Again, we seem to be rearguing the referendum in June. There’s no point rearguing that; that is clear, and the result is clear in terms of what the direction is. But I do think we need a dose of reality here. If we had a free trade agreement with the US, nobody would want to jeopardise it—nobody. Nobody would be here saying, ‘What we want is to be in a situation where there might be barriers in place in trade between us and the US’. The EU is a much, much, much bigger market. It is bigger than America and Russia combined. Of course, the EU exports more in monetary value to the UK than the UK does to the EU, because it’s eight times bigger than the UK. In fact, percentage wise, we export about 40 per cent to the European market, and 8 per cent of European exports come into the UK. So, as a percentage, the UK is not a big market compared to other countries.

Now, the danger we must avoid is the kind of rhetoric we saw at the Conservative Party conference that can only unite countries in Europe together against us. That surely is not what we want to do. There are plenty of countries in Europe who don’t believe in ever-closer integration. They’re there—the Czech Republic is one of them, Denmark is one of them—and it’s right to say there are tensions within the EU, but there would be an irony if the EU became united against the UK because of the UK’s attitude. So, we’ve got to avoid that at all costs. It’s a sign of imperial arrogance to think that everyone’s going to fall at the UK’s feet; they’re not. The UK’s not a big trading block. It isn’t the EU, it isn’t America, it isn’t Russia, it isn’t India. It has to box clever when it comes to being able to sell its goods.

In terms of powers, he was almost making a case for independence for Wales at one point, I thought. I know his party has taken a long journey, but I didn’t think that the journey had been quite that long. We want to make sure that we get the right kind of advice as far as the future is concerned. I can say to him: I speak to companies who have invested in Wales and I speak to potential investors, and they all, without exception—without exception—say to me that they are uncertain about the future, because they don’t know what the UK’s relationship with Europe will be. Now, if you are Airbus, you are a very integrated European operation, you want to know if there will be any barriers between your operations in Broughton and Toulouse. They don’t know the answer to that yet. If you are Ford in Bridgend, you want to know whether a tariff will be imposed on the engines, every single one of which is exported—every single one—to Germany, and then another tariff imposed on the assembled car coming back in again. The answers aren’t there at the moment. Now, if those answers can be provided, I think he’s right, I think we can get to a situation where we can see a restoration of economic stability, but we don’t have those answers yet and these are not easy issues to resolve. We need to have that resolution.

To me, as I’ve said before, we get to a position where there are no tariffs, and that would be helpful. But, let’s not pretend that if we don’t have an agreement after two years things will be fine—WTO rules will be applied. The EU has no reason to be nice to the UK, if for no other reason other than to encourage others who would want to do the same thing. The reality is the EU can look for other markets elsewhere. There are many, many thousands of jobs in Wales that depend on us having unfettered access to the single market. Why would somebody come to the UK, rather than the EU, if they were two entirely separate markets? Why go to a market of 60 million and not a market of 500 million? There’s no way they’d come here. There are all those companies in the UK who are here—Nissan is one of them. Nissan is only in the UK so it can sell in the European market—that’s it. Ford is in the same position, Airbus is in the same position. If they cannot sell without a barrier—of course they can sell—without a barrier being in place, there is no reason for them to stay and there is no reason for them to come in the first place. Yes, there will be trade, but not at the same level as we’re seeing now. If we have a free trade agreement with another large trading block, we would not be arguing for a situation that might involve tariff barriers. It seems quite obvious to me and hopefully to others.

So, there is much work to be done. He talks of opportunities. There are some. State aid rules might not apply, as long as we don’t have rules imposed by Westminster instead. He is right to say that we can shape agriculture and fisheries, but without the money, we can’t have any of this. So, there needs to be a financial settlement at UK level that’s fair to all the countries, that enables us to use our powers effectively. That’s the uncertainty that we face at the moment.

We have to make sure that the current situation, which is uncertain—no question about that—is resolved as quickly as possible. At the heart of that is the need for the UK Government to declare, not its detailed negotiating strategy—I don’t expect them to have it at this stage, potentially, and I don’t expect them to tell us about it—but at least the general principles. What are the red lines? What is acceptable? What is not? We’re not at that stage yet; we need to be soon.