I thank the Member for that supplementary question. He's right to say, obviously, that there's strong cross-party support in this Assembly and across Wales for the lagoon, which is why it's so disappointing that the UK Government took the decision that it did. As he rightly suggests in his question, the involvement of the UK Government was partly driven by the need for a contract for difference, which obviously is not devolved to Wales, and we don't have competence in the Assembly to set up a comparable regime to the contract for difference regime.

I'm aware, as he is, of the discussions that have been happening, and the press coverage in particular, of an alternative model, which might involve a mechanism other than a contract for difference method for delivery. Obviously, if that were the case, the powers of the Welsh Government would be different from a model where contract for difference is necessary. And subject to a large number of questions around resourcing, and broader questions, Welsh Ministers obviously do have broad, general executive powers to facilitate job creation and economic development, including by way of loans and guarantees and grants and so forth. In fact, those powers were actually the basis of the offer that the First Minister made to support the current proposal for the tidal lagoon. Those would need to be looked at in the context of a particular proposal if that comes forward, a concrete proposal, and obviously, again, in the context of state aid rules. Clearly, we'd need to either establish that there was no state aid or that the aid was compatible with the framework in the legislation. As I say, there isn't, at this point in time, a concrete proposal to evaluate, but he should rest assured that the Government will look at all its powers and consider them in that context if that proposal comes forward.