Thank you, Presiding Officer, and can I thank everyone who's contributed to this debate this afternoon? It has captured the public's concern, this particular issue has, and I find myself on the line, as it were, with people who wouldn't naturally align themselves with a Conservative politician and, indeed, someone who does support the building of Hinkley Point and other nuclear power stations to meet our energy needs. But I do recognise the genuine concerns—the genuine concerns—that constituents and on a wider basis have expressed over this particular issue, and I do regret that it is the opposition parties that have had to come together to put this motion down today rather than the Government leading on that. We have been back for nearly four weeks now, and the Government could have led on this issue and actually put some of those assurances that were required by the public and those members of public in the gallery who have come here today, but they have not done that, and we have had to take the lead on this particular issue.

I think I'm correct in saying, Presiding Officer, that this motion would not lead to an unlawful act, as was introduced into the debate by the Cabinet Secretary and also by the Member for Caerphilly, because otherwise it would not be accepted, because you can't put a motion down that then would lead to an unlawful act. I believe I'm correct in saying that, and that's an important consideration to be considered here when voting tonight. And I do pass comment on the comments from the Member for the Vale of Glamorgan, who I wholesomely support in conveying her constituent's views into this Chamber, but she read our motion out. She read the motion out from Barry Town Council, who felt so compelled to participate in this debate that they had an emergency meeting and they conveyed their sentiments via that letter. You will now, if you take the Government whip, vote against the motion that you were talking to in your contribution. So, I do hope that you will reflect on the position that you have tried to convey in the Chamber here tonight with the way that you might vote, when the vote is called in about five or 10 minutes' time. 

The opener of the debate, Rhun ap Iorwerth, clearly identified the work that the Petitions Committee has undertaken in this particular area, and he introduced the point about NRW and Cefas saying that they would welcome the opportunity to actually undertake further tests—further tests at depth—to reassure people who have concerns about what sediment might be lurking below the test levels that they've undertaken to date. That doesn't seem unreasonable to me. That seems perfectly reasonable, that does, because when you look at the widespread concerns that are out there, if people require that information, they should have that information, and it is our role as politicians to make sure that information is secured. As I say, I'm talking as someone who actually supports the construction of Hinkley Point and other nuclear power stations to meet our energy needs.

But, Cabinet Secretary, I would hope that you will reflect on what has been said here tonight, and you will reflect on allowing your amendment to go through to shoot this motion down, because you have the votes here tonight, you do— looking at the Chamber, you clearly have the votes. But I cannot see anything unreasonable in the motion that is before us here tonight. It is merely calling for wider consultation—and you have recognised in your own amendment that NRW have not undertaken that consultation—and, in the meantime, suspending the licence so that further testing can be undertaken. As I understand it, the licence continues until March next year. They are halfway through the dredging already, so there would be plenty of time to undertake the testing and satisfy the widespread concern, and if that testing proves positive, they could continue with that testing. Why will you not sanction that? As Llyr Gruffydd said, when he talked about your intervention over shooting on public land, you were prepared to direct NRW to do that, you were, and we disagree over that point. [Interruption.] Why will you not lead on this issue, Cabinet Secretary? We are not seeing that. [Interruption.]

Now, the Labour back bench can shout. I'll gladly take an intervention if someone wants to make the intervention. I am merely stating what has happened in this place over the last couple of weeks since we've come from recess. I am merely asking a perfectly reasonable question about why that at-depth testing cannot be undertaken, as evidenced in the Petitions Committee. [Interruption.] I'll take the intervention.