Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru

If you require amplification, that's also available on the headsets via channel 0. Can I remind Members to turn their mobile phones off or on silent and any other equipment that may interfere with the broadcasting equipment? There are no scheduled fire alarms this afternoon, so if one does take place, please follow the directions of the ushers to a safe location. Do any Members wish to declare an interest at this point in time?

I'm not sure it's pertinent to this.

Actually, I don't think it is on this one. Okay. We've received apologies from David Melding, and we are expecting Suzy Davies to arrive later during the meeting, but she is in another meeting at this point in time. We've also received apologies from Joyce Watson. There is no substitute for Joyce in this meeting.

So, we move on to our next item of business, which is a scrutiny session with the Minister for International Relations and the Welsh Language. Can I welcome the Minister, Eluned Morgan, to this afternoon's meeting? Minister, would you like to introduce your officials for the Record, please?

We've got Andrew Gwatkin, who is director of international relations in the Welsh Government, and we've got Emma Edworthy, who's deputy director for international trade.

Thank you for that. We'll move straight into questions, if that's okay with you. And the first one is a very straightforward and very simple one, I suppose, because you have indicated in the previous meeting that you hope that the strategy would be put to Cabinet in May, with further details and confirmation probably before the end of the summer. Have you managed to meet your May deadline of submitting a paper of your draft strategy to the Cabinet?

I've been in consultation the whole time; this is very much a cross-Government international strategy. So, I've been having bilateral discussions with them periodically; I have sent copies to the people who are mostly engaged with this. This week, the draft copy will go out to members, ready for discussion in Cabinet next week. And, yes, we're looking forward to the publication of the document before the summer recess.

So, we're about a month behind schedule.

I think we're more or less on target. I think this is exactly where I expected to be at this point. So, I think we are—. It's been very much an iterative process, not just in terms of the Cabinet members but with the broader public and people who are engaged in international matters within Wales.

So, as you know, we've had a very comprehensive consultation exercise. We started off with the public. There's been a lot of interaction on social media, for example, where we've asked people to feed in what their views are in terms of developing the international strategy. We have asked Wales Arts International to co-ordinate the response from the arts community, for example. We've asked Global Wales to co-ordinate the response in terms of higher education. We've asked the Wales Centre for International Affairs to co-ordinate the civic society side of things. So, all of that has been fed into building up this international strategy, and now we're just pulling that together. And actually, it's just being tested out now in terms of—. The document is ready; we're just testing it out. And, of course, we've had the task and finish group who have been key to helping us develop the document. They've had sight of the document and they're giving their feedback as well.

Can I just clarify: your document is ready but you're testing it out, so is it going to Cabinet this week for next week's consideration? And if 'yes', are we still in line for a launch of the strategy to the wider public and to Members of the Assembly before the summer recess?

Absolutely. Yes.

Alun.

I'm interested in—. Thank you very much for that, Minister; that's very comprehensive. I'm interested in understanding the process that you followed because that's not as important as the strategy itself, but it is of significant interest to this committee in terms of who said what. And, of course, what is really interesting is what you didn't accept as part of the contributions, you didn't accept as part of that overall strategy. I presume that all the contributions will be published in line with established Government procedures, but can I ask you if you could ask your officials—I don't think we need to spend time this afternoon on this—but if you could ask your officials to write to the committee with an outline of the feedback that you received in terms of—? You've mentioned social media and you've mentioned a number of other individuals you've approached. So, it would be useful, I think, if the committee could understand that process more fully when it comes to examining what the strategy actually says. 

I don't think it's an approach that's very common in Welsh Government. I've deliberately tried to go outside the normal channels of consultation to try and broaden the discussion. So, what you probably won't get is the formal response in the way that when there is a formal consultation, there is an expectation that this will be responded to in this way. I very much try to keep an open door and to have a very informal approach where good ideas are taken on board. And we'll see from the response whether—. It's not going to be to everybody's taste, clearly, and one of the things that I've tried to do in the strategy is to understand that if you want to make an impact, you have to focus. You can't be all things to all people and that means making choices, and that means that some people will be unhappy with some of the choices that I will make.

But that's the role of Government, isn't it, to actually set priorities? And that's what I've tried to do, whilst understanding that, actually, to make this work it has to be owned by everyone. This is not just about Government selling Wales abroad; it's about how we engage the broader civic society in telling the same message and giving the same message. That's when we will be impactful, is if we're all singing from the same hymn sheet.  

But I did ask you a question that you haven't answered. I quite agree, Minister; I think all of us on all sides of this table have read Government strategies that, frankly, are less inspiring than perhaps the writer may wish them to be, seeking to placate rather than to drive. And so, I'm very, very happy to hear of a Minister who wants to take decisions and isn't afraid of upsetting some apple carts—that is a part of Government. But I did ask you about the process by which you arrived at this strategy, and whether you'd write to the committee outlining some of the processes you've followed. That's particularly important, of course, if you're going outside of what the committee might expect Government to do.   

I'm very happy to give you a list of exactly what we've done to engage people; that's absolutely fine. I'm not sure if we can commit to giving the responses by everyone because you'll be overwhelmed, frankly, by the number of responses. I think in terms of social media, for example, how many responses did we have? 

