Wel, Dirprwy Lywydd, diolch yn fawr, a diolch yn fawr i Adam Price hefyd am beth dywedodd ef am y rhaglen waith.

The work programme is a very important publication alongside the framework. I hope that Members of other parties here will see that, where some specific commitments have been made by the Welsh Government to include items in the work programme, you can see them there. That includes the energy rate relief possibility that Adam Price mentioned. There is a regulation-making power in the land transaction tax Act that allows the Welsh Government to introduce new reliefs using that regulation-making power.

There are three criteria that I have tried to set out every time we’ve talked about new reliefs as far as LTTA is concerned. There would have to be an agreed policy purpose—and I think energy relief meets that, because we are looking for environmental benefits there—they have to be affordable, and thirdly they have to meet their intended audience. That’s probably the key thing—the key test that has to be passed as we look at a potential energy rate relief. Because there was such a relief introduced between 2007 and 2012, and it was abandoned, essentially, because the empirical evidence showed that the relief simply hadn’t reached the people for whom it was intended, and it hadn’t had the policy impact that had been hoped for it. But it’s there in the work programme in order to allow these things to be tested further, and I’m very keen that we do that.

I think Members opposite will also see in the work programme a specific commitment to the publication of data by the Welsh Revenue Authority about the higher rate for second homes and whether there is a regional impact of that in Wales, to allow local authorities that might wish to make a case to the Welsh Government for differential arrangements in the future to have the data that they would need in order to be able to mount that case effectively.

Can I echo what Adam Price said in relation to the new Member of Parliament for Ceredigion? I always felt that he played a very constructive and helpful part in the discussions that have gone on between our two parties, and I obviously congratulate him very much on his success there last week.

As far as APD is concerned, this really is an area where the record of the UK Government does not stand up to examination. It demonstrates an entirely haphazard way of making tax policy across the United Kingdom. Its own Silk Commission recommended at least the devolution of APD for long-haul flights. The refusal of the UK Government to publish the evidence that they say they have drawn on in denying the devolution of this tax to Wales cannot be sustained. We will carry on working, as the work programme says, to demonstrate our belief that proper devolution of this piece of taxation would be to the benefit not just of Wales but to economies close by to us as well.

The issue of corporation tax devolution has been raised a number of times here this afternoon. I’m aware of the Holtham variation on corporation tax devolution, and I read with interest the recent article by Eurfyl ap Gwilym that returns to that idea. My own view is that it remains something that we ought to continue to debate. I’ve said here in the past, Dirprwy Lywydd, that I do have a concern about a race to the bottom in corporation tax devolution, but there are ways, maybe, that that could be mitigated if it was done in particular ways. I noticed that Eurfyl ap Gwilym says in his paper that this variable setting of rates in different parts of the United Kingdom by the UK Government would be politically palatable. And I could not help believe that it would be one of those ideas that would be politically palatable to those who benefit from it, and maybe slightly less palatable to those who would not. But it’s a debate for another day. I’m very grateful to all Members who’ve taken part this afternoon in what has been, I think, a very useful discussion of these very important new responsibilities.