Item 4 on the agenda this afternoon is a statement by the Counsel General and Brexit Minister on the UK Government's current proposals for EU withdrawal, and I call on the Counsel General and Brexit Minister, Jeremy Miles.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. As we sit here, our colleagues in the UK Parliament are reaching the end of their elongated debate on the Government’s proposed EU withdrawal deal. They will vote later and it’s likely the Prime Minister’s deal will be defeated, probably quite heavily. We are scheduled to leave the European Union in 73 days, and there is no kind of deal in place. 

We have been led to this cliff-edge by an inept Government more interested in its increasingly desperate attempts to hold its own party together than the national interest. This situation is truly appalling. Importers and exporters have no assurance at all as regards the basis on which they can conduct their business in just a few weeks' time. Agricultural produce faces crippling tariffs, and the risk of chaos around our ports could impact on supplies of anything from spare parts for cars to medicines to fresh fruit and vegetables. This could affect all parts of our communities. It poses a real threat to the most vulnerable in our society and will place needless additional pressure on our public services.

European citizens already living and working here in our community are inevitably unsettled and vulnerable. Those with job offers to fill much needed vacancies, for example in our health service and universities, after 30 March, have no idea of the basis on which they will be allowed to work here. Investors who have seen the UK as their best base for operations for supplying the European market are now avoiding us. Jobs are at risk. Indeed, some are already being lost. Economic growth is grinding to a halt and nobody knows what will happen next. Deputy Presiding Officer, the UK Government is gambling with this country’s future.

It took two years to come up with the Chequers proposals—effectively, the Government’s opening gambit on the long-term relationship—which should have been in place at the point at which we triggered article 50. This was time lost posturing over red lines and playing to the gallery at party conferences, and even in the last few weeks, in retreat, time was lost in pleading for assurances. All of this instead of developing a viable strategy and building coalitions of support, including those, like the Welsh Government and this National Assembly, who advocated a post-Brexit relationship based both on respect for the European Union and the vital interests of this country.

The result is a deal which represents an obvious retreat from the Prime Minister's arrogant red lines and her pretence that we can have the same access to the single market without subscribing to its rule, but which fails in the cobbled-together political declaration to secure firm guarantees over this country's economic future. The deal does not remove the threat of a perilous cliff edge; it simply postpones it. The Prime Minister's deal creates ambiguity in trading relationships, and excludes services where the UK actually enjoys a trade surplus with Europe. It fails to guarantee alignment with future EU social workplace and environmental protections. It fosters uncertainty for citizens, both Europeans living here and UK citizens living in Europe. And when taken together with the wholly misconceived proposals in the White Paper on immigration, it positively inhibits the ability of employers to recruit workers in shortage areas in both the public and private sectors. As a result of this incoherence, the UK Government has been forced to accept the convoluted Northern Ireland backstop arrangement. The UK Government's own analysis, and those of independent institutions, including the National Institute for Economic and Social Research and the London School of Economics, shows the UK Government's approach will damage the economy. No-one voted in the referendum to be poorer.

Now, if we're criticising the UK Government position, it's entirely reasonable to ask what we propose instead. On that, we can be very clear. Almost exactly two years ago, we, jointly with Plaid Cymru, published our proposals in our White Paper 'Securing Wales' Future'. And I'll associate myself, if I may, with the comments the First Minister made in tributes earlier to Steffan Lewis, in particular his integral role in developing those proposals jointly. But if the Welsh Government was able to publish a comprehensive, strategic position for EU exit two years ago, why was the UK Government unable to do the same? We had to wait until the summer of 2018 before we had any serious inkling of where the UK really stood. 'Securing Wales' Future' represented as well an effort to reach out beyond the confines of one party to seek a broader consensus, an approach that the Prime Minister has rejected in formulating her own position.