Nearly 400 responses via social media, and we've had, as the Minister's mentioned, the co-ordination of civic society, and so there's been an awful lot of input. But we can certainly outline the process, if the Minister's happy. 

I think the committee's up for a challenge. 

Okay, well—. 

I think we'll accept the challenge. The Member has indicated that, clearly, if possible, if it's not too problematic for the Government, I think it should be available to the committee for consideration because, clearly, we want to understand where the strategy comes from. And if we're going to ask questions as to why you've reached certain positions, then that information would help us understand that. So, I don't think we're worried about the committee's commitment to it; we'll manage it.  

But then, you also indicated, you talked about an event on 10 May, which I think was at Aberystwyth University, where you actually outlined quite a broad area of inclusion. In a sense, I suppose the question we should be asking is: have you got the resources to actually deliver such a broad area, because that is going to be a crucial consideration? 

It is very much a cross-Government strategy and, of course, my department is not going to have a huge amount of resources compared to some of the other departments in Welsh Government, and that's why what's key is that we harness the resources across Government, so that, for example, when you're talking about health, the international activities in relation to health, we co-ordinate that where possible with a Welsh Government-focused approach, perhaps focusing on particular regions where possible. But also it's got to be beyond the Welsh Government. So, for example, I'm very, very keen to see the UK Government do a lot more for Wales, but I think if we were being fair, we perhaps needed to give them clarity in terms of what we want them to sell. That's what I'm hoping that this strategy will do, is to give absolute clarity to them in terms of the messages we want them to give. And once we've got that clarity, I will be demanding a lot more, not just from the UK Government, but some of the agencies that work for the UK Government—so your British Council and other organisations as well—just asking how are they supporting Wales in terms of their endeavours, and just making sure that we're getting at least 5 per cent of what we'd hoped to gain. But I do think that it's fair that the answer that they would give is 'What do you want us to sell?' Well, from now on, there will be absolute clarity in terms of what we want them to sell. 

I appreciate that, and we will want to come back to you as to perhaps how you can assure yourself and the Welsh people as to how we can achieve some of those points, and we'll probably be touching on those things, and the national health service, clearly, in a few of the questions coming down the line this afternoon. But it's about the resourcing. You indicated that it's not just your department; it's across the Welsh Government's departments as a totality to deliver this, and I suppose, again, the same question is: have you got sufficient resources across all departments to be able to deliver on your proposed strategy? I know it's going to be a discussion coming up in the Cabinet, but it's crucial, if you're putting the strategy forward, that everybody in the other departments have bought into this. 

Yes, and what we've been doing over a series of months now is making sure that everybody is lined up in terms of what their responsibilities are in relation to this strategy. There is quite a lot of international activity being done in various different departments, but it hasn't been brought together in quite this way in the past. So, that is something that will be different in relation to this strategy. And, of course, we have to tailor what we're able to do to the budget that we have, and we are still living in an age of austerity, so, obviously, there's always room to do more. So, if we were given more resources, we could do more, and I will play my part in making the case for resources to be given to this area. 

Alun. 

Well, I presume that the resources that you have available to you are the resources of the Government as well, in the sense of, in terms of the economy, you will have Ken Skates and his department delivering for you in terms of other areas, and with the environment, for example, you will have Lesley Griffiths and her department as well. So, I'm sure it's not just a matter of the resources you have available to yourself in your departmental headings. But, like the Chair, I was interested in the speech you made in Aberystwyth. I saw reports of it; I haven't read the script. But from what I read, and what was reported, you focused on trade, on external relationships, education, Wales for Africa, the foundational economy, tourism, healthcare and the language. I was expecting technology to be there, and I probably wasn't expecting the foundational economy and healthcare to be there. So, I was wondering what is your thinking behind the inclusion and exclusion of topics like that.

Well, I think probably what you didn't get from that speech in Aberystwyth is the prioritising that will be in the document. So, running through the document, there will be three key themes—sustainability is going to be core to it, technology is going to be another key issue that we're looking at, and creativity is the other thing. So, those are three pillars that will run through the entire document. So, technology, I can assure you, will be very much at the forefront. 

And one of the things that I've been looking to do is to see how we can Brexit-proof this international strategy. It's a really difficult time to be writing an international strategy, when you have no idea what the relationship with your nearest neighbours is going to be. And, so, what I've been trying to, in particular in relation to inward investment, is to say 'Look, where are the areas that we have genuine global leadership? Where are the areas where, irrespective of what happens with Brexit, we will not be impacted in those specific areas?' I've been looking at what those areas are, and technology is key. They are some of the areas that I'm looking at, but it will be much more specific than that. 

Okay. So, what about the foundational economy and healthcare?

Well, they are important in the sense that, with healthcare, we have something to sell to the world. I think that some of the prudent healthcare that we're engaged with—. We've got relationships with the World Health Organization; they've asked us to partner and to be leaders, to tell other people throughout the world what we're doing. So, I don't think I would see the foundational economy as being the driving force of what we're selling internationally.

I'm sorry, but it's your speech, so I was just wondering what lay behind it. I don't want to spend too much time on this, but, of course, in terms of healthcare, we've got some of the worst health stats in the world, so I'm pretty sure that we've got more to learn from others, possibly, than they have from us. But we'll look at that.

