I thank the Counsel General for his statement this afternoon, and for his intervention in this significant issue. I’d also like to associate Plaid Cymru with the sentiments he’s expressed regarding the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary.

That there is and will be far-reaching consequences of this judgment and the final determination of the Supreme Court is beyond doubt, and it is clear that a consequence of the triggering of article 50, however that occurs, will bring about changes to the competence of the National Assembly and Welsh Ministers. The provisions of the European Communities Act 1972 are enshrined in the Welsh constitution, and must not be interfered with or amended without the expressed will of this country and its democratically-elected legislature. I would be grateful to the Counsel General if he could elaborate further on the exact nature of this proposed intervention in the appeal to the Supreme Court, specifically on what formal role he is seeking for either Welsh Government or the National Assembly in the process of triggering article 50. Given his proposed intervention, is it his view that, if upheld, the High Court ruling calls for primary legislation at the UK Parliament on triggering article 50, or, as some have suggested, that a resolution of Parliament would satisfy the demands of the High Court ruling?

Secondly, would he agree that there are potential dangers in upholding the principle of UK parliamentary sovereignty above all other considerations, as far as Wales is concerned? For example, if triggering article 50 occurs through primary legislation at the UK Parliament, then the UK Government will be able to supplant such legislation with secondary legislation that may infringe upon devolved matters, but will not be privy or be required to legislative consent motions of this Assembly or other devolved Parliaments. Is the Counsel General concerned that the principle that the UK Parliament would not normally legislate with regard to devolved matters without the consent of the Assembly might be abandoned as the UK Government hides behind the principle of parliamentary sovereignty and may argue that these are not normal circumstances?

Finally, Llywydd, article 9 of the Bill of Rights Act 1689 establishes that Acts of Parliament must be accepted entirely by the courts. This would make it impossible for Welsh Government to retrospectively challenge any infringement on devolution as a consequence of UK parliamentary legislation. That, of course, does not apply to Bills of the National Assembly, as we discovered in the previous Assembly term, when a Bill was challenged by the UK Government in the Supreme Court. What avenues, therefore, is the Counsel General considering constitutionally and politically in order not simply to uphold the principle of so-called parliamentary sovereignty, but the sovereignty of the people of Wales?