I welcome the opportunity to rise in the Chamber this afternoon to speak in this debate, albeit I recognise the limitations of the actions that we can take. I do identify myself with many of the comments that David Melding made—the Conservative Party is nothing if it is not a broad church. Some people might find that odd coming from my mouth as a Brexiteer, but actually, as a Brexiteer, I passionately believe that voices have to be listened to, in whatever party they sit. But if the people have spoken, then you do have to act on the wishes and instructions of the people. And that’s what the referendum in 2016 was about. It was about seeking an instruction from the British people—Wales, England, Scotland and Northern Ireland—as to how they wanted our relationship to be with the European Union.

I did have to refresh my mind as to exactly how the ballot paper looked, because I’ve heard so many people over the three years that have intervened say, 'Well, that wasn’t on the ballot paper', 'This wasn’t on the ballot paper', 'That was on the ballot paper'. To me, it was relatively simple: there was the word 'remain' and there was the word 'leave', and I would suggest that most, if not everyone, who walked into that ballot booth knew what they were voting for. Now, we can argue—[Interruption.] We can argue—[Interruption.] We can argue that there was a very broad range between the 'leave' and the 'remain' that people aspired to have. On the remain side, was it that we were to have a federal state of Europe such as Juncker has outlined over the last three years and increasing integration—and I’m hearing 'yes, yes' from some quarters—or was it the status—[Interruption.] Was it the status quo? 'Leave'—was it the break that is talked about on 31 October when no agreement is in place, or was it an agreement to be put in place and then we leave? And that’s the discussion that we've been arguing about for the last three years. Now people can argue as much as they want about what Boris Johnson has done over the last six weeks, but he has sought to bring this to a conclusion, and that has to be something—