Thank you, sir—a pleasure to speak under your chairmanship, David Melding. First Minister, thank you for your statement. Thank you very, very much for stating that the Brexit debate is over, but it's very important to bring what is necessary onto the statue book in an orderly and effective manner. I strongly agree, and I think there was an apparent invitation to support or at least be consulted about that, and certainly that's something I'd be very happy to do, and was pleased with what you said on that aspect.

Could I also say, on that, that I'm often criticising you and sometimes others for legislating differently in Wales for the sake of it, as I put it? I think it's incumbent on me to recognise, in this particular area, that that hasn't happened in terms of almost all of what you've done with the EU exit legislation. You referenced the 51 Welsh statutory instruments we've made, and I think 158 to which we've given UK consent, and I have been impressed by the pragmatic and sensible approach that's generally been taken in this area. I think it's partly pressure of work and not wanting to redo all of that, but also, I think, a sensible approach. Mick Antoniw and his committee have worked very, very hard on this, and I'd like to put on record my thanks to them.

You said on the curriculum Bill that it was to enable changes to be in place in 2022. Are you, as a Government, ruling out pushing back that deadline? Is it still possible there may be a change to that, or are you setting your face against it? To bring this forward I think is important, because in some ways I find it quite a difficult Bill. I've been rereading some of the debates about the 1988 Act and the curriculum then, and, interestingly, it was Margaret Thatcher who was trying to keep discretion for teachers and limit the extent to which the Bill was prescriptive, and many in the Department for Education who were wanting to go the other way, and the outcome was a compromise. But they were specifying particular things that had to happen in areas at the time in the curriculum, whereas the approach here is a much more general one, and concepts that are much harder to pin down into legislative language that will bite. I do just think it is quite difficult for teachers and schools to look at that legislation and then practically how is that legislation going to bind them. I know most of this will happen through guidance and them being helped through it, but, if anyone actually breaks the law, how will you know and what will the enforcement ever be for that?

COVID-19 has affected huge numbers of people in absolutely extraordinary ways that have made such difference to people's lives, but I think also it's made a significant difference to Welsh Government. Of course, I understand you redeploying civil servants elsewhere, and some legislation now can't get through. I asked earlier only for the same understanding to be extended to the UK Government, but I certainly extend it to your Government. But also you had a period of legislative time and could quite properly be expected to bring these Bills in. Now, you will not be able to, and that—for you and for your Government with the majority you have—is a loss, and I think we need to empathise with that. 

Ken Skates, and the Bill he's been doing particularly on bus services I think is unfortunate—I'm not sure whether or not I agree with the overall approach, but I've been engaging with it, and certainly he has worked very hard with the committee in developing it with scrutiny. And now it seems, unlike the other Bills that are published in draft and may be taken up in the next Assembly, depending on the results of the election, this one seems to be being lost. A few aspects of it you're able to do in other ways, but what about some of those other principles? Do you expect them to come back, or is the uncertainty for bus services because of what's happened with COVID is so great that it's just not possible to say for now?

I was struck, talking to Lord Thomas about the justice commission, by the emphasis he put on the Renting Homes (Wales) Bill and commencing that Bill from 2016 and the huge practical on-the-ground difference that will make for many people in Wales. Often, when we talk about legislating differently, it may have an effect at margin for a few people; this will have a huge impact for so many people, and I just support what the First Minister says on the importance of the scrutiny in getting this right, particularly when you're amending a Bill, a complex Bill, before it has even been commenced. 

You mentioned there was other important development work that is under way, including work on reforms to residential leasehold and commonhold. I'm aware of a very substantial programme of work from the Law Commission in this area. I wasn't clear if you were referring to that or whether there's a separate programme of work under way in Welsh Government. The Law Commission work has a small section early on about Welsh devolution and some ambiguity and uncertainty about the extent of devolution, given the cross-cutting themes of their work, but the pragmatic assumption that seemed to run through it was it would be done on an England-and-Wales basis. Do you expect that you would want to recommend consent to much of their work programme? Do you know more about it than has been published, or are you looking to develop a Wales-only approach in this extraordinarily complex area?

Two other areas you mentioned I think were going to be done by statutory instrument. Third-party puppy sales: I know a number of members of my group will be very pleased to hear that you're taking further action on that. And also, in terms of the banning of smoking, there had been some suggestion it was going to be a far wider measure, but, to the extent that you've mentioned hospital grounds, school grounds and local authority play areas, certainly I personally have no objection to those areas being included, and am pleased that it's not a wider programme. 

Finally, can I just refer to land transaction tax? We spoke at length as the Bill was going through about potential different models of scrutiny, and I was arguing that the rate should be on the face of the Bill and you were strongly against that, but you proffered a number of other mechanisms of scrutiny that would substitute for that. Do you agree it's sort of unsatisfactory that this was announced at a press conference by the finance Minister yesterday, isn't being considered even as a statement today, and we then have the two months of recess? Okay, you've lifted the threshold, but there are also some quite complex legislative options about how you may do that in terms of the second homes and not carrying through the exemption to that category. I can think of a number of different ways in which that might be done, and I'm just unclear how the Government is using the legislation to attain its goal. It really would have been more satisfactory if we had had a proper debate and discussion about that here.