– in the Senedd on 29 January 2020.
The next item, therefore, is the Welsh Conservatives debate on the departure from the European Union. I call on Darren Millar to move the motion—Darren Millar.
Motion NDM7241 Darren Millar
To propose that the National Assembly for Wales:
1. Notes that the people of Wales voted to leave the European Union in the referendum held on the 23 June 2016.
2. Believes that the outcome of referendums should always be implemented.
3. Acknowledges that Wales, along with the rest of the United Kingdom, will leave the European Union at 23.00 on 31 January 2020.
4. Recognises the potential benefits to Wales, of the United Kingdom’s departure from the European Union, including:
a) striking new free trade agreements;
b) creating a fairer immigration system which does not discriminate against people on the basis of where they may come from;
c) establishing a new approach to regional investment.
5. Calls upon the Welsh Government to engage positively with the UK Government as the United Kingdom leaves the European Union.
Diolch, Llywydd. On 23 June 2016, to the surprise of the Welsh establishment and many in this Chamber, the majority of Welsh voters cast their votes in favour of leaving the European Union. It was a mandate to deliver Brexit. The 2016 referendum saw the highest turnout in any ballot in Wales since the 1997 general election, with 854,572 people across the country voting to leave the EU. That's nearly three times as many as those who voted for the Labour Party in the Assembly elections that were held just a few weeks earlier.
Now, politicians cannot choose which public votes they decide to respect. Parliament gave the public the power to decide whether our future was in or out of the EU, and it is vital for our democracy that election and referendum results are always implemented. So, that's why I'm delighted that this week, at 11 o'clock on Friday—in spite of the best efforts of the Labour Party, Plaid Cymru and the so-called Liberal Democrats—Wales, along with the rest of the United Kingdom, will finally leave the European Union, and Boris Johnson will have delivered on his pledge to get Brexit done, fulfilling the promise to voters in Wrexham, Bridgend, Clwyd South, Ynys Môn, the Vale of Clwyd, Delyn, Brecon and Radnorshire, and many other seats across Wales.
And we will do so with a good deal, a good deal that protects the rights of EU citizens in the UK and UK citizens in the EU, and ensures that there is no hard border on the island of Ireland, a deal delivered by a Prime Minister against the odds and defying all of the doomsday predictions of the naysayers. And, of course, once we leave the EU, the UK will finally be able to take back control of its laws, its borders and its money. We will be leaving the single market and the customs union as well as the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice and will have an independent trade policy that is able to take advantage of the 90 per cent of global economic growth that is happening outside of the European Union.
We will continue, of course, to trade with the European Union, without tariffs, without quotas, without charges, while still being able to pursue trade deals around the world, opening up new, exciting markets for Welsh goods and services. And the UK market, of course, is vital to the European Union, just as our trading relationship with the EU is important to us. That's why it's in the interests of both parties—[Interruption.]. I'll take the intervention in a second. That's why it's in the interests of both parties to get a decent deal done, particularly for those large economies like France and Germany that rely on a lot of trade with this great nation of ours. I'll happily take the intervention.
I just wanted to ask Darren Millar whether we can look forward to the advent of chlorinated chicken and hormone-induced beef in this country.
I think I'll make some more progress with my speech.
A trade deal will ensure, of course, that businesses in Wales can have a smooth trading relationship and full access to the EU market, but Boris Johnson has also made clear that, even in negotiating that trade deal, access to public services—and this is in future trade deals with other nations, too—access to public services such as the NHS is not going to be on the table in those trade deal negotiations.
Now, over the last 20 years, the Welsh Government has received some £5 billion in EU structural funds, yet Wales has continued to qualify for support because the gross domestic product has remained below the 75 per cent EU average. And this is in spite of the fact that we've seen the accession of former communist countries into eastern Europe with poorer economies.
Dirprwy Lywydd, never has so much been spent with so little to show for it. Even the projects that have intended to have a lasting legacy in Wales, such as the dualling of the Heads of the Valleys road, have been delayed by years, and they're over budget by tens of millions of pounds. And it was the poor spending decisions over EU aid—[Interruption.] I'll take an intervention in a moment; as I always do, gracefully.
It was the poor spending decisions over EU aid that contributed to the Brexit vote, with Valleys communities voting the most strongly to leave the European Union because, despite the billions wasted, EU membership hasn't been seen to be helping them or their communities. I'll take the intervention.
Darren, Pontypridd is probably one of the most regenerating towns in the whole of south Wales. European money enabled the pedestrianisation; European money enabled the lido; European money is enabling the regeneration of the former Taff precinct; are you saying that that is wasted money? Will you say that to all the people now gaining jobs moving in to the Pontypridd area?
What I'm saying is that it has failed to deliver what it promised to deliver, which was to get that GDP up beyond the seventy-fifth percentile. And I think that you should be acknowledging the failure of successive Labour Governments to actually deliver on what it was supposed to deliver. And, of course, Pontypridd still voted to leave, in spite of the cash spent because it hasn't delivered for the people of Pontypridd.
So, here, Brexit provides with a new opportunity. In the coming weeks, the UK Government will be publishing further details of the new shared prosperity fund that will be designed to reduce inequalities across the four nations. It will replace the overly bureaucratic system of European aid, which has failed to deliver for the people of Wales, and Boris Johnson has been very clear that Wales will receive at least as much funding under the new arrangements as we do from EU structural funds. And that shared prosperity fund will provide us with an opportunity to make different strategic investments that leave a lasting legacy—truly leave a lasting legacy—to communities across Wales in need. And, of course, it will be more flexible than the current arrangements that fail to tackle any of the pockets of deprivation outside of west Wales and the Valleys.
Now, leaving the EU is also an opportunity for a green Brexit. It gives us a chance to reset and enhance our environmental obligations and to continue to lead the way, as we have done in the UK, in tackling climate change. Leaving the EU means that we can leave the failed common agricultural policy that has not recognised the work that so many farmers are already doing, frankly, to protect the environment. And, of course, we'll have a stable transition, because the UK Government has guaranteed continuity of funding until 2022. Of course, the Welsh Government needs to ensure that Wales's new environmental and land management system includes the recognition of the work of so many farmers as the custodians of the land and environment that they manage.
