More than 40 per cent of our trade goes to the EU; it is our biggest market. As I say, we play fast and loose with that at our peril. It may be that some SMEs don’t trade directly with the EU, but they trade with bigger companies that do trade with the EU, and any effect on those bigger companies, like Tata, for example, like Ford, has an effect on the entire supply chain. If you look at the Ford engine plan in my constituency, every single engine is exported—every single one. There is no domestic market for those engines. We must be careful that we don’t lose the advantages, economically, that we have now.

With immigration, I’ve said it before and I’ll keep on saying it, the UK will not control its own borders. You cannot control the UK’s borders unless you’re prepared to see a hard border in Ireland—there is no other way of doing it—and accept the conflict and turmoil that will happen as a result. If you want to get into the UK, you simply have to get into Ireland. They can walk into the UK; there’ll be no immigration control, no border control at all. So, the reality is that the UK cannot control its border in the way that some would want to see.

Now, it’s right to say—and I believe this is correct—that people were concerned about the current system of freedom of movement. I concede that point. People offered me many views on the doorstep: some people didn’t want to see immigration at all; some people wanted to kick immigrants out—I accept that they are a small minority of people; but a lot of people were concerned for different reasons about freedom of movement. My proposal is that we look to do what Norway does already. In other words, there is limited freedom of movement: freedom of movement to a job and some flexibility around that, but there comes a point, if somebody doesn’t have a job, when they can’t work or remain in the UK. The reality is that the UK went beyond what the rules required. If they’re interpreted in the same way as Norway interprets the rules, even though Norway has freedom of movement, you do introduce what I think is a sensible system, which most people would accept. Nobody’s said to me, ‘What we need to do, you see, is prevent all these doctors, nurses and students from coming into Britain.’ We must make sure that we are still able to draw on the best expertise from around the world. Freedom of movement to work, I believe, is a hugely sensible and rational way of dealing with people’s concerns while at the same time not cutting us off from the rest of the world.

We’ve got to be careful as well of free trade agreements; they’re not what they’re cracked up to be. A free trade agreement in China would make it potentially impossible to impose tariffs on Chinese steel, and that means the end of Tata and steel production in Wales. A free trade agreement with New Zealand runs the risk of having more New Zealand lamb into Wales, and that ends up, of course, in a situation where, again, Welsh farmers are hit by a double whammy of no subsidy and having to compete against lamb that will always be cheaper. No matter what we do, New Zealand lamb will always be cheaper than lamb in Wales because of the geography and topography and climate of New Zealand. Our farmers can’t afford for that to happen. [Interruption.] Of course.