Well, of course, I was one of those who campaigned to remain, but, when we had lost, I accepted the result. I, at the time, was working for a youth work charity and I experienced directly the distress and anger of many, many young people at the result. At that time, we worked with them, advocating acceptance, trying to deal with their emotional distress and attempting to work to influence the nature of what Brexit might look like—for example, retaining the UK's place in the Erasmus programme that's been so important.

It isn't very often in this place that I admit to naivety, Llywydd, but I have to say that I thought there was a plan. Now, given the people who were advocating Brexit, I should have known better, because there clearly wasn't one. I assumed that the people who wanted this to happen would know the nature of it, and my colleague Llyr Gruffydd has just told us of the multicoloured Brexit nonsense that we've had ever since. So, I did accept the result of this referendum because I think, in principle, that was the right thing to do, but I thought by this time—[Interruption.] And please, can I just say this? I am quite happy to accept interventions, but I find it difficult to speak properly when I have people making comments from the floor. So, if any Member who disagrees with me or indeed agrees with me would like to make an intervention, I'm very open to doing that, but, please, the way we treat each other in this place ought to be with respect, and so let's listen to one another, even when we disagree.

So, I was prepared to accept it, assuming that there would be some kind of plan, that there would be things we could put in place perhaps to mitigate some of the worst effects, and three years on, everything is completely different. There is no plan, or there is a wide range of different plans, and other colleagues have already pointed out some of the consequences that have come to light.

Now, colleagues here have said that we don't know why people voted the way they did. Well, in fact, that isn't true. There's been extensive academic research looking into why people voted 'yes' and why people voted 'no', and we know, as other colleagues have said, that that powerful message about taking back control was one that very understandably resonated sometimes with people in communities who felt that their lives were out of control. Of course, what we've seen since is the absolute opposite of any kind of control, with the people advocating Brexit unable to tell us what it ought to look like, unprepared, perhaps, to be honest. And many colleagues, as I've said, have highlighted the huge potential risks and the current threat that has come to light again this week to our health service—what was offered as the golden deal. The trade deal with the NHS is just one of dozens and dozens of examples that we could cite.

So, we do know that people had good reasons for voting the way that they did, and we also know, because there's ongoing extensive research, that many of them have changed their minds. One group of the population that hasn't changed its mind is young people. Three years ago, 18 to 24-year-olds voted 71 per cent to remain and 29 per cent to leave. Now, it is their future—many of us won't be here to see the long-term consequences of particularly what a 'no deal' Brexit would mean, but it is their future that is hanging in the balance.

I think today of all days it's also very important to remember the other group of the population that voted overwhelmingly to remain, and that was those of our fellow citizens who remembered the second world war, who remembered the genesis of the European Community—whatever its faults, and there are none of us here who think that institution as it is, I'm sure, is perfect—but that generation, our parents' generation, who knew what that conflict was like stood with the young people and voted roughly 70 per cent to 30 per cent to remain. Now—