We will also, of course, leave the common fisheries policy—the subject of a debate later this afternoon—enabling us to take back control of our waters and to regain the power to access overfished seas while pursuing the very highest standards of marine conservation.
A genuine, serious point, beyond the political bluster and so on, a genuine point, in advance of the debate this afternoon: would he agree with me that any future policy on fisheries, beyond the slogans of getting back our control of our fisheries, actually needs to comply with the scientific evidence on maximum sustainable yield? The reason for that, I would put to him, is that otherwise, we fish to exhaustion our fisheries stocks. So, would he put within the reality of the political slogan that, actually, it needs to be sustainable fisheries?
You need to play catch-up. The Fisheries Bill, which has been published today in Westminster, takes into account those precise concerns and addresses them. So, I just wish you'd pay a little bit more attention to what the UK Conservative Government is actually doing on Brexit rather than aimlessly criticising, as you often do, from the backbenches.
So, we will have also the opportunity to have our own immigration system. Boris Johnson is committed to introducing an Australian-style points-based immigration system—[Interruption.] It's very discourteous of the Member to leave the Chamber during the debate after making a contribution. [Interruption.] That's very discourteous. I'm sure the Dirprwy Lywydd is making note.
Boris Johnson is committed to introducing an Australian-style points-based immigration system that considers people based on their skills rather than where they come from in the world. It will allow us to attract the brightest and the best to our shores, regardless of where in the world they come from while bringing migration, net migration, down to sustainable levels.
Will you take an intervention on that point?
I'm terribly sorry, I haven't got a lot of time left.
The UK's new global immigration system will address public concerns over immigration while still meeting the needs of our economy and our public services, including our public services here in Wales.
And, of course, once we've delivered on this referendum result, once we get through Friday, it means that we can start to focus our attention, including here in Wales, on the people's priorities of schools, the NHS, and tackling crime. And this includes recruiting Wales's share of the 20,000 new police officers that are going to be coming into our police forces here in the UK. And you've seen a big boost to the Welsh Government's budget—over £600 million in the block grant, which we can use to address the significant failings that we've seen in our national health service, some of which have been discussed this afternoon, and the fact that our education system is the worst in the UK according to the Programme for International Student Assessment.
On top of that money, of course, we've had an extra £700-odd million in terms of growth deals. Wales is the only part of the United Kingdom—the only nation—that is a growth deal nation. Every single part of the country is covered by a growth deal.
So, as we leave the EU on Friday, it's against this backdrop, a backdrop not just of additional investment, but of record high employment, with key industries like Airbus in north-east Wales already confirming that they see the potential to expand after Brexit. So, my message is this: it's time for the Welsh Government to move on from carping about Brexit, to work collaboratively with the UK Government, to take advantage of the opportunities—many of which I've outlined this afternoon—and to stop fighting Brexit, accept it and to get on with delivering the benefits for the people of Wales.
I have selected the amendment to the motion, and I call on the Counsel General and Brexit Minister to formally move amendment 1, tabled in the name of Rebecca Evans.
Amendment 1—Rebecca Evans
Delete all and replace with:
1. Notes that the people of Wales voted to leave the European Union in the referendum held on the 23 June 2016 and that Wales, along with the rest of the United Kingdom, will leave the European Union at 23.00 on 31 January 2020.
2. Recognises that there are benefits as well as challenges arising from the United Kingdom’s departure from the European Union.
3. Believes that the challenges may include a significant threat to the future of the United Kingdom itself; that therefore significant reform to the constitution is needed to fully embed devolution; and that the negotiation of Free Trade Agreements with the EU and other countries, without the meaningful involvement of the devolved administrations could risk undermining the devolution settlement; and regrets that this was not recognised by the UK Government during the passage of the EU (Withdrawal Agreement) Act in the UK Parliament.
4. Supports the 20-point plan put forward by the Welsh Government in 'Reforming our Union' which will ensure that devolution becomes an established part of the constitution once the UK leaves the EU.
5. Calls upon the Welsh Government to continue to engage positively with the UK Government and to speak up for the interests of Wales as the United Kingdom leaves the European Union.
Formally.
I'm hoping my contribution will be less political, in one sense, than we've just heard. I welcome the opportunity to reflect upon the impact of reaching the deadline of 11 p.m. Greenwich mean time on Friday 31 January. My colleague Mike Hedges, who sits alongside me, will feel trepidation at that deadline as it's a critical point to deciding whether sufficient people have been brought into the Swans in order to reach the play-offs, as the transfer deadline is reached at 11 p.m. on Friday evening—[Laughter.] Now, that's not an attempt to belittle the other significant events, but to remind us all that not all eyes will be focused on that single event. Now, many people around us will actually be looking at other aspects, even though the news coverage will be focused on nothing else.
And there will be many others who will see it as a time when we will no longer be citizens of the EU and all that entails for us—positive in the eyes of some; negative in the eyes of others. Now, I fully recognise the outcome of the vote of the majority of the voting electorate in Wales in June 2016 and that the UK is leaving the EU, but, once again, I will stress that the means by which we leave and the path that we take are crucial to our future. I do hope that it is a bright future, and I will always work towards that, but it is our duty to ensure that we test the decisions taken by Governments, we critically analyse the future strategy for a strong and vibrant economy and that we scrutinise the legislation that comes forward to ensure that the law that impacts upon the people we represent is good law, not flawed or rushed to simply deliver a populist solution.
We all know that the potential for leaving the EU will essentially come through the trading relationships that the UK forges with other nations. There is no doubt that there will be concerns as to how UK mandates for such agreements will be created and the role that devolved nations for such agreements will have in setting that mandate. Many across this Chamber have expressed a view that it is important that all devolved nations are part of both the team setting the mandate and also the team that undertake negotiations. So, this is something well established in this Parliament.
