I welcome the statement. It's perfectly reasonable, I think, that the Counsel General seeks to intervene in this case brought by the Lord Advocate of Scotland. Devolution is an evolving process and there are inevitably going to be uncertainties and ambiguities that are created by the legislation that is the means of bringing it about. We moved from a conferred-powers basis to a reserved-powers basis, and in a sense that perhaps provides more work for lawyers to unravel the areas of doubt that will continue to remain as experience of life throws up practical problems to be solved. So, I do think that the Welsh Government is entitled to take part in these proceedings. In fact, it is vital that we do resolve the ambiguities that are inherent in the Scottish case.

I would like to pay a compliment here to the Welsh Government, as I've done before, in comparison with the Scottish Government, that they've taken a practical approach to withdrawal from the EU and not tried to turn it into a kind of political football match as has happened in Scotland. I appreciate that there are other parties behind the refusal of legislative consent in Scotland as well as the Scottish nationalists, but I do think that, although the Scottish position is different because devolution has gone further in Scotland, nevertheless, the arguments that they're producing are specious and are fundamentally designed to inhibit the withdrawal process. So, I'm pleased that the Welsh Government has taken a different view, and it is sensible that they give Wales's voice a hearing in the court as well.

I also think that the four issues that the Counsel General has identified as necessary to be resolved are vital questions in this case. I fully agree with the Government's view that all powers currently vested in Brussels that under the devolution settlement should come to Wales should be vested here, and it's always been, I think, a paradox that those who complain that the devolution process is being undermined are actually talking about powers that we don't currently have the powers to use anyway. So, I think the important point that the Counsel General made earlier on was that the EU withdrawal in this respect does potentially enhance the competence of this Assembly. It gives us more power. It may not go as far as Plaid Cymru would like. I fully understand their objections and reservations; they're entitled to make those points because they don't believe in the United Kingdom as the political structure within which we will continue exist. I think it's very important that their point of view should be expressed and that these arguments should be put in this Assembly and that the Government should defend itself against those arguments. It's very important that this should be done in the most open and transparent way possible.

I also think that it is very important that the court's powers to review Assembly legislation are further refined through cases of this kind. There will inevitably be areas of uncertainty that need to be resolved, and the common law process works by case law so we build up a corpus of constitutional law, not just by statute but actually more fundamentally in the interstices of the law through individual cases turned over long periods of time into legal principles and conventions. So, I think that this is an inevitable step in the devolution process and also in the process of withdrawal from the EU. It's one that I welcome, and I wish the Counsel General well in his advocacy for Wales in the case.