I thank the Member for that and for his observations. I would just say that I think that this is, as he indicates in his question, a route that is, obviously, laid down in statute for clarifying issues of constitutional law. The reason for the intervention was not really in relation to the specifics of the Scottish Bill. Clearly, that is a matter for the Lord Advocate in Scotland to make the case in defence of the Scottish Bill. My comments about competence were my own comments in that sense. But the way in which the Attorney-General had set out the case took us beyond, in my view, the narrow issues relating to the Scottish Bill and, indeed, even to the Scottish devolution settlement itself. There are, obviously, in particular following the entry into force of the last Wales Act, now greater similarities than there were in the past. So, the approach that I have taken is, generally speaking, not to reiterate the points that the Lord Advocate made in defence of the Scottish Bill, but to confine the case on behalf of the Welsh Government to broader constitutional principles that affect the devolution settlement here in Wales. I felt that that was important to bring focus, really, to ensuring that the concerns of Welsh Government and of this place, I hope, were heard in a context that was germane and specific to the Welsh experience and Welsh settlement.