We believe Wales's vital interests are best preserved through participation in the single market across the whole economy, including services. That's what business wants and that's what investors need. We should remain in a customs union, which is essential to avoid increased friction at the border and which delivers free trade with so many countries. We should preserve social protections and mutual rights for UK and EU citizens living in each other's countries, and continue to match environmental standards and social and labour rights as they develop across our continent. Fair movement should clearly link migration from the EU to work opportunities and should be accompanied by vigorous measures to prevent the exploitation of workers. If we follow these measures, as we outlined in our White Paper, the need for a Northern Ireland backstop simply melts away, and the integrity of the UK, which has been taken for granted in the UK Government's negotiating position, is protected.

Llywydd, I have no idea if the Prime Minister has a plan B. In the national interest, I hope she has—it is essential. We urge her now to commit to a new approach, based on working with the devolved administrations, and on a cross-party basis, and, at the same time, to ask the European Union for an extension to the article 50 deadline of 29 March. This country is in deep turmoil, and it cannot be right that fundamentally important decisions about our collective future be taken in these circumstances. The clock needs to be put on pause while Parliament regroups, while we all regroup, and think carefully about the best way forward for our country.

And I say this with great respect to all shades of opinion. Wherever people stand on Brexit, it cannot be right for the country if we simply fall out of the EU without any sort of deal, based on a random date at the end of March. That is the first choice of hardly anyone, and would be a travesty. But the stark reality is this: we face leaving without a deal on 29 March, and we must prepare for that. As the First Minister outlined last week, most of the key levers for 'no deal' Brexit preparation are in the hands of the UK Government. In spite of our policy disagreements, we are committed to working closely with them, and with the other devolved administrations, and other partners, to make preparations.

We have consistently said it would be extremely difficult to mitigate the effects of a 'no deal', but we have a responsibility to prepare for such a bleak situation. We are working with other organisations across Wales to do all in our power to prepare. To inform citizens and organisations, we have created a Preparing Wales website, bringing together the latest advice and information. We anticipate launching that in the coming days, taking into account developments in what is a very fluid situation.  

Members will know that we are working hard to make sure that our statute book is up to date. An enormous amount of work is being done, here and in collaboration with the UK Government, to ensure that legislation necessary to function outside the European Union is in place before 29 March. The work is being tackled in extraordinary and unique circumstances, and we look to colleagues here in the National Assembly to play a part alongside us as a Government. We have activated the well-established networks for civil contingencies management in Wales, and we are linked in to the wider UK contingencies network. We are also working with local resilience fora across Wales. NHS Wales is working with the Department of Health and Social Care to facilitate their necessary preparations. Information useful to business is posted to our Business Wales Brexit portal, and further information will be provided as it becomes available.

Llywydd, there is no avoiding the serious reality of the difficult position we now face. 'No deal' is a very possible outcome, and, as a responsible Government, we must do all we can to work with others to prepare and mitigate where possible. But this is not the outcome we want. Even now, we remain ready to work with the UK Government, and others, to secure a sensible deal with the EU. We will find out soon how the UK Government and Parliament intend to resolve the position. We have already called for the article 50 deadline to be extended.

The UK Government has perplexed its friends, undermined our country’s interests, caused anxiety to Europeans in our community, and exacerbated deep division amongst its own citizens. If the UK Government can't bring forward a deal that commands strong support, then it should stand aside. The current chaos cannot continue.

Can I thank the Counsel General, or Brexit Minister—whichever role he's making the statement today in—for making a copy of the statement available to me? I have to say, I'm a little bit disappointed at the tone of the statement that's just been delivered, because of course we all know that Theresa May has been working incredibly hard to be able to build a consensus of support in the UK Parliament—[Interruption.]—in the UK Parliament, in order to deliver a Brexit that realises the outcome of the referendum back in June 2016. And yet it appears that we have a Labour Party, both in Westminster and here in Wales, that looks set to try to frustrate Brexit and to frustrate the will of the people. And let's not forget; the people of Wales voted to leave the EU. I know that that's an inconvenient truth for some people in this Chamber, but it is a statement of fact. And, of course, in your own constituency, Counsel General, it was very clear that there was a margin of almost 14 per cent of people voting in favour of leaving the EU. 

