I want to start my contribution this afternoon, actually, by giving recognition to the work undertaken by the Cabinet Secretary for Finance. Everybody in this Chamber should recognise the commitment that Mark Drakeford has given in that work. But not just to Mark Drakeford, but also to his officials because many people will not appreciate, perhaps, that it's the intensive discussions that have been taking place between Welsh Government officials and UK Government officials that have allowed the opportunities for where we are today to be reached. We must give recognition to all the work done by those officials, led by Mark.

But also, the approach taken by Mark Drakeford and his counterpart in the Scottish Government, Mike Russell, have been constructive and focused. They've been making sure that the position of both Governments have been presented to a series of Secretaries of State within Westminster because we must remember there have been various chairs, and it's only latterly that we've seen chairs who have started to listen to them.

As a consequence of this determined negotiating position, we've seen the UK Government move away from their ridiculous initial position of prevarication to a position that now offers a workable solution that will be considered in detail when we debate the LCM in less than two weeks, and that's when we will have the meaningful vote on the agreement and the amendments.

I hope to avoid any technical aspects in my contribution this afternoon because I'll put those forward perhaps during that debate when I think it's more meaningful to have the debate on technical aspects. But unfortunately, there are a couple of points I wish the First Minister to perhaps clarify for me as soon as possible. There's no doubt that the clause 11 that emerges today, if those amendments are passed in the House of Lords today, is far different from that which currently exists in the Bill. And the continued question from both the Welsh and Scottish Governments, along with the committees from their respective Parliaments, have been able to influence that change. The question to be answered before we vote on the LCM on 15 May, not today, will be: have those changes gone far enough to allow Members to support the amended Bill? That's the question we will all have to answer on 15 May. Again, not today. However, I do seek clarification on a couple of points from the First Minister. 

The original Bill allowed the UK Government to change aspects of the Bill without going before Parliament, and this would have included the opportunity to extend the sunset clause—I think that's been highlighted already by several people in this afternoon's debate—possibly indefinitely, by keeping the powers within Westminster, amending the Bill time after time after time. If that's the case, that is obviously wrong.

Now, I understand that the agreement will now require the UK Government to go before both Houses of Parliament, including the House of Lords, before such changes could be made, which therefore puts a stronger safeguard in place to ensure that continuation of an indefinite possibility is no longer a reality. So, therefore, can the First Minister provide the Chamber with any further clarification on that particular point? Because—my personal view, five years is still too long; it takes us into the next Assembly, and actually into the next UK Government as well. That's if it doesn't go sooner. But it does hinder us perhaps in having a discussion as to what we can put in our manifestos, as to what policies we can apply, when we go for the Assembly elections in 2021.

Secondly, I am disappointed that the agreement does not actually provide a requirement for Welsh Government to lay reports or regulations before the Assembly as soon as it gets them from the Westminster Government. Now, the 40-day period, I understand, is initiated when UK Ministers give their counterparts in Wales those reports or regulations, but there's no requirement for you to actually lay them immediately before the Assembly; there's the possibility of a delay. I would seek reassurances that that's the intention of the Welsh Government, to lay any report or regulations before the Assembly—and I'll give you some time—no later than 48 hours after you've received them, so it gives us as much time as possible to scrutinise what comes before us.

Now, other technical matters, Dirprwy Lywydd, I will leave until the debate on the LCM, but, moving forward, we also want to focus upon the frameworks and ensure that these work for the people and businesses in Wales. That's what this is about: working for the businesses and the people in Wales, making sure that continuity exists, making sure that we can continue operations and we can grow our economy.

But we must also pay attention to other Bills that will come through—let's not just talk about the EU withdrawal Bill. The Trade Bill is another one that has similar issues and we need to ensure that that is amended along the same lines, so that we do not allow one Bill to actually change something that another Bill has—and if you need to look at that, check it up—and that's the important aspect of that. We also addressed the aspect of the JMC. We talked about the agreement, how is it governed, how is it adjudicated, how do we ensure that things happen: there are still issues on the JMC to address.

I'm conscious of the time, Dirprwy Lywydd, so I'll leave it at this point, but I will just stress that I'm disappointed with the contribution at the start of the debate from the leader of Plaid Cymru, because it felt to me much more like another example of what is termed 'project fear' than actually looking at the aspects of this agreement and where we can move forward. And that is what we all want to do. No-one in this Chamber wants to see things going backwards; we want to move forwards. That's why we put the amendments in that we suggested beforehand. Let's make sure that we get the best we can.