Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I thank everyone who contributed to it. If I could focus on predominantly, in the time that I am limited to, responding to the Counsel General's reply. I believe that the first part of the argument was trying to set the First Minister up above the law, if you take the interpretation that he has given us that, actually, he is not accountable under the Government of Wales Act for the functions that he exercises, whilst, in fairness, Ministers are accountable under that law. That is dictatorship, and, as I said to you, the only example we could find anywhere was Egypt. That's the only example we can find.

I read out—and you didn't challenge it, Counsel General—I read out the legal note that we are basing our argument on, and you didn't challenge it. I'm more than happy for you to challenge me on what I've put before the Assembly today in the legal note. No? Okay.

You then said that the Government wrote to the Presiding Officer yesterday to try and seek consensus. I will read again what I opened my remarks with this afternoon, which was point 3 of the letter:

'First, the Table Office, on behalf of the Presiding Officer, has'— not 'could have'—

'has acted unlawfully by accepting the motion.

'4. Second, the Presiding Officer'— not 'could have'—

'has acted...unlawfully, by not withdrawing the motion.'

You were telling the Presiding Officer what she should do yesterday and, by association, you are telling the Assembly what it should do. No democracy can function under that level of duress, I would suggest, and it will be a very dark day if, after listening to the arguments that I have put today, Members of the governing party on the back bench do follow the whip and do listen to your arguments, because, actually, what you have implied is to ignore the law and just run roughshod over what we're governed by, which is democracy.

I have not heard a single counterargument come from you today, Counsel General, to challenge any point that I have put before this Assembly. Not one. I systematically went through the three arguments that the Government have deployed over the last three months as to why this report should not see the light of day: (1) protecting the confidentiality of individuals who have contributed to the inquiry; (2) release could prejudice further inquiries; (3) exercising the law and the provisions of the Government of Wales Act. You have not sought to undermine any one of those arguments. I therefore call on the governing back bench to respond to the motion before us today, because, ultimately, if you do not, then, as I said, the Government whip might well win the day, but morally you will be found wanting.