Now, we can't ignore those facts. We have to deliver on the outcome of the referendum whether people voted to leave or to remain. What the Prime Minister has done is she's gone to Brussels, she's engaged with stakeholders, she's listened to people's concerns and she's come back with a deal that is a compromise deal, that not everybody is happy with. But it's a deal nevertheless that will avoid the sort of turbulence that you have described that could happen if we leave the EU without a deal on 29 March. [Interruption.] 

It's all very well of you to be crowing and criticising the fact that article 50 was triggered, but let's not forget that article 50 was triggered with the support of the Labour Party and, in fact, it would have been triggered even sooner had Jeremy Corbyn had his way, because it was the day of the referendum he wanted to hand our notice in. So, what we have is a Prime Minister who's trying to steer and steady the ship at a difficult time in British politics and we ought to be working collaboratively on a cross-party basis—this is where I do agree with the Counsel General—in order to deliver a Brexit that will work in the interest of everybody here in Wales.

We need some mutual respect, and I don't feel that the tone of the statement that you made is giving that mutual respect in terms of the UK Government, because we know that, of course, the UK Government is trying to include the Welsh Government in taking the situation forward. I know, for example—and you could have given us an update on this, but you didn't, and I would appreciate it if you could tell us what the outcome of the meeting was that you had on 19 December, when you attended the national security council meeting.

Perhaps you could have given us an update on the weekly meetings that the First Minister and the Welsh Government have been invited to participate in in terms of the new EU exit preparedness arrangements. You could have told us about the numerous statutory instruments that have been passed with the agreement of the UK and the Welsh Governments—75 of them in all, which have been laid before the UK Parliament. You could have decided to inform us about the arrangements that you have in place, under the contingency plans, for Holyhead and Pembrokeshire ports. You could have told us about the daily communication that's taking place between the Welsh Government and the UK Government in terms of your communications teams, which I understand is working very well. But instead what you've done is you've simply repeated the same old, same old claptrap, frankly, that we've heard time and time again from the Welsh Government, without adding anything new to the mix today. 

So, what I would like to know is: how are you working with the UK Government? Where are you collaborating? What can you give in terms of assurances that you will continue to engage with the UK Government to deliver a successful Brexit? How is the Welsh Government going to deliver on the outcome of the referendum in a different way than that which has been described by the Prime Minister's deal? Because we know that the Prime Minister's deal will enable us to take control of our own borders and it will end free movement. Your arrangements, as set out in 'Securing Wales' Future', will not be able to do that.

We know that the Prime Minister's deal will protect jobs. We know that there will be no rolling back of environmental protections or employment protections. You've suggested we ought to continue to be wedded to the EU in terms of their environmental and employment protections, even if they are eroded in the future. Well, the Prime Minister's given an even better guarantee: she said there will be no erosion, and I think that it would be good to know that you would also like to make that statement too. In addition, of course, the Prime Minister's deal will enable us to strike free trade agreements around the world. Your proposals wouldn't enable us to do that by tying us to a future customs agreement in the way that's set out in 'Securing Wales' Future'. And, of course, the Prime Minister's deal protects the integrity of the United Kingdom. That's why I'm supporting the Prime Minister, and I think that the UK ought to be working on a cross-party basis to deliver the Brexit that the people of Wales and the rest of the UK voted for. 

The Member talks about the inconvenient truth. I'm afraid the inconvenient truth is this: that people in Wales were promised there would be no damage to their job prospects as a consequence of leaving the European Union; they were promised there would be not a penny less coming into Wales from European funding sources; they were promised sunny, sunlit uplands by those campaigning to leave the European Union—and the Prime Minister's deal offers none of that. It offers none of it. It offers two years of seeking to stick to red lines, which were never going to be defendable, and spending the time that could have been spent in the kind of cross-party initiatives that the Member has been describing, to reach across to other parts of the House of Commons to seek to build, in admittedly difficult circumstances, a consensus around the kind of Brexit that people in the UK have voted for—that is not what the Prime Minister did. She focused her efforts on managing her own party and managing the tensions in her party, rather than seeking to build that expansive consensus in admittedly difficult times. It's no good, at the eleventh hour, calling up union leaders to give the impression that she is seeking to reach out; it is not credible at this point. The work should have been being done for the last two years. The eleventh hour is not the time at which to be doing that.