But I'm interested in the choices you made in the speech in Aberystwyth, and how that reflects your thinking in terms of developing this strategy. Because what you said this afternoon, in terms of creativity, in terms of culture, in terms of technology, is what we would expect and anticipate. And what I'm interested in is the way in which you seek to enable the office, for example, in San Francisco to be able to link in to the major technology corporations that exist in that region, and then to create a relationship that will benefit us in terms of policy at home. I'm just interested in understanding what your thinking is there.

Part of what we're planning to do is to—. We've got to understand what does Wales look like to the outside world. And, if we were honest, we'd have to say that, actually, for huge swathes of the world, they've never even heard of Wales. So, we're starting off from where we have to actually tell the story of Wales, and what is the story we want to tell. And part of what we're doing here is trying to create the image of Wales that we want to sell. And some of that image—. One of the things that I'm very keen to look at is linking in where we have genuine global leadership in relation to, for example, the fact we have the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015. It's a unique law, which is not done anywhere else; everybody's intrigued by this. But also, linking that in with the fact that, actually, we have real global expertise in things like compound semiconductors, for example. It's not an image of Wales that people might expect. So, by selling ourselves as world leaders in compound semiconductors, we are changing the way people look at Wales. And it won't be relevant just for that particular sector, therefore—it is changing the way people look at Wales. So, despite the fact that we're going to be focusing in on three specific areas, I think the narrative will attract people to look at Wales. And in terms of how we interact, for example, with Silicon Valley, we're already starting to look at how exactly we're going to develop those relationships. We have some Welsh experts in Silicon Valley that we're working with, to get us into these places. And we're already planning a visit there next year, to really promote this new international strategy in areas where we think we've got global leadership.

Huw, on this point.

I'm really interested in how you use the existing networks to try and attract additional inward investment. We're all familiar with the mantra that we need to grow our own small and medium-sized enterprises, and so on—and that's absolutely true—but we also need significant inward investment as well; the two go hand in hand. I'm going to be parochial for a moment, but if you look back 40 years ago—a little bit more than 40 years—when Sony first came to Pencoed, it came on the back of a relationship between our royal family, curiously, and the Japanese, and so on. That's the way it worked, over a dinner table conversation. But the fact is that they've been here through good times and bad, and stayed at it, and they have those connections. So, when you have delegations, when you have discussions with the Japanese ambassador and the consulate and so on, as you recently did, are you using those connections? Because some of these companies—some of the Japanese companies—there are one or two other companies that they speak to about investment in the UK. Do you know that—? Is part of your role now understanding that, with Ken Skates, the economy Minister, and others, to say, 'These are the key companies that open doors for us'—into Japan, into China, into wherever it is?

Yes, and I think one of the things we're trying to do—. Because actually they can go anywhere, these companies, so what is it that's unique, why would they come here, particularly in an age of Brexit? So, it's quite a hard sell, inward investment, if we're honest, at the moment, which is why we've got to look for where we have genuine global leadership.

But we've had difficult decisions on inward investment in this country in difficult times—Raspberry Pi came back to Sony. We have the skills, the expertise but also relationships.

And I think that's where we're going to be focusing a lot more on—is on how do we use the Welsh diaspora, for example, who've got expertise in these areas, to help us get an in into some of these organisations. And that's something we're already working on in various countries. I think one of the things we've got to be clear about is we can't do everything, so that's why we're going to be really, really focused on trying to become experts in specific areas.

You mentioned, absolutely and I think rightly, Minister, the idea of not simply this being a Government effort but using others out there. We have companies throughout all parts of Wales that are the experts in the networks internationally in their field, so it's how we use them as well. Do we have that detail of understanding and do we have the cultural understanding that goes along with that about different countries and how we open the doors in different countries? 

One of the things we're keen to do in terms of the international strategy is to make sure we've got a comprehensive database of what's going on and who's doing what and where the experts are, and then to leverage those. And you're absolutely right; it's much better, I think, for other people to sell us rather than Government selling us in some circumstances. So, if you go to China, you have to have Government selling you, but if you go to Silicon Valley, it may be better that you have other companies talking about how great you are rather than the Government. So, what we need to be is absolutely flexible in terms of how we respond. But you're absolutely right; it's using those channels where we have expertise already. 

Go on, Huw—very quickly, because I want to move on to the NHS as well.

To take it on to the issue of the Wales overseas offices, what's your assessment overall of how they're currently performing, the 21 that are there? Well, let's start with that—what's your assessment overall? How are they performing?

I have been looking at the performance and I think what we've done now is to bring somebody in to just be much clearer in terms of what is our expectation of them, are they performing, are they delivering.

What's the level of seniority of that individual, who I understand has an oversight role?

We do have—. Maybe I can ask Andrew to go into detail, because this is more of a management—.

We have now a head of performance management for the overseas offices, directly managing all of those 21 offices with monthly calls, metrics, a pipeline—monitoring that consistently. In that way, we understand how those offices interact with our effort here in Wales. So, we're working very much with the Minister for Economy and Transport's team to ensure that any inward investment is landed, and similarly that those offices overseas are supporting Welsh export, either directly or through the trade missions. So, he reports directly to me within the team. We have weekly conversations about how we're doing in terms of the offices to bring that performance up, to make sure that they're an integral part of our team.