Currently, there is no formal mechanism to ensure that the Welsh Government or this Parliament would have any say in negotiation and confirmation of these agreements, even in circumstances where they engage devolved competence. We should be involved in setting the direction of the negotiations and be included in establishing the mandate for those negotiations. We should be in the room when negotiations discuss devolved competencies or matters that impact upon devolved competence. This is often the case across our European neighbours and elsewhere in the world, so why not here?
Now, I understand that there has been a meeting of the ministerial forum on trade, but the outcomes have not yet been published, and clarification on our role in the process remains in the periphery. I welcome the Welsh Government's efforts to move the agenda forward on how we can change the current constitutional settlement and support its position as set out in the recently published 'Reforming our union: shared governance in the UK'. This is clearly the approach that suits the interest of Wales and our citizens, being able to influence any trade deal in order for it to be to the benefit of Wales and its citizens.
We only need to look at the events this week to consider the risks that can occur in such trade negotiations and thus why our voice must be heard and duly considered. Take yesterday, we heard from the UK Government that they were going to accept Huawei as part of the future of the 5G networks, but across the waters, we saw Republican senators tweeting how this would impact upon their consideration of any UK-US trade deal—effectively trying to blackmail the UK into succumbing to the decisions of their Government and their interests, not ours. It is important that our interests must not be sacrificed to suit the political interests of one group only. Difficulties will arise.
Last time we debated trade agreements in this Chamber the Conservatives put an amendment forward denying our valid concerns over the current trading negotiating stance of this UK Government. Instead, they prefer to block them out from people’s minds. The amendments that they had stated that we should have no involvement in trade negotiations as it's reserved matter. I hope they're changing their minds now. But what does that say for the ambitions of the Welsh Conservatives? They're more than happy to leave it to Westminster and not involve us—
Will you take an intervention?
I will take your intervention, Darren.
It's just on that very point. We've made it quite clear that we do think that there needs to be discussion with the Welsh Government in any future trade arrangements and deals. What we have also said though is that the UK Government is there to act in the best interests of the UK as a whole and it will be the body that signs on the dotted line as it were, with those trade deals, and therefore it's inappropriate that there should be a veto for Wales or any other part of the UK.
I thank you for actually indicating that you're moving your support in the direction that we are thinking. I've never said a veto and I've always argued against a veto. Even in the last debate, I argued against a veto. But I do believe that it’s important that the negotiations should be set by a mandate agreed with all the devolved nations because it’s crucial because the interests of the devolved nations are important.
Dirprwy Lywydd, I can see the time so I'll conclude with one other point and that’s the point about our workforce and immigration, and the important role that EU citizens play in delivering services in both public and private businesses across Wales. Just to highlight that the Migration Advisory Committee has published its report, following the request from the Home Office, on the future of the system and they did not fully support a points-based system. They actually indicated that they still believe that there should be a salary-level cap. They had reduced it to £25,600, whereas businesses still wanted a cap lower than that of £20,000, and they felt that a points-based system wouldn't deliver for the needs of the workforce of the UK and particularly, in my view, for Wales. We need to look at what are the workforce needs of Wales and how that system would work for us. It’s important that we have that so that when we do get that immigration Bill we'll be able to scrutinise it carefully. I am yet to be convinced that the proposed points system will actually deliver for Wales. So, I think that we need to look very carefully at the future. I hope that it'll be a bright future; I will work for a bright future, but also, we will scrutinise very carefully to ensure that anything that does come forward meets the needs of the people of Wales.
On 23 June 2016, the UK voted to leave the European Union, Wales voted to leave, and did so again in the European elections last year. In the UK general election last month, the people of north Wales voted to get Brexit done. Yet, this Labour Welsh Government, backed by Plaid Cymru, have repeatedly refused to follow the people’s instructions on this and an increasing number of other matters.
Quoting businesses in north Wales, the Daily Post said last October,
'Uncertainty fuels uncertainty...We need an end to...Brexit uncertainty.'
Last November the Confederation of British Industry's director general said,
'So many businesses here in Wales are full of optimism and enthusiasm. They want to be talking about—and acting on—Welsh strengths. To signal that Wales is open for business. But desperately want to put an end to uncertainty.'
Yet, the Labour Welsh Government and Plaid Cymru have stoked up uncertainty at every opportunity. They scaremonger about the future of the NHS. However, the 2019 Conservative manifesto was crystal clear that our NHS is not for sale. It says:
'When we are negotiating trade deals, the NHS will not be on the table. The price the NHS pays for drugs will not be on the table. The services the NHS provides will not be on the table.'
They scaremonger about the UK shared prosperity fund—
Will you take an intervention?
I'll take one intervention, yes.
Thank you for taking the intervention, but the fact of the matter is that those are still within the clear objectives of negotiation of the US Government.
In any negotiation, both sides go up with long wish lists, but a deal has to come out at the end and that's a red line for the UK Government.
They scaremonger about the UK shared prosperity fund, when our UK Conservative manifesto clearly stated that Wales will receive at least the same level of financial support as it currently receives from the EU. The UK Conservative Government also guaranteed that it will match funding for agriculture throughout this UK Parliament and, most importantly, will actually deliver on the Brexit that the people of Wales voted for and continue to support.
They scaremonger about the future of the Erasmus+ scheme funding opportunities for young people to train and study across Europe. However, the UK Government stated that as we enter negotiations with the EU on the future relationship, we want to ensure that UK and European students can continue to benefit from each other's world-leading education systems, and that it is wrong to say that the UK will quit the Erasmus scheme.
The Welsh Labour Government and Plaid Cymru scaremonger that the UK will no longer accept unaccompanied refugee children from Europe after EU withdrawal. However, the UK Government has stated that its policy on child refugees has not changed, and that they will continue to all that they can to enable children to claim asylum and be reunited with their families—[Interruption.] If it's short.
It will be short. I appreciate what you just said. Then, why do you believe that the UK Government took those parts out of the EU (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill when they had been inserted by the Lords? They just rejected them totally. There was no need to reject them.