The Member talks about working together. As a constructive partner, we do work together with the UK Government in terms of preparedness and in terms of many other things. He mentioned the legislative programme; there has been a high degree of co-operation in parts of that. We have had to press for an awful lot of that co-operation, and I have to say, where it has been delivered, it has delivered progress for us. You will know about the inter-governmental agreement, which we worked together on. The point I'm making is this: in putting together the vision—not simply the way it happens, but the vision—for the future of the UK's relationship in the European Union, the Prime Minister had it open to her to reach a broad consensus, and she chose not to follow that path. We have been clear. He asks what we would do if we were in her situation. We have been very clear about this. The time now has come to extend article 50 and create space to enable that kind of discussion to take place, which reflects the principles that this Assembly have supported, to reflect the principles in 'Securing Wales' Future'. Also, we know that senior leaders in the EU will be happy to negotiate on that sort of basis. She has missed that opportunity so far. It is not too late to take that opportunity, and we encourage her to do that.

I’m very grateful to the Counsel General for the statement, and I welcome also the Government’s endorsement, and its appeal to the Government of the United Kingdom to extend article 50 on the basis of the motion passed before Christmas.

Just on that point, it’s one thing to appeal to the United Kingdom Government, even though there’s been no hearing given to that at present, but it’s important also that we reach out to other member states of the European Union that will have to respond to any proposals. Is the Welsh Government considering forging those relationships with member states—such as the Republic of Ireland—to ensure that they’re aware that there are some in the United Kingdom who are pressing for the timelines to be extended?

One thing that is missing in the statement, even though the Counsel General did start touching on it, was: an extension to what end? Of course, the Counsel General has just reflected perhaps some of the language that we’ve heard from his fellow members of the Labour Party in Westminster—namely to extend it, to find an opportunity to have renegotiation and a better deal. The truth is—and that was endorsed, certainly, in the discussions that we had with the Government of the Republic of Ireland—that isn’t an option. The time has passed for that. So, it’s only to extend for something fundamentally different, such as membership of the single market, or, of course, a people's vote.

And on this, of course, we are some four hours away from the vote this evening. Things will accelerate, and I understand why the Labour Party has tried to keep all options on the table, but over the coming days we are likely to have a vote of no confidence, and the likelihood is that that will be lost. In that particular situation, would the Welsh Government move swiftly to make a decision and a statement with regard to what should then happen? We could be talking about developments by the end of this week, that is not something that will happen over the coming weeks—there aren’t many weeks left. So, can the Counsel General  walk us through the steps to be taken over the coming weeks with regard to the loss of this evening’s vote, or the failure of it?

And finally, one of the things that we also discussed in Dublin was the need, regardless of what happens with Brexit, to intensify and to strengthen the links that we do have across the Irish sea in the Celtic nations where we have so much in common, so many joint interests, and to use the capacity that is there under the Good Friday Agreement, under strand 3, to create a multilateral relationship between Ireland, Scotland and Wales, so that, whatever the mess that should enfold in Westminster, we at least, together, can collaborate for the future, for the benefit, of course, of all those nations.

I thank the Member for his question. On the point of extending article 50, we have been calling for this because it is evident that we need more space in order to arrive at the right point with regard to a deal that works for Wales and for the United Kingdom. Having an opportunity to have those discussions would be a prize worth winning for all, and that we have a plan that gives the interests of Wales and the UK an opportunity to be respected and supported, and also a relationship that recognises the crucially important role of the European Union as a trading partner and so on for us as a nation. And having an extension of article 50 would give us an opportunity to try and attract more support than what the deal that the Prime Minister in Westminster has on the table has at the present time.