So, if, Andrew, I were to ask you—. That's good, thank you, and it's reassuring that he's reporting directly to you. That's why I asked about the issue of the level of seniority, on the assumption then that you and the Minister can then decide to take action if there's underperformance in a prompt way. You should, then, have an idea of how those offices are currently performing.

Yes, we do.

Is that something that you can share with us?

I can talk in general terms about the pipeline that we have in terms of FDI, I can talk about some of the deals that have already been done in terms of the export support. So, since the beginning of the year, we've had, in terms of business wins—. Welsh businesses with Welsh Government intervention have declared that they've won over £25 million in terms of business wins, and the offices have been involved in those trade missions and involved in supporting those companies. Then, in terms of the inward investment pipeline, which we are monitoring, as I say, on a monthly basis with the teams, we have got 51 projects at the moment in the pipeline that are possible to proceed, and 28 that are probable and going to proceed. So, those are different categorisations of the stage of those projects and the work that we're doing with them, and the offices are involved to a greater and lesser degree in a number of those projects—not all of them; some come through DIT, but some come through our offices too.

I wonder, Chair, whether it's possible to ask you to consider how much of this you can share and how granulated the detail might be. Obviously, there's a limit to what you'd want to present to us, but the more that we've got, the more helpful, because it gives us an idea of how rigorous the monitoring is—how critical the people on the ground understand that your monitoring of them is, and that they have to perform as well. Could you do that on a periodic basis, so that the committee is kept up to speed on how things are going?

Well, I get monthly reports on their performance, and I interrogate that information. I think it's worth just understanding that there has been a shift in emphasis, because of Brexit, to focusing on exports rather than just on inward investment, simply because it is a really tough time to be selling Britain. But, when you see figures like that, you can see that the export market has grown significantly, and I think that there are real opportunities for us to do more. So, I think—. We could maybe do it quarterly. Would that be—?

Quarterly would be fine.

Yes, that would be really good. Chair, sorry: one other small thing, and it's only a request. In light of the news that we had last week over the consultation of the proposed Ford closure, could I simply ask you, Minister, and your team to liaise very closely with Ken in terms of any emerging decisions around inward investment or any other opportunities within the Bridgend area, because—? I'm not asking you to change your entire strategy and so on, but, if there are people in the pipeline there—in technologies and whatever—that would benefit that area, I think it would be a help, not just to the area but to the south Wales and regional economy. Sorry.

You've just made—. He's making a request.

A pitch.

Yes. Before we move off the overseas offices, can you just clarify: clearly, the Brussels office has been a very major hub for your relationships. Have you now identified a different strategy for the Brussels office? Because, whatever is going on in the Conservative Party at this point in time, there's clearly a move towards a 'no deal' departure on 31 October. The First Minister has made that clear. That's why the Welsh Government has changed its position on the future. So, what strategy do you have in place now for your Brussels office, particularly post 31 October?

So, we're obviously very committed to keeping the office. If anything, we are reinforcing the importance of that office. But, obviously, we can't make any final decisions on what that will look like until we know what the future relationship with the EU will be. We have had discussions with other countries about how they work as third countries—Norway, Switzerland—as I know you as a committee have as well.

But I think that there needs to be an understanding that the Brussels office is not just about direct EU institution relationships. There are also huge European networks that we need to keep tabs on—it's a really important intelligence-gathering office that we will be cut out of in future in terms of some of the information that we've automatically had access to as members in the past. So, there will be an expectation, I think, that we'll have to work a bit harder to get access to that information in future.

But, it goes further than that again, and that is to understand that Brussels is an international hub like very few others. So, if you think about the number of lobbyists, it has the second highest number of lobbyists in the world, and there's a reason for that. It's because it’s an influential place. So, the Brussels office is not just about keeping tabs on the institutions and trying to influence those. It's a much broader role where, actually, we get access to major companies that are based in Brussels, where it's easier to access those people.

Obviously, in terms of forging the new relationship with the EU, post Brexit, if it comes to that, then we will want to influence what that relationship will look like, and understanding where Brussels is coming from in those negotiations will be important, and that Brussels office will be crucial for that. 

Based upon what you've just said, and the fact that I think the recent figures show that 60 per cent of our exports still go to the EU—and that's not going to change overnight—I assume you would actually be looking to strengthen the Brussels office, because it's got to work harder for the extra relationships. It's going to need more staff, effectively, or strengthening, at least, to make sure that we are continuing the levels we're at at this moment in time to be able to deliver the services for the Welsh companies and Welsh organisations. So, can I take from your answer that you're seriously considering strengthening the Brussels office to make sure it continues to deliver for the exporters of Wales, which is a large proportion?

So, what we've done is we've reinforced, as a result of Brexit, our offices on the continent of Europe by opening a new office in Paris and two new offices in Germany, which are our main export markets. So, we've reinforced them in country, and I think we're going to have to have a reassessment once we know where we land in terms of Brexit, in terms of that Brussels office. 

But you have said that Brussels is the hub of everything and the second biggest lobbyist place in the world, so I'm assuming you wouldn't want to weaken it, because that's where obviously all the decisions are being made.

We certainly wouldn't want to weaken it. There's no question about that. The question is how do we respond to Brexit. But I do think we have to wait to find to find out exactly what our relationship is in future.  

Go on, Huw. 

Going forward, in a post-Brexit situation, do we have a combined UK position in terms of what our Governments are lobbying on in Brussels? 