It's like receiving advice on poker playing from a bankrupt gambler.
The Labour Welsh Government and Plaid Cymru scaremonger about the forthcoming trade talks with the EU. However, Wales benefits from the clout of belonging to the UK single market and customs union, in which most of the Welsh economy is traded. As a former UK ambassador to both Germany and the US stated last week, missing from so much analysis is awareness that the EU's £94 billion trade surplus with the UK could be put at risk, and gives the UK a massive lever.
The recent Deloitte chief financial officer confidence survey demonstrates the biggest ever jump in business confidence, and Members opposite should stop trying to hammer their confidence. Last week, the International Monetary Fund predicted that the UK economy will grow faster than the eurozone this year, assuming an orderly Brexit and a steady transition to a new relationship, which we all want. PricewaterhouseCoopers's global chief executive officer survey found that European chief executives regard the UK as a key market for growth and investment, rated only behind the US, China and Germany internationally.
The Labour Welsh Government and Plaid Cymru scaremonger about losing EU money when, in reality, this is recycled UK money, and the UK Chancellor has stated that he will use his first budget after the UK leaves the EU to pump £100 billion into infrastructure projects across the UK to help left-behind parts of the UK and unleash the UK's potential.
The First Minister claims that the EU (Withdrawal Agreement) Act enables UK Ministers to amend the Government of Wales Act 2006 without consent from this Senedd. Yet, the UK Conservative Government has made clear that this Act does not enable UK Ministers to amend the devolved settlement and, in fact, will lead to greater powers for the Assembly as policy areas from the EU are passed down to devolved Governments.
As Boris Johnson delivers on his promise to get Brexit done by 31 January, let us build together an outward-looking Wales within a global United Kingdom.
'Let the healing begin', said Boris Johnson after winning the general election, and judging by the contributions since, the healing process is going really well. [Laughter.] Reconciliation and healing require some reaching out by both sides of an argument. Otherwise, we have unseemly triumphalism on the part of the victors, and entrenched bitterness and despair on the part of the vanquished. Rubbing our noses in our defeat repeatedly—'You lost'—hardly constitutes reaching out in a spirit of mutual reconciliation and healing.
However, we are where we are. We are all leaving now, as Adam Price said this week. Healing means that it's time to start thinking positively, in spite of everything, time to turn from power grab to power gain, and to take advantage of some of the flexibilities afforded to Wales outside the European Union—flexibilities including the ability of the Development Bank of Wales to allow lending without the constraints of state aid rules; devolving power over corporation tax, capital gains tax on property, apprenticeship levy, air passenger duty and VAT; flexibilities like developing new procurement rules to support our foundational economy; flexibilities to create Welsh free ports at key ports and airports; flexibilities to develop Welsh work permits as part of a Welsh migration system. The red dragon of Wales taking back control. Letting Wales and its people be unleashed to realise their full, unfettered potential.
But Wales and its very existence faces is a very real threat because of the way Wales voted in the referendum. Wales voted to leave—austerity and people feeling left behind ensured that outcome. Now, I do believe that the outcomes of referendums should be respected, but that means all referendums, including the previous one here in Wales in 2011 for more powers for the Senedd, because recent events suggest that the outcome of the 2016 referendum somehow trumps the result of the 2011 referendum.
We have seen Welsh Government frozen out of the Brexit negotiations since they started in 2016—not even in the room. We have seen common frameworks, shared governance supposedly, with little evidence of the 'shared'. We have seen Welsh Government having no recognition in trade talks, as David Rees said, and with the shared prosperity fund, the details of where European funding goes have always been decided here in the Senedd for the last 20 years. Now Boris wants to decide. We face a power grab.
I'm grateful to you for taking the intervention, Dai. That is incorrect to say those decisions were taken here in the Senedd—they had to be approved in Brussels first under the seven-year envelope of cash attached to those redevelopment funds. So, you must recognise that there's a partnership to develop here, and we want to see that partnership develop with equal standing between the Welsh Government and the UK Government. But you cannot say that those decisions were only being taken here over the last 20 years.
Not solely here. It didn’t involve UK Government.
And we've seen with the withdrawal agreement Bill all three devolved nations vote against it, and still it goes through. So, what of consent? Our consent here—does it actually mean anything? And clause 36 of the withdrawal agreement Bill—Westminster Parliament is sovereign. Whatever happened to the 'shared' part? Our powers are being rolled back.
Now, benches opposite would justify this on the basis of the general election result, and you can't argue with 365 Tory MPs—345 of them in England. This Conservative landslide is in England, yet our noses are being rubbed in it in Wales too, with your 14 MPs—[Interruption.] We've heard enough of you, Darren.
Are you taking an intervention?
So, constitutionally, what of Wales? Ireland has cause to be become a united Ireland. Scotland may well go for independence. What of Wales? A Wales increasingly welded to England and ignored and sidelined and assimilated, or Wales forging its own path to independence, healing centuries of hurt?
As the great, late Winston Churchill said in 1947,
'there is the broad feeling in our country that the people should rule, continuously rule, and that public opinion, expressed by all constitutional means, should shape, guide, and control the actions of Ministers who are their servants and not their masters.'
These are very wise words that have eluded the Welsh Government. Despite the people of Wales voting to leave the European Union in a referendum held on 23 June 2016—
Will you take an intervention?
Just let me get going. You have campaigned to remain in the EU. You have proposed that Parliament should legislate for a referendum with 'remain' on the ballot paper. You have seen the First Minister here—and I don't refer to him as Mark Drakeford, despite everybody in this Chamber, on those benches, referring to our Prime Minister as 'Boris Johnson' or 'Johnson', even—with the First Minister of Scotland, call for a further referendum. And only last week, you voted against the withdrawal agreement Bill.
Plaid Cymru are no better when it comes to respecting voter democracy either. Plaid Cymru tabled a motion calling on the Assembly to declare its unequivocal support for a confirmatory referendum on any proposal by the Prime Minister to take the United Kingdom out of the European Union with 'remain' on the ballot paper. It has taken until now, only this week, for the leader of Plaid Cymru, Adam Price, to acknowledge that it is time to focus on the new opportunities that Brexit will bring.
