It seems to me that the important point is that this is a major step forward. It opens the door clearly and constitutionally in a way that we have always argued for the interests of Wales within the Brexit negotiations, within the treaties in which we, like other devolved administrations, have specific interests in terms of jobs and in terms of investments to ensure that the sort of negotiations, the sort of treaty, is one that actually protects the interests of the people of Wales. We will be following this with a debate where we will go into that in some quite considerable detail.

I think this judgment is very timely, because what it does is say that, one, Parliament must now engage and assume that responsibility but, secondly, that automatically means that Sewel is given the status that we’ve always argued it should have and, in fact, it will have. So, it gives us that voice in the process, and that is absolutely fundamental if we are to fulfil our role, which is defending the interests of the people of Wales, and no doubt Scotland and Northern Ireland will do the same, and no doubt the regions of England will also do the same. What format that will take—what format the trigger Bill will take—remains to be seen, and I’d be cautious about waiting to see what it is before we start thinking about the process itself, because I think we’re on a long constitutional road, not just in terms of the trigger Bill, but also the negotiations, the engagement and the institutions that are set up. One would hope that the ultimate objective of the UK Government is to seek an endorsement and the consent of all the devolved institutions, because our ultimate interest has got to be a cohesive United Kingdom with a common purpose. And that is why our unwritten constitution is not only important, but also why this decision within that process was so important.