Well, at the moment, it's very much high level. That's what the agreement is about. It's about what our future relationship looks like. So, we've got the divorce settlement and we've got the political. 

Absolutely, that's high-level stuff. When it gets to the nitty-gritty, when our electronics or farming sector or anybody else has a difference of opinion, to what extent are you anticipating working hand in glove with UK Ministers out there, in a way that has traditionally been our operation, or are you going to be competing with them and arguing different messages? Or doing both? 

Well, what we're trying to do, obviously, is to make sure that we have the right infrastructure to allow that negotiation to happen. So, if you take agriculture, for example, I think the mechanics of how we discuss agriculture is perhaps more progressed than some of the other areas of negotiation. I don't know, Emma, if you'd like to add to that. What's odd is it's kind of slightly different—the way we're negotiating our trade relationship with Brussels is slightly different from the way we're negotiating our trade relationships with the rest of the world. 

Well, just moving on to trade relationships, we've got several questions on that, as you may have anticipated, and I'll start with Delyth on these areas, particularly in light of some of the comments made by President Trump and other representatives last week. 

Thank you, Chair. Well, Minister, as the Chair has indicated, there's a lot of concern after Donald Trump had suggested last week that the NHS would absolutely be on the table in any future trade agreement. I know that he did step back from that, but I'm not sure how much we can take him at his word on that. You have been—you and Welsh Government have been—adamant that you would not want to see the NHS privatised, and I think that you've said

'there is absolutely no prospect whatsoever of us allowing the Welsh NHS to be part of any negotiation on a new trade deal with the USA. It is simply not going to happen.'

I applaud your tenacity on that, but could you give us some clarity, please, about what mechanisms you could use to ensure that this would not be on the table, because, as far as I understand, the powers over public procurement were handed over as part of the inter-governmental agreement? 

Of course, Trump talked about the NHS. What was almost more concerning to me was the US ambassador talking about it, who should have had a clearer understanding of the importance of the NHS to us in the United Kingdom. Legally, it would be difficult for us to stop, because we don't have a veto over trade, in terms of the Welsh Government. Politically, I think it's extremely unlikely to happen. So, I had a discussion with Liam Fox about it specifically. This is an area that is devolved, and we would be absolutely clear that we would want a say in that. If they were to try and trample on our rights as a devolved area, then we would probably challenge them in court, because we think that they would be stepping on our toes, constitutionally. But I don't think it makes any sense for them to go down that route, because they can sign any trade deal they want—we're the people who are driving the vehicle here, and it would be very difficult for them to gain access if we are actually the people driving the vehicle, which is the situation we have.

In terms of procurement, it is a slightly different issue. What we are absolutely keen to protect is it being a service free at the point of delivery. The procurement issue is slightly separate in as much as, actually, lots of people in Britain use drugs that are from the United States, and I'm not sure if we'd want to stop that either.

So, would you be quite relaxed about more powers over procurement being, potentially, handed over?

Well, I think we'd want to look at any detail relating to procurement in particular, because it's got to be about value for money as well, and that's something that I think we'd want to focus on, because we've got to do—. With the small amount of money we have to run the NHS, we've also got to make it work for the people, and, if the best drugs come from the Unites States, I don't think we'd want to block them either.

I was going to ask—. Sorry, did you want to add something?

I was just going to say, in relation to a future trade agreement, the government procurement agreement of the World Trade Organization generally is used as a basis, and that already sets out what public authorities in Wales open up their markets to. So, some of the agreements, as we go forward—that basis will start with that agreement.

Thank you. In hindsight, Minister, do you regret that those powers were given away as part of the inter-governmental agreement? Do you think that's made our case, or your case as Welsh Government, more difficult? Or is it too early to say at the moment?

I don't understand—what powers do you think we've given away?

In terms of public procurement.

Well, that's an international role where we don't have the responsibilities and we don't have a veto over that area. So, as a nationalist, obviously, you'd be in a different place from us, but what I would say is that, actually, we are part of the United Kingdom, we understand that trade negotiations are made by the UK. What we do want is to be able to influence those trade negotiations within the United Kingdom, and that's what we will insist upon.

Thank you, Minister.

For clarification, sorry, on a public procurement question, if we go to a no deal, we go to GPA and WTO rules don't we?

Yes.

So, that would apply to all nations in the UK, because the UK as a member state—

That's right.

—would end up having to comply with those rules.

That's right.

Okay. Sorry.

No, that's all right. Thank you, Minister. So, just to clarify, on the mechanisms that we would seek to use in order to halt further privatisation of the NHS, in terms of it being free at the point of provision, would—the mechanism that you would use then would be to challenge the UK Government in court, were it to get to that stage.

From what I hear, the UK Government is also—at this point in time, they're not keen to open that door either, but— 

I'm sure they're not. I'm sure they're not, but there's so much uncertainty at the moment.

We will keep a very, very close eye on that. But what we have made clear is that this is an area where we have responsibility and therefore they should not be concluding any trade agreements without consulting us where we have the power in terms of being a devolved administration.

Thank you, Minister, but just to clarify—the specific mechanism you would use would be challenging them in the court.

Well, it is a mechanism. We'd hope that it wouldn't come to that, obviously. 

And would there be further—or mechanisms before it were to get to that point, or is that the—?