Interestingly, I think that the penny may just have dropped with Plaid Cymru, and that they realise now that there could not be such a thing as an independent Wales within the EU. Mind you, it could be more down to the fact that they've realised that the forthcoming elections are around the corner, and they've seen the recent polls.
I am grateful to the Member for giving way, despite the urgings of others in her party.
She quoted Winston Churchill. Does she also agree with what he said on 19 September 1946 in Zurich when he called for a united states of Europe?
Well, I didn't hear that, so—. I wasn't around at that time.
But to put it simply, the EU sucks sovereignty from our national Government and places it in the hands of unelected commissioners, denying democracy, and rubbishing referendums has its own consequences. Winston Churchill quite rightly stated that people should rule and that Ministers are their servants, and not their masters. The people have held Welsh Labour and Plaid politicians to account, returning the highest number of Welsh Conservative MPs since 1983 and my own MP, with a much-improved majority, Robin Millar. My colleagues are keeping to our manifesto commitments and I am delighted that Wales, along with the rest of the UK, will leave the EU at 11 o'clock on 31 January.
It is now time for you to commit to engaging positively with the UK Government as the United Kingdom leaves the EU. It is now time to make the most of the benefits Brexit will bring. Do you know what is sad for me as an Assembly Member? When I've heard people on those benches say, 'Oh, I can't wait till it all goes wrong and then see what you say.' [Interruption.] I have heard that being shouted across the Chamber.
The UK will be able to forge new trade deals for the first time in nearly half a century. It is about creating a global Britain and we are on track to doing just that. Already, around 20 continuity deals have been agreed, covering 50 countries or territories. However, we are also determined to ensure a close relationship with the EU too. [Interruption.] No, sorry. I don't see why it has to be either/or. Given that we are already aligned and that our trade deficit with the EU was £64 billion in 2017, I am confident that a new free trade agreement will be secured by the end of this year. The UK Government is looking out for businesses and creating a platform from which they can flourish. For example, our Prime Minister, the Right Honourable Boris Johnson MP, has increased export financing support, built a new platform to help small and medium-sized enterprises with contracts abroad, and developed a strategy to help increase British exports to 35 per cent of gross domestic product.
We are looking out for our farmers, too, as there is a clear commitment that we will not give up on our excellent food standards. Any new products wishing to enter the UK market must comply with our high standards on animal welfare and food safety.
Wales voted to leave, the people voted to leave, so I am proud that we as Welsh Conservatives are doing everything possible to support the best interests of every corner of our nation. The Prime Minister, the Right Honourable Boris Johnson MP, has confirmed that the EU cash Wales currently receives will be matched, and the new shared prosperity fund will provide an opportunity to tackle deprivation and raise living standards in some of the poorest parts of Wales. Brexit can be and is, in fact, a bright light for Wales, so I for one will be celebrating its deliverance on Friday night and the start of a global Britain, global Wales. And I'll be doing the Westminster bongs at exactly 11 o'clock.
I trust the Member enjoys her party and her bongs. I was speaking yesterday to the First Minister about the different ways in which we were marking Brexit day, and I'm glad to see the Conservatives bring forward this motion today. I hear voices from various sides saying that we should come together, and I think that is a worthy sentiment. I'm disappointed that the Welsh Government do not appear to be prepared to back this Conservative motion, because it strikes me that it should be unobjectionable to them, and I think that would have helped to forge common ground across the Chamber.
David Rees spoke—and I've heard other Labour Members say similar things—and he said that he fully recognised and accepted the result of the referendum. I do recall him also saying that in 2016, and, when I served on his committee, he initially referred to, 'When we left the European Union', and then it became 'if', and then, with his party, he campaigned for a second referendum to set that result aside and have another one. [Interruption.] I will take an intervention.
I thank the Member for taking an intervention. Clearly, one of the problems we saw in 2016 to 2019 was the total chaos that was being put upon the whole process by the Conservative Government. We saw failure after failure after failure to actually deliver on that and to get a deal done that would be to the benefit of Wales. Don't you agree, in that situation, you cannot support something that does not deliver for the people of Wales?
No, I don't agree. I accept the first part of the Member's statement, particularly with reference to Theresa May's Government and the way it acted. It's not for me to defend Theresa May's Government, but I would note that it was also the behaviour of the Labour Party in the Commons that led to the situation we had. And I'm afraid I doubt the sincerity of many of those MPs who were effectively seeking to block Brexit by voting against any deal, intending to vote against any deal—even when they were given everything they'd been asking for, including a customs union, they demanded more. And they gambled on trying to block Brexit, elect a Corbyn Government, and then have a second referendum and win, and it be remain, so we stay in the EU. Now, we can judge how sensible or otherwise that gamble was, and I think that was the reference to the bankrupt gamblers that you heard—[Interruption.]—that you heard earlier.
But—but—in the spirit of magnanimity, I would like to accept the sincerity of what you said today, David, because I think it's in the interests of all of us that we seek to move on and to make the best of Brexit wherever we individually came. And I accept that those who—. I think five sixths of the Chamber voted remain compared to the one sixth of us who voted to leave. I do not denigrate the patriotism of those who made a different assessment as to the advantages than I did, and we shall now seek to move forward together and get the best we can for Wales and for the United Kingdom.
On which note, I move to Dai Lloyd's speech. I thought it was very revealing, the exchange that he had with Andrew R.T. Davies. He didn't actually object and say the UK was taking more powers than the EU; it was the fact that it was the UK Government rather than the EU that he objected to. And I take a pragmatic approach on this and support 4c of this motion,
'establishing a new approach to regional investment', because it's important to recognise that that money, whether it's specifically for regional development funds or whether it's to fill that £15 billion fiscal gap that we have in Wales, comes from the rest of the United Kingdom and primarily from England. And the aim of regional development is to try and lever up areas that are at the time they're receiving that money less well off. And I think there is a role for the UK Government, and also a very full role for the Welsh Government. And those roles will be different than they were within the EU structures. And, overall, I would be happy to see something where the relative powers and influence of the UK Government on the spending of regional development money coming from the UK in Wales is no greater than that that was taken by the EU, but I think we should have a pragmatic approach to try and make that work.
