Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. I thank Members for their varying contributions to the debate. If I could begin, first of all, with the leader of UKIP. I’m not keen, in the course of my response, to rehash some of the discussions we’ve had before, but to deal with some of the newer issues that have arisen. First of all, there are great dangers that the UK Government will try and use Henry VIII powers in order to avoid scrutiny by the UK Parliament, and indeed to prevent this institution from taking its own action with regard to Brexit, and that is something that would subvert democracy, to my mind, actually—to avoid that kind of scrutiny.

On the issue of the market, we have to remember that the European single market is one of the world’s biggest markets and it’s on our doorstep. If we were looking for a new relationship with the EU, it would be the first market we would look at, because we have a land border with it, and will continue to do so in the future. Yes, free trade agreements with other countries may be important, but Australia and New Zealand are not going to replace the European single market in terms of what it’s worth to us.

Nobody argues for tariffs. I’ve not heard anybody argue that tariffs should be imposed. I don’t agree, necessarily, with Mark Reckless’s view that tariffs somehow can have minimal effect. Some will have more of an effect than others and the more inelastic the demand for a product, the greater the effect tariffs will have. The stronger the brand of a product—for a German car manufacturer, I don’t think they’re particularly concerned. They know people will continue to buy BMWs and Mercedes even if the price goes up, because people want to buy them because of the brand. The consumer will pay the price as a result of it. But he will know that the whole point of a tariff is to make foreign goods more expensive in a domestic market in order for domestic goods to appear cheaper to the consumer. So, therefore, it is a tax that consumers have to pay if they’re going to buy goods from outside of that market. The worry I have is that if there is no agreement in an incredibly short time frame—by, really, the autumn of next year—then tariffs appear by default. No-one wants them, but they appear by default at that stage, so we end up in a situation that’s unsatisfactory for all involved in these negotiations.

I’m concerned about agriculture, because, as was rightly said by the leader of UKIP, agriculture has a special place in the hearts of people. People are particularly protective of agriculture, and it is often the case that agriculture is excluded from free trade agreements. Can I make it absolutely clear that we would not under any circumstances accept a free trade agreement that excluded the ability of our farmers to sell into their biggest market? Ninety per cent of what we produce that is exported goes into the European market. We would not accept any barriers to trade with regard to that.

But I do urge those who wanted to leave to move beyond re-arguing the referendum and to come forward with plans of their own. The supreme irony at the moment is that those of us who wanted to remain are actually taking forward plans to leave whilst those who wanted to leave don’t quite know what happens next. Some have ideas, some don’t—I don’t want to put everyone in the same category—but I do urge all those leavers to come forward with a plan rather than saying, ‘Well, the referendum result has happened, and therefore we must leave.’ We need more than that.

In terms of the continuity Bill, look, I have no objection to continuing discussions on this. For me, what I would want to know is: what would the Bill do? Is it a declaration rather than a Bill? What would the shape of the Bill look like? And how would we avoid such a Bill being overwritten, in effect, by Westminster anyway, as a result of the great repeal Bill? So, let’s continue with those discussions. We’ll continue to abstain today, but in terms of—[Interruption.] In a second. In terms of the principle of such a Bill and what it might deliver, I think there are further discussions to be had.