Oh, yes; I mean, there's a whole load of areas that—. One of the thing we're trying to do at the moment is to make sure that we develop a concordat for how we negotiate future trade deals and make sure that we all have an understanding of how we feed into that process. That concordat has, I understand, been drafted. I haven't had sight of that, but I think some of the officials have had sight of that. But we haven't—. That hasn't been finalised. What's happened is, it's, of course, all up in the air now. I think it was all ready to go, but there's now a Tory leadership contest, so nothing is going to be decided for a few months. So, I'm afraid we were hoping to have moved on by now, but the Conservative Party have other ideas.

Yes, and it's the same Conservative leadership contest that is making, I think, lots of people concerned about it coming to the crunch point with the NHS—that actually they may get into a desperate situation, but I won't become political on that point.

Okay. So, you would hope to use the concordat, but if that were to fail, then you would be prepared to challenge the UK Government in court.

Yes.

Thank you, Minister.

Alun, and then Huw.

Do you know, I find that an extraordinarily unsatisfactory position? And I've listened to that exchange with some discomfort, Chair, on all sides, I have to say. The United Kingdom has to find a way of functioning. At the moment, your answers aren't giving me any confidence that there is that structure in place, because if the Welsh Government's position is, 'We'll see you in court,' it's not a very impressive argument either for the continuation of the structure of the United Kingdom as a state or the commitment of the Governments within the United Kingdom to actually work together.

Well, I hope I've made it clear that that wouldn't be our starting point—that actually what we want to do is to have a constructive relationship through an inter-governmental structure, which will be determined and set out in the concordat—

Well, I don't want that, you see. That's not what I want, because a concordat is an agreement between you and the United Kingdom Government on how you will operate. I want something that is in law, to which I can hold you to account and which colleagues in Westminster can hold the UK Government to account. If a concordat is agreed between yourselves, I don't think—. You know, I'm no barrack-room lawyer, but I'm not convinced that you'd have a leg to stand on, because, at the end of the day, the United Kingdom Government, were they so to wish, could sell the NHS down the river on this, if they were to wish to do so, and the argument, 'We'll make life difficult for them,' sounds all right on the street but it's not the reality of inter-governmental relations. If our argument is, 'We'll see you in court,' then that sounds like the last breath before you're thrown out of a pub at midnight. It doesn't sound like we've got an effective, structured, strategic view of what we want to see to create the structures that need to work within the United Kingdom in order to enable the UK both to sign international agreements—. Because, at the end of the day, if I was watching this in a Government office somewhere else in the world, I would say, 'I'm not sure I want a deal with these people, because they're going to spend the next two years arguing and paying lawyers.'

Well, is the current inter-governmental structure adequate? Absolutely not. We didn't expect to be in this position, and it's not just in relation to trade; it's in relation to almost every aspect of Government policy. So, that infrastructure needs to be built. The concordat is a part of building that infrastructure that doesn't currently exist but that will have to exist in future. The fact is, we belong to a United Kingdom, and the current structure was made—. Don't forget, we didn't have a devolved Government went we went into the EU, and we didn't need it in the same way. And that's why building those structures is something that needs to happen now that didn't have to happen before. I think we did have certain structures, for example in relation to agriculture, where we were able—and I'm sure you did it in the past—to thrash out what the common line should be from the United Kingdom prior to the negotiations in Brussels. So, some structures have existed, but we're in a different place now, and we need to build on what was there before.

I get that, and we did have a memorandum of understanding, as it happens, much improved, as it happens, by David Lidington and William Hague, when they were in office nearly a decade ago. But I couldn't rely on that and say, 'I'll see you in court'. That was an agreement, which was agreed by the JMC, and which was to govern relationships. But also, it was a matter, if a Secretary of State sought to ignore its provisions—and Emma will remember some of this—that they had the absolute right to ignore its provisions and there was absolutely no way, without coming back and grizzling at the JMC, that a Minister in the Welsh Government, Scottish Government or Northern Irish Executive had any way of effectively challenging that. You're right that Brexit gives us a very different position, but I would suggest that that sort of machinery of governance was inadequate then, although much improved from what had been there in the past, and is wholly inadequate for today's and tomorrow's circumstances. So, what we need—and this is what concerns me—. It appears to me, listening to you and the Brexit Minister and others at different times, that we're having a web of inter-governmental agreements and memoranda and concordats and all the rest of it, which is creating almost a hidden state within the United Kingdom by which we're being governed. None of that is on the statute book, none of it is open to scrutiny and nobody's held to account for how those structures are supposed to work. Now, that, to me, does not paint the picture of a United Kingdom that I or many of the people we all represent would feel very happy being citizens of.

Well, for us to remain a part of the United Kingdom—and you've seen that there's a lot of tension in Scotland and Northern Ireland—if there's a genuine will to keep the United Kingdom together, then I think they would be well advised to make sure they build that inter-governmental infrastructure pretty sharpish, if they actually are genuine about keeping the United Kingdom together.

