Thank you very much, Llywydd, and I thank the Minister for the statement. It's crucial, of course, that there is a specific framework for rural support in Wales, with specific measures to support rural development in order to provide for the viability of our rural areas. In doing so, it's also important that the Government's approach delivers across the aims and objectives outlined in the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015, which are the environmental goals, but also the economic, social and cultural goals, and I would hope that the RDP would reflect that cross-section of ambition that each and every one of us has, I hope, in Wales.

I share the Minister's disappointment on the fact that the Conservatives have not kept their word on funding. There is valid concern that there is a risk that this Government will also find itself not adhering to your part of the funding deal. Now, I welcome the fact that you've committed, in your statement, to spending the whole of the RDP budget for 2014-2020. I do think it's very ironic that a Conservative involved in this debate has asked you to keep to your level of RDP funding for future years, but that is a valid request. The Welsh Government should be contributing on average £40 million, which is what would have been the joint domestic funding. Now, I want to hear you saying clearly that that will be a commitment from Government in moving forward, because if you don't do that, then you are doing the same as the Conservatives by ensuring that Wales will lose out as a result of leaving the EU.

Your statement does say that there will be a further evaluation completed, and you have made mention of that, but you've not provided us with any detail on what that evaluation will be and what it will evaluate. I assume that you will say that it won't be an evaluation of the impact and value for money for the whole RDP. It perhaps will only look at specific projects, and perhaps you could give us more information on that. Will it be an independent evaluation or something that the Government itself undertakes? Because if we are basing the future approach on the model from the past, then it is important that we learn lessons from the past and it's important that those lessons are objectively assessed outwith Government, and I'm on the record in saying that I also support a broader independent review of the past RDP. So, we need more clarity on your intentions in that regard, please.

The point on governance is valid. We do have the current programme monitoring committee for the RDP, and there is concern that transparency and accountability will be eroded unless there is a corresponding body in the context of the future programme, and it's an important principle, I think, that stakeholders should be a central and meaningful part of that process of managing how this funding is administered and used.

Now, you refer to the fact that this will be the first in a series of consultations undertaken in the summer—well, I hope it'll be more meaningful than some of the consultations that we've had in the past. Because you will know, with the White Paper on agriculture, many people feel that very little has changed, although we're on our third consultation. You said that it was important that we speak to stakeholders; I would say that it's important to listen to stakeholders too. Perhaps we need to do a little more of that in future years.

Finally, I just want to refer to something that you said in your statement.