With regard to the next steps, we anticipate, of course, that the Prime Minister will lose the vote this evening and that a motion of no confidence will be tabled within a period of time of that. It’s a question of when not if, and we know, of course, that in the light of the Dominic Grieve amendment to the recent motion that the Prime Minister has to come back to Westminster within three days with a further statement. So, that will give a moment of further clarity to us. 

With regard to collaboration and joint working with Ireland, for example, as he mentioned in his question, the First Minister has already been in contact with the Taoiseach. I have written to my opposite number in the Irish Government too. These links are important ones within the European Union and beyond the membership of the European Union, and we must take every opportunity possible to strengthen those links. I attended, with the former First Minister, the British-Irish Council to discuss this issue at the tail end of last year, and it’s very encouraging, I think, in the context of the question that the Member has raised, that there is now a portfolio allocated for this kind of work within the Cabinet, under the First Minister.

These are deeply concerning times for the communities we represent, for businesses, for the country as a whole, and they're looking for this Government and other governments to plan our way through it. Now, in the welcome statement this afternoon, you've made—the Counsel General and Brexit Minister has made—very clear that should there be a defeat in the vote tonight, as most commentators, most politicians, most of the public, and old Uncle Tom Cobley and all are expecting, then depending on the scale of that defeat, depending on what the outcome of that defeat will be—and there are a number of different scenarios—the Welsh Government would hold a hand out for further discussions amongst other devolved administrations, on a cross-party basis, which would look at discussions based on the idea of a customs union, of a fair movement of workforce, on fair immigration and so on. But there are other possible scenarios as well, and depending on the scale of defeat tonight—if there is a defeat tonight, because we can't forecast it, but most are thinking that this is what's going to happen—we could be in negotiation again, we could be in a situation where we have Government collapse, we could be in a situation where we have a Prime Minister removed or a Government stepping down, it could be a general election, and we could be looking at scenarios including that of a further public vote.

Most people in this Chamber—not all, I appreciate that—but most people in this Chamber would want to avoid the situation of simply stepping out of the EU, whichever way you would call it, a hard Brexit, a 'no deal', crashing out of the EU—not a managed transition. But I'm struggling to see a way now in which we can avoid that in any of those scenarios without actually an extension of the article 50 deadline. Any of those discussions, negotiations, general election, public vote et cetera, et cetera, et cetera all seem to require an extension to article 50. So, I'd ask the Brexit Minister and Counsel General: am I missing something, or isn't that now an absolute prerogative, unless we accept that we are going to step right off that cliff edge?

But it is right that, meanwhile, we do continue planning in detail here in Wales and at a UK level for that 'no deal'. So, could I ask the Counsel General and Brexit Minister to expand on the work that he is doing in different ways, and fellow Ministers are doing in different ways, on those 'no deal' preparations right across the business of Government, but also with businesses and other stakeholders, on civil contingency planning and also on communications? Because the concern that the business community, residents and the people of Wales have at this moment—they need reassurance that that proper 'no deal' planning is taking place.

Finally, could I ask if he has more up-to-date detail for us on the use of the European transition fund to address pressing priorities in the case of a 'no deal' scenario? I know the Government has been thinking though this. He and other Ministers have been keen to address the top priorities in the case of a 'no deal' scenario. How is that European transition fund being used? It is right that we plan for a 'no deal', but I'm struggling to see a way now, frankly, in any managed transition or any eventuality that doesn't simply step off the cliff that does not need an extension of the article 50 deadline. 

I thank the Member for that question. Firstly, with regard to the extension of article 50, I think he's right to say that. I think that finding a resolution to this is going to need an extension to article 50. That's certainly what we've been calling on the Government in Westminster to seek from the other European Union members.