But if you were genuine, surely you would be saying 'we' rather than 'they'. What I'd be interested in isn't a UK that's designed in London where we're told, 'This is what you'll have'; I would prefer to see a UK that is a joint venture between us all together, equally taking these decisions, and this is why I'm finding this conversation somewhat unsatisfactory because you're not giving me much confidence that the Welsh Government is playing an active role in seeking a structure within which trade arrangements and trade agreements can be struck by the United Kingdom Government—and I accept that it's a matter for the United Kingdom Government to sign those deals—but, in signing those agreements, there has to have been a process in place that means that we're satisfied here in Wales with the provisions to which we're being joined and then a means by which we are able to continue to deliver policy and to deliver those agreements in practice, because what worries me is that we seem to be heading for a car crash here, and without any sense—. Everybody agrees that it's going to happen, but nobody seems to have the gumption to get up and stop it happening.

So, I'm interested in understanding what the processes are by which the structures within which trade agreements will be reached. What is the Welsh Government contributing to that? Has the Welsh Government produced paperwork and, if so, can you share it with the committee? Do you have proposals you're putting to the United Kingdom Government on these matters? With whom are you negotiating in the UK Government, and by what time do you expect to reach agreement on these matters?

Well, I think, in the discussions we've had with the relevant trade Ministers, I've got to tell you that they are—seem to be, in our discussions—very accommodating in terms of their will to take on board our position as a Welsh Government. I don't think that's good enough because that's about the Minister that happens to be there today, and who knows what will happen tomorrow, which is why you do need inter-governmental structures. So, the concordat will set out what that is. It's a two-way negotiation. It's not them just telling us, 'This is your concordat, off you go'. This has been a long-term discussion that's happening not just between us but also with the other parts of the United Kingdom. But, also, what we're not prepared to do is to wait until that concordat comes through, and I've followed up in a letter to Liam Fox to say, 'Look, now, let's not wait for the concordat because it looks like you're going to be out of action for a while. Let's get on with the joint ministerial committee as a pre-emptive strategy before we get on to the next phase'. But the fact is, Alun, that we live in a constitutional democracy where the UK Government, the Parliament of the UK, reigns. That is the constitutional position that we are in.

But that's not an adequate—

If you want to change that, listen, it's—

I don't, as it happens; I just want to make it work. And it appears to me that if you simply take that approach, then you can say that—I'll use the example the Chair used to start this conversation—were the UK Government to say, 'We are going to privatise and sell off the Welsh NHS', all the Welsh Government would do is issue a press release and say how terrible it is and perhaps make some idle threats. But I'm interested in a structure that actually prevents us getting to that in the first place. I'm talking about how it—

But that's exactly what the concordat will do. It's exactly what the concordat will to. Emma, do you want to—?

Minister—[Inaudible.]—UK Ministers' position. The Member also highlighted his concerns over the fact he hasn't seen the clarity in that, and perhaps we'll be best able to—. I'm conscious of the time, so perhaps you'd be able to perhaps provide a written response to the committee as to how you see the progression of the structures within the UK to ensure that we have those opportunities to have an input into it and we see movements going forward.

Whilst I appreciate that the UK Government is going through a state of flux at the moment as we await a new prime minister and, as a consequence, new ministerial leads, it is still important that we take this opportunity, just like Donald Tusk, of the time to actually get a position quite clear and our strategy quite clear in taking that forward. So, perhaps you could write to the committee with that type of information and detail.

We'll give you as much as we can. As I say, I haven't seen the concordat yet. Emma, would you like to just—?

Yes. What you're asking for is what will all be out in the concordat. I'm happy to run through—. In a response, we can put down when we started and the areas that that concordat will cover. What we wouldn't be comfortable doing, because the negotiations are ongoing, is to tell you what is in there. But we can certainly tell you what our starting position was, from Welsh Government going in, at the start of those negotiations.

I did ask a series of questions. Perhaps the clerking team could look at the transcript and then send that to the Minister and ask for a response on those matters. That would be useful.

Huw.

I've already said this, but I just wonder whether that concordat will go down to the sort of detail that says, 'We agree that, under no circumstances, will there be an undermining, in any discussions on health trade affecting health services, of the principle of a publicly funded, free-at-the point-of-delivery healthcare across the UK'. Because that in itself might give some assurance that there will be a long-standing, or at least a medium-term, UK approach to not undermine it. Because it isn't simply the individual trade deals in sectors or parts of the NHS in England; it's the question of taking public subsidy out of NHS England, which would affect NHS Wales. Would that likely be part of the concordat, do you think?

No, the concordat is not going to go into policy. It's going to set out how Welsh Government, UK Government, Scottish Government work together. What you're talking about is what would possibly appear in a mandate for an individual country. The concordat works out how we sit down as the UK as a whole and come up with that mandate. And in that mandate, it might say the NHS is off the table, but the concordat is how we get to that point, how we make sure our voices are heard, the mechanisms for that and what the mechanisms are if we don't agree. So, it's going to be more about the process in the concordat, not individual policy decisions.

Is your understanding, from what you've said, Minister, that, going from the concordat to developing some sort of mandate, UK Ministers would be open to a mandate that bolts down in a cast-iron way the free-at-the-point-of-delivery, public-funded health service? And would you be arguing for that?