Dai refers to the 2011 referendum and to the 2016 referendum, and I think one issue that we have is, because of the last three and a half years and how this Assembly has acted, and the motion after motion after motion to expressly, or, in effect, block Brexit, when Wales voted to leave, for many voters, that has reduced their assessment of this place and their attachment to our National Assembly. And I think we need to recognise that. And that's happened again. Whatever the rationale that was given at the vote, voting against that LCM and then saying how terrible is the UK Government's pressing ahead despite all three devolved legislatures voting, or administrations voting—being—against it, ignores the fact that Wales voted to leave the European Union. That is the deal. It's not particularly a deal that my party thinks is a great deal, but it's the deal that's there. It's a lot better than Theresa May's deal. We're coming out, we're going to have Brexit—
He's out of time; he's out of time.
—let's make a success of it. Let's work together.
Well, I rise to support the motion so rumbustiously moved by Darren Millar this afternoon. And, for me, Friday will be the culmination of a lifetime's work, as I joined the Anti Common Market League in July 1967 as a schoolboy in Ammanford, and it has been the skein that has run through my whole political life, which has, as Members know, taken often some surprising turns, perhaps not least to have brought me here.
But the most surprising of all was when I was appointed to the EU Council of Ministers by John Major to represent the UK on internal market matters. I've never wavered throughout my entire life, and, indeed, in doing that job, from my belief that Britain—and that includes Wales, obviously—would be much better governed if those who are taking the ultimate decisions about our laws were elected by, and accountable to, the people. And this opaque unelected technocracy in Brussels, which is so worshipped by so many remainers, has always been a rather incredible fetish to me. I've never really understood why anybody would approve that as being the best form of government.
Carwyn Jones mentioned Winston Churchill earlier on. Churchill famously said that democracy is the worst of all political systems until you consider the alternatives. And it is, of course, a calumny to say that Churchill's Zurich speech in 1946 was actually an endorsement of the European Union, because Churchill famously said—[Interruption.] No, but this was the precursor of it, the precursor of the European movement, which was founded, I think, in the following year.
As Churchill famously said:
'We are with Europe, but not of it. We are linked, but not comprised.'
And he saw Europe as a unity in conjunction with the British empire, which we then still had—as being, together, two great forces for good in the world. But he never actually saw Britain as part of that European entity.
And, over the course of the last 50 years, I have fought to achieve what we are going to achieve on Friday. So, it's actually a very moving moment for me, and what we make of it, of course, is entirely up to us. A nation ultimately succeeds or fails according to the strength and determination of its own people.
Will the Member give way?
I just wonder, given the historical sweep and span that he has today, whether, looking back, he would have any regrets for his own role in voting for the Maastricht treaty?
Well, I'm afraid the Member is—[Interruption.] I'm afraid the Member is very sadly mistaken, because although I was at the time a Government whip, I spent so much time trying to persuade Teresa Gorman to vote for the Government that I actually missed the division itself. [Laughter.] And so I was the only member of the Government who did not vote for the Maastricht treaty. So, I'm grateful to the Member for allowing me to establish still more impressive credentials, but—. And I survived.
So, what we make of Brexit is entirely up to us. And I'm rather disturbed, therefore, that Sajid Javid said last week that the:
'first priority is...getting the agreement with the EU', which I think is a foolish negotiating tactic, because Steve Mnuchin, the American Treasury Secretary, said the other day that the US was
'prepared to dedicate a lot of resources' to securing a trade deal with the UK this year, and he said
'the UK and US have very similar economies with a big focus on services, and I think this will be a very important relationship.'
[Interruption.] Yes, I give way again.
I thank the Member. Is it also acceptable, in your consideration, that the reason the US want to do a quick deal with the UK is to weaken an agreement and therefore strengthen their argument against the EU by getting us in a weaker position so they can argue with the EU that the UK has already accepted the lower standards and, therefore, the EU wants to ask to do the same? So, it's in their interests, not in ours.
Well, the United States Government obviously has to look out for itself, and it will, but our interests do happen to coincide in this particular instance. Our hand will be stronger with the EU if we've done a deal with the United States, and there are plenty of other countries that are lining up to do those deals as well. I'm therefore rather disappointed that Boris Johnson's Government doesn't seem to see that the Theresa May tactic of sucking up to the EU is bound to fail, because they will take whatever they're offered and ask for more. The United States is offering us something and now they might be regarded as being snubbed.
Taking back control of our borders, similarly, is vitally important. We've added 6.7 million people to our population in the last 20 years, and this rate of increase cannot be sustained. Now, we have the opportunity, as the motion says, to have a non-discriminatory immigration policy, which, if used according to the opportunities, will perhaps deal with some of the causes of why people voted to leave the European Union in the first place. Immigration was a massive part of that campaign.
Regrettably, my time is running out. So, I think we should all congratulate Boris Johnson, whatever the flaws in his agreement, and there are many—not least the line down the Irish sea. He has actually achieved what we set out to do, which is to leave the EU legally, on Friday.
Last Thursday, 23 January 2020, the Deputy Speaker of the House of Commons announced that the withdrawal agreement Bill had received Royal Assent. The British membership of the European Union will end at 11 o'clock on Friday evening. The Conservative Government has delivered on the promise made to the people of Great Britain to get Brexit done.
It is more than three and a half years ago that the British people voted for Brexit by a clear and decisive margin. In Wales, the margin of victory for leave was even greater than the United Kingdom percentage—far more, for example, than the margin of victory in the Welsh devolution referendum in 1997.