In relation to the work of preparation, he's absolutely right to identify this as a cross-Government responsibility. There isn't really a part of Government that this doesn't touch, and all Members of the Government are responsible for ensuring that we are looking at the various consequences of different scenarios and preparing as best we can for those. Preparedness work comes in four strands, if I can summarise it in this way. Firstly, the sort of work where, as I mentioned in my statement, the UK Government is leading on aspects of it because the levers are in their control, for example, but we have a strong interest in some of those areas and therefore we're participating with them—supplies of medicines and so on would be an example of that. There's the work we've been doing on the legislative programme. We've consented in this place to around half of the volume that will need to be passed through Westminster, and we've begun, over the last few weeks, to lay Welsh-specific regulations here in the Assembly as well, as he knows. Work on that is on track. Obviously there is some work here that is dependent on work that is happening at Westminster, but providing that continues to happen to the current timetable, then we are reasonably well placed to make sure that that's done in time. There is civil contingencies work that he refers to there. Those are very established structures, as he will know, and they engage the UK Government and all devolved administrations and local government and other partners as well. Clearly it's incumbent on all the Governments in the UK to look at different scenarios and to ensure that those civil contingency arrangements, in ways that may be familiar, are able to be activated should they need to happen. Clearly, the objective is that that should never be the case, and the preparedness in other areas means that the risk of those procedures needing to be activated is minimised.

That takes me to the fourth area in which preparedness is under way: projects that are specific to Wales that perhaps reflect characteristics specific to Wales—the nature of our economy, the fact that we have a high number of small and medium-sized enterprises, for example. So, those projects are the sorts of things that have been supported by the Welsh Government through the European Union transition fund, and that's touched all sectors of the economy, private, public and third sector as well. He may have seen the announcement today of further support for police liaison for social services and for the future planning of regional investment, in which he will have an interest given his new responsibilities. We're also discussing with the Welsh Local Government Association what further support we can give to local government, and there'll be announcements about that in due course.

Thanks to the Brexit Minister for his statement today. To quote from page 3 of your statement:

'we face leaving without a deal on 29 March and we must prepare for that.'

I think that's a very sensible approach. I take on board what you say, that many levers, in terms of preparing for Brexit, are in the hands of the UK Government. But I think that there are a lot of contingency plans that you can set in motion now, and I do welcome the fact that you are actually making plans for us to leave the European Union. I think it can be no bad thing if contingency plans are made for the date that we're working with, of 29 March, which is in only nine weeks' time, and hopefully that will be the date when the United Kingdom leaves the European Union. I see that on Sky News they now have a countdown on the screen, which is today showing that there are only 73 days until Brexit. Given the time frame, and given all the plans that you could conceivably make, is it your intention to give us a Brexit update each Tuesday? I think that would be helpful, bearing in mind the comments that Darren Millar made about all of the meetings that are taking place between different levels of government that we don't always hear about in this place. So, I think it would be a good idea if we did have a weekly update of what your contingency plans are exactly, given that we now know that we do face this prospect of leaving on the correct date of 29 March, and given the fact that you're now accepting that as a very real possibility.

As I say, I think there are things that the Welsh Government can do to plan. For instance, you've set up the website. I think that's a good idea. Working with the ports authorities is very important, so it would be good if you could give us some updates on that as we go along, if you can't add anything to what you've said this afternoon on that issue.

As I say, on this side of the Chamber we are very much committed to leaving on the date of 29 March. I'm glad that you've now put in your statement that that is a possibility you are countenancing. I hope that your efforts are now going to be concentrated on making these contingency plans and giving advice to people and to businesses, rather than on lobbying the UK Government not to leave the EU or to delay the leaving date, which is what you've been doing for the last two and a half years. The best thing is to focus your efforts on making your contingency plans, accept firmly that 29 March is the date that the UK will leave the EU, because, as you've said yourself today, that is now a very real possibility. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Clearly, unless there's an extension to article 50, 29 March has always been the date at which we leave the European Union. The question is on what basis does that happen? I'm afraid that the notion that leaving without a deal is just one scenario that we could just plan for is for the birds. The truth of it is that leaving without a deal is very bad news for Wales and very bad news for the United Kingdom. Even the Government's own economic projections tell you that, and we face an economy that is 10 per cent smaller than it would have been under a 'no deal' scenario. That's not just a statistic. That's people's jobs, people's livelihoods, people's businesses and so on. [Interruption.] It's not scaremongering. The Government's own figures tell us that there will be economic damage as a consequence of that outcome. So, this is not just one modelling scenario where plans will be able to deal with this in its entirety. What we are doing is making sure that the plans that we are able to make—either here in Wales on our own, or working together with the UK Government and other devolved administrations—are being put in place. And, as the likelihood of a 'no deal' Brexit has become more apparent, so our preparations have been intensified to deal with that. But I just want to be absolutely clear: no amount of planning and preparation is going to be able to mitigate the damage that a 'no deal' Brexit would cause to Wales and to the United Kingdom. I'm afraid that's just the reality of it.

