Diolch, Llywydd. May I start by thanking the Member for Bridgend for reminding us of the powerful impact in the daily lives of people of judgments that are made in relation to Brexit, and how getting those judgments wrong can have catastrophic consequences in real lives? There were a range of contributions from Assembly Members in this debate. The vast majority I welcomed. Some, I'm afraid, I disagreed with fundamentally.

Adam Price and Dawn Bowden were reflecting on the response that we would get from the European Union. We know, don't we—President Tusk reminded us just last night—the backstop is part of the withdrawal agreement, and the withdrawal agreement is not open for renegotiation. So, we believe that there's an obvious alternative Brexit deal available, as several key figures in the EU have acknowledged: to commit to a closer economic relationship of the sort that constituents in Jack Sargeant's constituency and steelworkers and large businesses in David Rees's constituency would want to see—the form of Brexit this Assembly has supported. But even mentioning this has caused outrage yet again today from those hardline Brexiteers like Neil Hamilton, who believe that 'no deal' is actually a desirable outcome. The Member for UKIP actually advocates a 'no deal' outcome. Let's be clear about that. We've said—. I've said—. I said at the start—