The passing of the withdrawal agreement Bill has been achieved in spite of the opposition of the Labour Party. Labour and its allies have tried to delay, frustrate and stop Brexit at every opportunity. Not a single Labour MP—not a single Labour MP—voted for the withdrawal agreement Bill. This shows that they have learned nothing from their crushing defeat at the last general election. To the very last moment—[Interruption.] Sorry, I haven't got time. My apologies.
To the very last moment, they have tried to overturn the referendum result and ignore the will of the people of Great Britain. After pledging to respect the result of the 2016 referendum, Labour's stance on Brexit has been ambiguous and lacking in credibility: yet another renegotiation of the deal followed by another referendum, a referendum where senior Labour figures said that they would campaign against their own withdrawal deal to remain in the EU. Indeed, Mr Jeremy Corbyn proved unable or unwilling to say—[Interruption.]—unable or unwilling to say what his position would be in a fresh referendum. And now the architect of the policy shambles is the frontrunner to replace Mr Corbyn as the Labour Party leader.
We all saw the result of this disconnect between the Labour leadership and its traditional voters in the result of the last general election. Labour suffered its worst defeat since 1935, winning fewer seats than in 1983. The result was equally dramatic in Wales—a string of Conservative gains means that it is now possible to travel from Abergavenny to Aberconwy without leaving a Conservative-held constituency.
In Wales, people voted to get Brexit done. This is not the end of Brexit, but it is perhaps the end of the beginning. We now enter a transition period phase to prepare for our new relationship with the EU. Although we will have left, our trading relationship will remain the same until new negotiations take place. The UK Government has made it clear that we want a deal to continue to trade with the EU with no tariffs, quotas or other barriers in place. With goodwill on both sides, I am confident that this can be achieved by the end of this year. Indeed, in December, a senior official of the German Government was quoted saying:
'As far as the trade agreement is concerned, I believe it is evident that what is known in Brussels as an off-the-shelf agreement—in other words a standard agreement that has already been negotiated in another context—can be negotiated relatively quickly with the United Kingdom'.
We can then deliver the benefits of Brexit, taking Britain out of EU laws, striking our own free trade deals around the globe, ending the jurisdiction of the European courts, controlling our own taxes and borders, and so on. Deputy Presiding Officer, now is the time to put the rancour of division of the past behind us. Now is the time to focus on delivering a bright and exciting future for Britain, strong and free. I support the motion. I think that two consecutive Prime Ministers of our party, Mr David Cameron and Theresa May, have sacrificed their honourable office to achieve this for the will of this great country, and this great country will survive and thrive, and it will certainly become Great Britain once again.
Can I call on the Counsel General and the Brexit Minister, Jeremy Miles?
Dirprwy Lywydd, I am delighted to see that a healthy sense of irony is alive and well on the Conservative benches. Week in, week out, month in, month out, as I and colleagues here on the Government benches have presented statements on Brexit or debates on Brexit, Darren Millar has berated me across the Chamber, saying, 'What's new? What's new?' And yet, today, I look at the order paper and I see a motion in the name of the very same Darren Millar on the topic of Brexit. And I'm sure there'll be plenty of Members in the Chamber, listening with respect to his speech, saying, 'What's new?'
But today—I hope Members will forgive me—I want to look forward not back. We don't want to replay the arguments of the last three years. So, as a guide to our future approach to the negotiations with the European Union, we have just published a document that sets out our approach. In that document we are absolutely clear that we accept that, given the UK Government has the principal responsibility for international relations, the Prime Minister has a mandate from that election to pursue the path he advocated. So, we are leaving the European Union this week and heading towards an economic relationship based on a free trade agreement.
We, as a Government, accept that our vision of a Norway plus model, more or less, of the UK participating in the single market and the customs union, is no longer tenable. So, you will not hear us arguing for that proposition in the future, but we will continue to argue on the basis of the evidence and in the interests of the most prosperous future for Wales after Brexit for an economic relationship with the EU to be given top priority, and for this relationship to be based on minimising the non-tariff barriers as well as eliminating tariffs and quotas. And that, unless negotiations prove otherwise, is likely to require close regulatory alignment with the European Union, at least so far as goods and agri-foods are concerned.
The other matter that will now need to be grappled with is the future of the Sewel convention. This Senedd's rejection of the legislative consent motion was very significant, and the decision by the UK Parliament equally significant in pressing ahead with the withdrawal agreement Bill unamended, despite the fact that both the Scottish Parliament and the Northern Ireland Assembly also had voted in the same way. So, where does that leave the Sewel convention?
Sewel is a creation of devolution; an attempt to reconcile an outdated theory of untrammelled parliamentary sovereignty with a recognition of the democratic legitimacy of the devolved legislatures. This sort of constitutional halfway house is the product of an unwritten constitution and an unresolved political tension, where pragmatism eclipses principle when it comes to constitutional affairs.
We want to see a much clearer, tighter definition of Sewel. But without a thorough overhaul of our constitutional arrangements, we have to recognise the possibility of the UK Parliament consciously acting in a way that defies the will of the devolved legislatures. Until that reform comes, that power must only be used in extremis. So, while we regret that the UK Government did not do more to meet our legitimate concerns about the potential impact of the Bill on this Senedd's competence, we welcome its recognition that proceeding without consent in this case is wholly exceptional, and we will hold them to that and work with them, we hope, to try to strengthen Sewel to make sure that this time is the last.
Therefore, Deputy Presiding Officer, what do we want? I'd like to emphasise two things. Firstly, we want a meaningful role in the negotiations on the future relationship with the EU, and indeed in the negotiations on other free trade agreements that could have an impact on devolved competence. This should reflect the 'not normally' principle of Sewel. That is, when a devolved competence is at stake, the UK Government should not put forward views on negotiating positions without first agreeing those with the devolved institutions.
In the meeting of the joint ministerial committee on European negotiations yesterday, although there was some progress on the process to include the devolved institutions, the central principle that I've just mentioned hasn't been accepted. I can't tell you that I'm confident that it will be accepted, but we do hope that the UK Government will now move on this, and will do so before the next meeting of the joint ministerial committee.
