Thank you very much, Llywydd. May I thank everyone who has contributed to the debate? I think the number of contributors has reflected the importance of the issue that we’re discussing and the concern that many of us have on the possible impact on HE institutions in Wales as well as on FE here in Wales and the broader economy. In my opening remarks I failed to refer to the Conservative amendment. We won’t be supporting amendment 1 for the reasons that have already been outlined. It does weaken the original motion. Of course, I would argue that the original motion is stronger than the amendment tabled.

Darren Millar referred to research sources beyond Horizon 2020, and that’s a fair point, of course. There are alternative sources beyond European funding, but the truth is that post-92 institutions, as they’re described, are more reliant on European funding than some of the other institutions. They are more exposed to the risk that comes from endangering the future of European funds. What’s required, therefore, is investment. If that funding is to be lost, then we do need to develop alternative income sources, and we need investment to do that, of course. In the current climate in this sector, where we see cuts and underfunding and so on, finding that additional source is quite a challenge. One university has described it as a need to have some sort of bridging loan in order to invest for development. It’s possible that the Welsh Government—taking into account the Cabinet Secretary’s comments on the role of the UK Government to look beyond the situation in England alone—should also consider making a contribution to that end.

I won’t pursue all the points made by all contributors, but Simon Thomas did remind us that one job is created for every three students from beyond the European Union in Wales, and one job for every five students from the European Union is created. But it’s not just the economic contribution—and that is a significant contribution—there’s also the intellectual contribution, as he reminded us, in terms of the students bringing their diverse perspectives and experiences and so on.

Michelle Brown suggested that universities should cast their nets more widely; it’s difficult to do that when the Westminster Government restricts the numbers that can actually come here, so I’m not sure how you can rationalise that. Huw Irranca-Davies was quite right in reminding us that it’s not just academic staff that we’re talking about when we are talking of international staff; there is an important cohort that make contributions in alternative ways too.

In preparing for this debate, I discovered that Bangor University, for example, is among the 100 most international universities in the world, according to the ‘Times Higher Education’. [Interruption.] ‘Of course’, I hear from a few in this Chamber, and why not, indeed? Cardiff Metropolitan University is on the top of all UK universities when it comes to providing support to international students in the past year, and indeed, on five previous occasions. I’m sure that all universities have their own stories to tell in terms of student numbers from the EU and beyond; their contribution, European funding, the benefit of student portability and the benefits to research and development and so on.

But, on this point, in terms of making applications to universities, I know of one university in Wales where applications from EU students are down 32 per cent—32 per cent. That’s a third. Now, what does that tell us about the impact of Brexit on HE in Wales? What does that tell us about what we need to do to ensure that the benefits that we accrue from the international relations that we have at present do continue and are indeed strengthened? What does that tell us about the need—and I hope you will agree with me—to support this motion this afternoon?