficult trade-offs that you have to make is okay, isn't it? In fact, it's essential if we are to build the public's confidence in our decision-making processes.

Today's motion notes the joint report of our three committees, which we hope will build a constructive, positive and progressive dialogue with the Welsh Government about its approach to draft budget impact assessments going forward and we'll continue, as I say, to pursue these issues in our individual budget scrutiny later this year.

So, in closing, Dirprwy Lywydd, I'd like to thank the commissioners and the Welsh Government for the constructive way in which they've engaged with us as three committees in our experimental approach and we certainly look forward to building on this innovation in the next draft budget round. Diolch yn fawr.