Those are the kinds of things that are set out in 'Trade Policy: the issues for Wales', so, some of that is set out there. There'll be some kind of red lines that we'll be setting out in the international strategy as well. And they were certainly some of the issues that we brought up with Liam Fox to just make it clear that there are certain areas that we would be very upset about if they started to—

Are you minded to bolt them down in black and white, whether it's in a mandate or anywhere else? Because that principle underpinning our NHS across the whole of the UK is sacrosanct to many, many people, and our worry is that a future Minister might walk away and some trade deal would find a way to undermine it. So, are you minded, in your discussions with UK Ministers, to bolt that down, in whichever way you want to, not in a Wales document or Wales strategy, but in a UK agreement?

I would certainly want to make that absolutely clear. We have made it clear in the document that we've already produced that they've had sight of, and, as I say, we will reiterate that and underline it in the international strategy. So, absolutely it's going to be in black and white.

That's your strategy. I get that. What about an agreed strategy with UK Ministers?

Again, this is going to be about individual trade negotiations, which is a slightly different thing. So, every trade negotiation is going to be different.

Whilst I appreciate that, I think the point that Huw is making is that, irrespective of which trade negotiation you're talking about, it is that simple principle of the national health service being free at the point of care that is going to be applicable across all trade agreements, I would've thought.

Yes. So, that's something that I've already discussed and brought up in Cabinet—that that's something that we would like to set out very clearly: where are the areas where we say, 'These are our red lines'?

Good.

Delyth.

Sorry to labour the point, Minister, but just so I've got clarity in my own head, you have said that the Welsh Government would want to rely on the concordat in order to protect the NHS from privatisation, but if the concordat doesn't exist fully yet, as it's still being implemented, then isn't it the case that the Welsh Government, short of going to court, doesn't have any mechanisms in place to protect the NHS?

No, we are so far away from this—

I hope that you're right on that, but, obviously, as a committee we need to look into the future.

We are so far away from concluding international trade agreements with third countries. We've got a long, long way to go before we get there. The concordat will set out the structures for how we negotiate when it comes to trade agreements. The content is separate, and that will be concluded separately for each trade agreement that will take place with individual member states.

I understand, but the contents of that, in that case, if I'm getting this correct, we, as a committee, won't be able to see the contents of that and so we can't know what the mechanisms will be to protect the NHS.

We'll see the concordat, I assume, once you've agreed a concordat, but not before.

The concordat is the structures, and of course you can see that when we see it, but what I would envisage is that we would have a set of red lines that we would say, 'For each trade agreement, these are the areas', so we'd copy and paste that onto each trade agreement. We'd say, 'These are the areas we don't want you to touch in relation to Welsh devolved issues'.

Okay. Time has caught us up, Minister, and we have a lot more, actually, to discuss with you. We haven't discussed the continuity agreements, and, for example, the agreement with South Korea today has been signed. I assume that that's actually a continuity agreement and not a new trade agreement—

Yes.

—because it would seem to be a roll-over of where we are. Again, where were you in that? Did you have sight of that agreement prior to it being signed? Where was the Welsh Government involvement in this process? Because that actually tells us a little bit more about the way in which the UK Government is thinking of involving devolved Governments in discussions. So, a last question, and a very simple one: have you been involved in the discussions on the South Korea continuity agreement?

Well, the continuity agreements are technical agreements, they are roll-over agreements—

That's not what I asked. Have you been involved—yes or no?

I mean, we've been in touch with them, haven't we?

Yes, we have. The UK Government had promised to share text with us once it had been initialled. That hasn't happened in relation to South Korea, simply because of how it works in South Korea. So, the process for ratification over there means that we cannot see the text at this specific stage, but we're as fully sighted as we have been on the others. But I think we've said before here that we wouldn't want you to think that this is a precursor of how things would work going forward, and we've been very clear that this isn't a process we would like to repeat for new trade agreements. But, no, we haven't seen the text for South Korea.

Thank you for that. I appreciate your comments that you would like to see it, but, to date, you haven't seen it. And, as you indicate, it's perhaps at the request of a third party. But that also means that could happen to many other third parties, in that case, which clearly you wouldn't have sight of the things going on as a devolved nation. So, I think there is a question here as to what is the Government's position in all these discussions and to understand your role as a Welsh Government, representing Welsh interests in a trade negotiation the UK Government is acting on with a third country and may not actually consider devolved nations involved. I think it's a very important aspect the Government has to go and think about.

With that, I will say thank you very much for your time. Time actually has caught us up. As you know, Minister, you will receive a copy of the transcript. If there are any factual inaccuracies, please let the clerking team know as soon as possible so we can get those corrected. Thank you for your time, and we will write to you on one or two other points, and, I'm sure, hopefully, you will be responding to some of the points that we've asked to be raised already.

Okay.

Thank you.

Diolch yn fawr.

We move on, then, to the next item on the agenda, which is papers to note. There is actually a paper from the Minister for International Relations and the Welsh Language to the Chair regarding the Trade Bill legislative consent motion that was discussed. Are Members content to note that? Actually, that doesn't give us any new information, but indicates the discussions that took place during the debate on the supplementary LCM. Are Members happy to note it?

And the second paper to note, in the supplementary pack, is a letter from the Chair of the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee to the Minister for International Relations and the Welsh Language, again regarding the Trade Bill, the supplementary motion and other motions. Are Members, at this point in time, content to note that? They are. Thank you very much for that.

The next item is that we move into private session and, under Standing Order 17.42(vi), to resolve to exclude the public for the remainder of this meeting. Are Members content to do so? They are. Therefore, we now move into private session for the remainder of today's session.