Secondly, we would like to see meaningful consideration given to constitutional change to ensure that the UK is not destroyed as a result of leaving the European Union. The result of the 2016 referendum, to a great extent, was an expression of rage from communities about the lack of control they felt over their own destiny. It would be a disaster if it led to the centralisation of power more and more in the square mile around Big Ben.
The UK Government and the Welsh Government both want the UK to succeed, and the Welsh Government believes that it needs to be reformed if it is to survive. We have introduced a sensible plan to root devolution in amending the constitution more broadly in our document 'Reforming our Union'. Also, the UK Government has a manifesto commitment to establish a commission on the constitution, and we hope and expect that the devolved institutions will be fully included in that process.
That's why, Deputy Llywydd, in our amendment, in recognising the opportunities that leaving the European Union will provide, including the potential to secure a closer relationship with other nations who trade, and to recognise clearly that we are leaving the European Union, we have focused in this amendment on the constitutional challenges that will arise. We must all now turn our attention to those. Therefore, I ask this Senedd to support the amendment and to reject the motion.
Thank you. I call on Andrew R.T. Davies to reply to the debate.
Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I congratulate everyone who has contributed to the debate this afternoon and created quite a robust debate, to say the least. I will just say something, if I may, about procedure. I do think it's unfortunate that, when someone intervenes on a speech, they walk straight out of the Chamber. The point of the debate is obviously to engage—
That's already been covered in Darren Millar's comments, and I will take further action. It doesn't need to be rehearsed again.
Well, I appreciate that, Deputy Presiding Officer, but I am entitled to say what I think, I think. And I do want to—
Well, you're going over old ground, actually.
—draw people's attention to it. [Interruption.] I do want to draw people's attention to that fact.
I do also want to reflect on the comments of David Rees and Dai Lloyd. I do think they made very pertinent comments, in that Friday, for many people, as Neil Hamilton highlighted, will be the culmination of a lifetime's work in politics and public life. But for many people as well, who have different views, they will have a very different feeling on Friday night. If we are to bring this country together, it is not about triumphalism. It is about accepting what the referendum gave us in 2016—a clear instruction—delivering on that instruction and opening up the opportunities.
And I do think those points were well made here today, because it is about making sure that we take the country with us. And one thing I would say about the new Government in Westminster—and I appreciate there might be some jeering from the other political parties—in every single Member that I have met of that Government since the election, every single one is committed to making sure this country moves forward as one, rather than disadvantaging one group over another. And that might sound lofty political speech, but it is a fact that what we want to make sure is that the country does move forward as one, and the wrongs of the past are corrected, so that people who do feel left behind can feel part of the process. [Interruption.] I'll happily take the intervention off you, Joyce, if you want to make an intervention. I'll gladly take the intervention, because I can hear you chundering away.
The Brexit Minister highlighted at the start of his speech 'What's new?' What's different in this motion that's before the house this afternoon? And what is new is that we are on the cusp of leaving the European Union. For three years nearly, there was constant debate, argument, discussion, there were roadblocks put in place to try and stop that. As the opener of the debate, Darren Millar, highlighted in his speech: time and time again, process was used to try and block what was a completely democratic exercise, an exercise that was brought forward before the people, and said that this would be a binding referendum—it wasn't an advisory referendum, it was a binding referendum—and that Governments, whoever they might be, should act on that decision. And Wales, obviously, as we've heard from many people—Mark Reckless touched on the point—Wales and other parts of the United Kingdom, cumulatively, gave us that majority vote to leave the European Union.
And this is about doing things differently. This is about, as Mark highlighted in his contribution, saying that where the European Union used to sit in arbitration on plans that might come forward—the rural development plan, for example, structural funds—that the United Kingdom and the devolved administrations do have a role to play in that decision-making process and shaping the future.
And I think it is a fair observation from the Government bench and other backbenchers here today that there is considerable work to do on improving the constitutional settlement within the United Kingdom. That is a very fair point to make, because we are moving into territory that is unchartered, shall we say, because, obviously, we have been in territory with the European Union being the final arbitrator on much of the work that this institution does for the last 45 years. That should be a sense of excitement, a sense of challenge for us here in public life to reach out and grab those opportunities.
As Janet Finch-Saunders, as Mohammad Asghar, as Mark Isherwood highlighted in their contribution today—the opportunities are limitless if we grab them and we actually start enacting them, rather than just thinking, 'This is what we used to have. This is what we've got to protect.' Well, the past we can learn from—correct—but we can shape the future, and that's what certainly we all go into public life for. And that's what's exciting about going forward now after Friday. The legal documents are in place, the date is set in stone, and we will leave the European Union.
It is perfectly fair and reasonable to point out that there is still a lot of water to go under these bridges, especially on trade negotiations and trade discussions—everyone accepts that—but ultimately, the Brexit referendum was not about putting one down over another. I personally want to see as strong a relationship as we can with our friends on the European continent, but I want to see the decisions in this country made in this country, whether that be here in Cardiff or whether that be in the Parliament in Westminster. And that to me is what binds this country of the United Kingdom together.
And I do hope that, with the sentiment that now is expressed, with the new mandate that's in place, we will take those opportunities that have been outlined this afternoon and we will move forward in a positive discourse to make sure that we ultimately do achieve what many people in that referendum felt—that their voice, after 45 years, hadn't been listened to, and they wanted to reset the clock and change the direction.
This isn't about triumphalism, this isn't about putting one sector of society down against another sector of society—this is about democracy. Democracy spoke, it will be enacted. Let's make sure that we take the opportunities that are presented to us now. And that's why I would hope that the Government would withdraw their amendment and accept the motion that's before the house tonight, as the leader of the Brexit Party pointed out, because I fail to see, and I didn't hear the Brexit Minister actually contradict anything within the motion, or point out anything that he found at fault with the motion. And I would hope that the Government would reconsider and support this motion, as they have time and time again called for support on motions that strengthen the voice of this institution when it speaks with one.
The proposal is to agree the motion unamended. Does any Member object? [Objection.] I will therefore defer the vote until voting time.