On the question of communications, it will be important for us in the weeks ahead to make sure that the Assembly is kept appraised of developments and has the opportunity, obviously, of holding Ministers to account in relation to that. I am afraid that I didn't respond to the point that Huw Irranca-Davies mentioned at the end of his question. So, since it relates to communications, I'll touch on that as well now. I mentioned in my statement the launch in the next few days of the portal, Paratoi Cymru. The objective there is to provide an authoritative, comprehensive and single source of information for people in Wales to understand what actions we are taking as a Welsh Government in relation to preparedness, and it'll contain material from the UK Government where that provides a fuller picture. We want to make sure that that is provided in a way that is both timely, but also contextualised, and in a way that takes into account communications from the UK Government and others as well.

I greatly welcome today's statement by the Counsel General and Brexit Minister. Let us be in no doubt that the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Government has made an absolute hash of negotiating the UK's exit from the European Union. If it wasn't so dangerous, it would be almost funny, like Boris. But, anyway, irrespective of this dangerous flux caused by the Tory leadership, it is vital for businesses and the economy, and for communities throughout my constituency in Islwyn, that the Welsh Government continue to do all they can within their capacity to safeguard our prosperity.

Two years ago, the Welsh Government, as has been stated, jointly published with Plaid Cymru its proposals in the White Paper, 'Securing Wales' Future', and it is also right to properly mention Steffan Lewis's input into this important document, which has been around for two and a half years. Throughout the tortuous last two and a half years, the Welsh Government, whilst respecting the outcome of the 2016 referendum, continued to strongly stand up for Wales and the best interests of our people. As has been said, and rightly stated, no-one voted in the referendum to be poorer. Equally, as we discussed Ford earlier today, no-one voted to lose their jobs, lose their homes, pay more for food, lose access to essential medicine, or be less secure from the threat of terrorism.

Presuming that, as is widely expected, the Prime Minister loses tonight's vote, she has options to do the decent thing. She could recommit to working with the devolved administrations, genuinely and on a cross-party basis, and ask the European Union, as has been stated, for an extension to the article 50 deadline, as we have. But morally, ethically and democratically, with no control of Parliament, will the Minister and Counsel General agree with me that the next thing that the Prime Minister should do, which would aid the people of Wales, would be an audience with Her Majesty and request a swift dissolution of Parliament for a general election to be held? Our people deserve no less, and I believe we deserve much more.   

I thank Rhianon for her question. The notion that a Government that is unable to take through the House of Commons its policy on the defining issue of the day should not seek a dissolution of Parliament would be very novel in our constitution. It would be exactly what follows, as night follows day, in any circumstance. So, it is right that the Government will face a motion of no confidence. As we have said, and as our colleagues have said in Westminster, it's a question of when, not if, that should happen. And we have said that, even at this late point in time, it is possible for the Prime Minister, should she choose to, to seek a different kind of deal with the European Union for Brexit, one that reflects a much closer relationship with the single market and the customs union, continued commitments of funding, a fair migration policy that works for the whole of the UK—not the principles that are set out in the immigration White Paper, which fundamentally do not work for public services, the private sector, here in Wales or across the UK—and a commitment to secure the rights of people on a progressive basis, keeping pace with developments across Europe, not simply frozen as they are today. It is still open for her to seek that sort of deal from the European Union. 

