First Minister, my colleagues at Westminster are meeting with Jeremy Corbyn as we speak, in order to explore cross-party co-operation in achieving, even at this late stage, a collaborative approach. We hope greater clarity will emerge about Labour's real position on Brexit. Last week, BBC Wales reported that a senior source inside the Welsh Labour Party—who may or may not be sitting, who knows, on your frontbenches—said that your lack of clarity over a people's vote was causing tensions in your Cabinet. They called your policy unsustainable and confusing. Your own AM—Torfaen's Lynne Neagle—described your position as ridiculous and unconvincing. Now, in your statement today, you said a second referendum would be divisive, possibly indecisive, though you would support it subsequently, if the House of Commons did first. It's difficult to conceive of a weaker endorsement of the case for a second referendum. You're rowing further and further away, First Minister, from the policy that we endorsed in this place in January, so much so that, if, miraculously, Jeremy Corbyn u-turns again, adopts a policy of a people's vote, following his meeting with Plaid Cymru this afternoon, you'll end up actually passing each other, facing opposite directions, like sinking ships in the night.

And then there's the question, First Minister, if another referendum were to happen, which way would you and the Labour Party campaign and vote? Interviewed by Sky News on Sunday, Jeremy Corbyn seemed, finally, to come off the fence. And then he got back on it. First, he conceded that there should be another referendum, on what he termed a credible deal to leave the European Union, by which he meant a deal negotiated by Labour to set up a new customs union and close alignment with the single market, and an option to remain in the EU. When he was pressed as to how he would vote in such a referendum, he answered that it was his preference to recognise the result of the 2016 referendum. Obfuscation is dead, long live obfuscation. What did he mean by that? First Minister, perhaps you can tell us here now. My colleagues in Westminster will certainly be asking him. But your statement today suggests that it's your preference too to secure your version of Brexit over a 'remain' result in any future referendum.

Finally, can I turn to the analysis for your Government by King's College London Professor Jonathan Portes, which has found that Wales will be harder hit than the rest of the UK by the proposed £30,000 minimum salary for skilled migrants who look to come to the UK from 2021? He said that, while average full-time earnings for the UK as a whole are not far off £30,000, in Wales they are significantly below that. Consequently, they would be a huge barrier to Welsh businesses seeking skilled professionals from abroad. He recommended a £20,000 minimum salary to apply to Wales. So far, the Welsh Government—as far as I've been able to find out—hasn't expressed a view about the results of its own research. So, First Minister, do you agree with Professor Portes, and, if so, what are you doing to persuade the UK Government to take his recommendations on board?