Extracts from Wales Assembly proceedings - Jun 11
|
Extract from Wales Assembly: Questions to the First Minister Leanne
Wood AM: I was half expecting this question to be withdrawn by
the Tories after shocking figures emerged showing the potential
impact of Wales's exit from the European Union upon our poorest
communities. Perhaps they'll just dismiss as scaremongering the
analysis that has shown that, based on comparisons between
the...Request free trial
Extract from Wales
Assembly: Questions to the First Minister
Leanne Wood
AM: I was half expecting this
question to be withdrawn by the Tories after shocking
figures emerged showing the potential impact of Wales's
exit from the European Union upon our poorest
communities. Perhaps they'll just dismiss as
scaremongering the analysis that has shown that, based on
comparisons between the UK Government spending on
economic development and the distribution of EU
structural funds, Wales could lose £2.3 billion over six
years, if the new shared prosperity fund is
distributed in the same way as the Government allocates
current spending on economic affairs. This was equating
to handing every Londoner a cheque for over £200 and
taking away £700 from every single Welsh person. The
Rhondda, where I represent, cannot afford to lose any
money, let alone this much money. So, how are you going
to prevent this nightmare scenario from unfolding?
Mark Drakeford AM (First
Minister of Wales): Well, I thank the Member for
drawing attention to that report. Time and time again, on
the floor of this National Assembly—and with support of
Plaid Cymru Members as well, I know—we have said that we
will not sit idly by and allow a shared prosperity fund to become
an excuse for sharing resources that come to Wales today
with other parts of the United Kingdom who do not qualify
for it as we do on the basis of our need. A Barnett
approach to sharing out money is completely unacceptable
to us, because Barnett does not reflect need, and the
money we get through the European Union comes to Wales
because it is assessed on the basis of needs that we have
here. We will continue to make that case wherever we have
the opportunity. We will make it alongside the Federation
of Small Businesses, who recently produced a report
saying exactly that, alongside the all-party
parliamentary group chaired by Stephen Kinnock, who produced a
report saying exactly that, and we will need the support
of Members across this Chamber who put the needs of Wales
first, to help us in that effort to make sure that when
there is money that is available for regional economic
development the other side of the European Union, that
Wales continues, as we were promised, not to lose out by
a single penny.
Extract from Wales Assembly statement on the implications of the UK Government's immigration proposals for Welsh public services and the wider economy
Huw Irranca-Davies
AM:...But also, what does concern me in
the statement today is what seems to be something of a tin ear
from the UK Government. We see very clearly that Welsh Government
has put forward some very constructive, tangible, meaningful
suggestions of how Welsh needs, in terms of immigration—not
departing a million miles from what the UK Government is trying
to do, not destroying their proposals, but actually looking for
some flexibility that would reflect, in the national scheme, the
Welsh needs. But there's been a tin ear to it, nothing has been
taken on, and that is very disappointing, I have to say. It does
not bode well for discussions around the shared prosperity fund, which we're all
waiting to hear outcomes on as well.
So, a couple of questions, Minister. One is: could I urge him not to give up the argument, the discussion with UK Ministers? Because on some of these areas that are not bolted down, such as the £30,000 limit, if we keep on pushing, perhaps that tin ear will crumble and we will have some leeway on that. Because we do need a UK national scheme, not a scheme for here, a scheme for there, a scheme for everywhere else; we need a UK national scheme that can reflect what the devolved Governments are asking for. Could I also ask what does this mean, going forward, in terms of the discussions around reforms of UK inter-ministerial, inter-governmental arrangements? Because this tin ear approach from the UK Government surely, again, doesn't bode well, not simply in terms of the shared prosperity fund, but general aspects to do with future trade discussions on a wide range of things. Surely, they actually have to listen to what Scotland and Northern Ireland and what Wales are saying. We have vested interests. There are some, I appreciate, who will say this is the equivalent, in a sense, of what I've heard some ardent Brexiteers argue about the Welsh lamb sector, which is, 'There's no answer to it. If we go into a 'no deal' situation, Welsh lamb will be trashed, quite simply. But, hey, you know, it's a price worth paying.' We seem to be in a similar situation here, with the UK Government saying, 'Well, we understand your concerns, but we're not going to listen to you.' So, we need to get beyond that. What does this mean for those inter-governmental relations?
Wales Assembly debate
on The Shared Prosperity Fund |