Thank you. Finally, David Rees. 

Diolch, Dirprwy Llywydd. Can I thank the Minister for his statement this afternoon on the future relationships and where we go with EU withdrawal? I've heard voices across the Chamber this afternoon trying to indicate that this Prime Minister has done a wonderful deal. Well, the reality is she hasn't, and the delay she's experienced—in contradiction to what you just said in your answer to Rhianon Passmore, the delay in my view is—. She's created five weeks' delay as a consequence. It's time to go back and renegotiate, but don't forget, when you renegotiate, you have to renegotiate with the 27 members as well, and they'll have to ratify any new deal. So, timescales to actually get something done by 29 March are very, very tight, so an extension is more likely if that's what she wants to do so. That's crucial. 

Minister, I can also assure you that the committee that you used to be a member of will continue to play its part in the process, particularly in regard to legislation, but not at the price of losing any scrutiny of the legislation. We will ensure that that scrutiny does take place. 

Can I ask a couple of questions of the Minister? Perhaps, for yourself, we've submitted reports as a committee on preparedness, which I know went to the First Minister, but perhaps you can ensure that we have those responses to those reports urgently because, clearly, if the vote tonight is to defeat the Prime Minister's deal then, as the First Minister alluded to last week, we are likely to have updates next week on preparedness, and we would like to see what the Government's response to our reports is in that sense. 

Has the Minister had discussions with the other UK nations as to what jointly we can do to actually address a 'no deal' situation and a defeat in Parliament tonight and perhaps, even so, as Adam Price alluded to, with our immediate neighbours, particularly Ireland, to ensure that we are in tune with actions that we can take to mitigate any damage that a 'no deal' will cause? 

Have you had discussions with the Treasury, because, if we do have a 'no deal' situation, they have guaranteed—? The UK Government has guaranteed they will cover the EU funding projects. So, have you had discussions with the Treasury as to how that would happen? What's the process? Are mechanisms in place to ensure that organisations that are currently being funded by Europe and programmes that are currently being funded by Europe will be able to have that money, or have confidence in that money not coming down in two years' time, but be in a position where they can actually pay their bills to ensure that they can be delivering those programmes?

You highlighted medicines and the department of health and social services. Can I highlight also not just medicines but equipment? And I'll give you an example. The recent Gatwick experience delayed Gatwick not because of the EU, but because of a drone, but as a result of that I know of nuclear physics examinations that were cancelled because they didn't have the isotopes in place, because the half life was too short for them to actually get things in place. So, again, there are issues that we have to look at on other aspects. 

And perhaps I can ask one question—

We're running out of time.

—on his other role, which links into this, because you're Counsel General. The Tusk and Juncker letter yesterday, which was displayed and produced by Theresa May in her statement, and she questioned or she indicated the legality aspects of that, have you done an analysis on the legal aspects of that, and what its legal position is in relation to the assurances that were given in that letter? And would those affect Wales?  

On that last point, I am reflecting on the legal context of that discussion. 

Can I firstly say, in relation to the reports that the committee that he chairs has produced on a range of preparedness issues, in particular towards the latter part of last year, that I've found them very beneficial? And I know that colleagues in Government are considering them with a view to issuing, obviously, responses on behalf of the Government. 

He asked about discussions with Ministers in the UK Government about 'no deal' preparedness. Yes, those conversations are ongoing. As I say, in some areas, the information has been flowing perhaps more freely than in other areas. Those departments that have more familiarity with dealing with devolved administrations perhaps have found it easier to be more open in their information sharing, but we have been pressing for that to become a more consistent approach across UK Government. Actually, where that happens, it obviously leads to better outcomes and better processes. 

In relation to funding, well, you know, we miss no opportunity to press the UK Government on its commitment in relation to funding. But, in a 'no deal' scenario, I think we just have to be very clear that significant additional funding would need to be made available from the UK Government, not in the conventional Barnett sense, but entirely outside that, in order to be able to deal with the consequences of that outcome. 

Thank you very much, Counsel General.