A gaf i ddiolch hefyd i’r Ysgrifennydd am y datganiad yma? Mae’n iawn i ddweud ei fod yn un hanesyddol. Mae’r Ysgrifennydd yn dilyn yn ôl traed Rhisiart o’r Wyddgrug, sef trysorydd olaf Llywelyn ap Gruffudd yn 1283. Ysywaeth, nid oedd hi’n bosib i senedd Owain Glyndŵr godi trethi oherwydd pa mor anodd, efallai, ydyw i godi trethi o dan gyflwr o ryfel. Nid yw’r drafferth yna, o leiaf, yn wynebu’r Ysgrifennydd. Ond mae yn gwneud pwynt sylfaenol bwysig, wrth gwrs, sef mai hanfod democratiaeth, a dweud y gwir—y ddemocratiaeth genedlaethol mae pobl Cymru wedi pleidleisio o’i phlaid ddwywaith—ydy’r gallu nid yn unig i ddeddfu ond i godi trethi hefyd, a thrwy hynny, wrth gwrs, sicrhau bod yna atebolrwydd gwirioneddol ar gyfer y gwasanaethau rydym ni yn eu cynnig o ran ein cymdeithas ni a hefyd y dyfodol y gallem ei greu gyda’n gilydd ar gyfer ein cenedl.

Now, Cabinet Secretary, as you acknowledge in your statement, an essential part of tax devolution, if it’s to be successful, is a clear and workable fiscal framework. Key to this, and, inevitably, the biggest headache in negotiations with the UK Treasury, will be the way in which the Welsh block grant is adjusted to reflect the transfer of tax revenue-raising powers to the Welsh Government. The previous Welsh Government expressed concerns at the adjustment made following the devolution of non-domestic rates. The dangers are clear from the partial devolution of income tax. You’ll be aware of a study by the Wales Governance Centre that demonstrated that the very different distribution of incomes in Wales compared with England means that not being able to vary the threshold, for example, will pose major difficulties. And so getting the mechanism wrong could cost the Welsh budget hundreds of millions a year.

Could the Secretary provide us with some further detail on the Welsh Government’s position on block grant adjustment and indexation, in particular what specific mechanisms the Government favours; how it intends dealing with differential growth in population, in tax returns, in economic growth; what procedure is being proposed whereby agreement on whether a tax change is material can be arrived at; how to distinguish between first- and second-order effects; and what appeals process or disputes resolution procedure will be in place where the UK and Welsh Governments disagree?

Much has been made of the no-detriment and taxpayer fairness principles that underline the Scottish fiscal framework, but does the Cabinet Secretary accept that, in the case of Wales, one of the poorest constituent parts of the United Kingdom at the current time, the UK Government should be prepared to allow not a no-detriment principle, perhaps, but a tax bonus principle that allowed us in Wales to benefit disproportionately from tax changes as a form of regional policy? Specifically in relation to income tax, will the Cabinet Secretary be asking for maximal flexibility on income tax devolution, including the power to adjust allowances and thresholds and create new bands?

He mentions the discussions with the Treasury; could he say a little bit more about where we are in that process? Has he already met on a ministerial level, and how is that process going to be taken forward over the summer?

Discussions between the Scottish Government and the Treasury on Scotland’s fiscal framework lasted some 11 months. One criticism of those discussions was the lack of transparency. You mention in your statement—and we welcome this—that this Assembly should have the power to accept or reject a new framework. Could you also provide us with assurances that the Assembly will have ample opportunity to contribute to and scrutinise those negotiations, and agree the underlying principles in advance? This is absolutely vital given our experience of the Barnett formula, which was, of course, introduced without consultation in the late 1970s, and has never been reformed despite its manifest unfairness.