I start my contribution this afternoon by thanking the Minister for laying the second supplementary legislative consent memorandum and for tabling the motion we're debating today. As the Minister knows, and the Chair of the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee has indicated, this actually comes from correspondence from the External Affairs and Additional Legislation Committee, and I'm glad we're able to debate and consider the question of consent for provisions that were inserted into the Trade Bill by an amendment at a late stage in the Westminster scrutiny process. I will try and avoid duplicating anything that my colleague the Chair of the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee has said, because we have very similar views in our committee to his committee. But I want to remind Members that this is the second time during the Brexit process where we've had new provisions inserted into a Westminster Bill at the eleventh hour that require the consent of this Assembly. We regret that we were unable to consider our consent in relation to the first such instance, which was during the end of the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill's passage through Parliament, but I'm pleased we're able to do so today and that we have an opportunity to actually debate the Trade Bill amendments. I do accept the Minister's position where we have given consent to the previous aspects and we should therefore technically be looking at the amendments inserted by the Lords in that Bill.

But the practicalities of considering issues of legislative consent that arise at the end of a Westminster Bill scrutiny process does require further consideration. It strikes me that this is a weakness in the current arrangements, particularly, as the Minister has inferred, when we're in a situation of ping-pong, where it's going back and fore like a yo-yo. We don't know where we will end up, but we do need to look at where is the process of scrutiny for this Assembly if additional amendments are made and approved after we have given consent to an LCM. The whole process of Brexit has actually shown us the weaknesses in the current scrutiny process.

Now, the External Affairs and Additional Legislation Committee considered the second supplementary legislative consent memorandum yesterday, and whilst this afternoon we've heard from the Minister the details of that amendment made in the Lords, with the timescales allowed to us, clearly we have not been able to provide a report on our consideration, but we are content to say that no further substantive points of scrutiny have arisen for us based upon the amendment we considered.

I'd like to close by thanking the Minister again for laying the memorandum. It is important that this institution does have an opportunity to debate supplementary amendments to LCMs that we have already given consent to. Because otherwise, we are not having an opportunity to comment upon something that will impact upon devolved competencies. The action is as important in terms of the principle of upholding that consent convention as it is in terms of the details of the amendments that gave rise to this debate. So, please, whenever we can, continue laying supplementary LCMs, but perhaps, as an Assembly, we also need to make representations to Westminster to look at the process, so that we have that opportunity even more.