I'd like to take the Chamber back to 5 May 2016, and particularly a living room in Hengoed, where I was pacing the floor with—it was the evening of the count; the polls had closed and I was very tired, and I'd had a shower, and you know what it's like—pacing the floor with BBC Wales on the telly and academics from Cardiff University looking far too happy that the BBC had announced Caerphilly was too close to call and was, in fact, a three-way marginal. So, it was a funny old evening, and we didn't actually have any indication as to how the count was going until about three or four in the morning. And I went off to the count, and I was pacing the floor of the leisure centre looking depressed because I thought I'd lost and the Plaid candidate Lindsay Whittle was pacing the floor looking depressed because he thought he'd won. [Laughter.] And we eventually came—there's a lesson for you there, Delyth, right? We eventually came out with the result, and the result was: I had 35 per cent of the vote, Lindsay, Plaid Cymru, had 29 per cent of the vote and UKIP had 22 per cent of the vote. And I reflected on that. If that had been a first-past-the-post system, that result would not have been acceptable under a first-past-the post system. We have the D'Hondt system and we were able to see that those people who'd voted Plaid Cymru and UKIP, their votes were represented in the D'Hondt system. And as I say, Chief Whip, I, 100 per cent, want people to vote Labour—and 60 Labour Members would be amazing—but I was delighted to see Steffan Lewis elected on the list and knew that he'd be a fine Assembly Member. And I'll say to Delyth Jewell that I was disappointed that you weren't elected on that list as well, and serving here with Steffan.

But the issue I thought, then, was that the balance of our electoral process wasn't right, and the fact the D'Hondt system was needed to top up those seats and create this dual tier of Assembly Members when, in fact, a single transferable vote system would do it better was what persuaded me. It's actually not much to do with Brexit or the system in the UK, but that persuaded me, actually. For example—and I've read 'A Parliament that Works for Wales'—and, for example, a three-Member constituency may have seen, through the single transferable vote, a Labour, Plaid, UKIP three-Member constituency. Who knows what you would have seen as a result of the single transferable vote? But it would have been fairer; it would have been more proportional, and you would have seen a fairer sweep across the system than was represented even by the D'Hondt system, which itself, I believe, is flawed.

So, my support for more Assembly Members actually starts with a more proportional voting system. So, my call is for a more proportional voting system before we actually start talking about more Members. So I was a little bit concerned about signing the ERS motion because it doesn't talk about the voting system in the proposal. It says for a Parliament fit for the twenty-first century we need the right number of Members. That's a key part of the argument, but a missing bit is that proportional vote as well, which I think is absolutely key.

More Members though will also bring, as has already been said, better scrutiny. I often think, looking at the frontbench now—frontbench, please pay attention, I'm talking to you. [Laughter.] I look at the frontbench and I think, 'What do they want? Would they be happier with more people scrutinising them or fewer people scrutinising them?' Not just you two, not just the two sides over here, but me as well—you'll have more people like me, too, scrutinising these people there.