Well, the record will show that you just asked for the black route to be built. So, we can perhaps check the record after this debate. 

Now to the elements of the motion that we can't accept. Firstly, it is inconsistent about devolution. I fail to see how it's possible to call for further devolution and yet support the UK Government's hollow concept of the shared prosperity fund as a way of replacing funds that Wales has been managing for decades to invest in matters within our devolved competence. It's hollow because, for more than two years, they have failed to spell out any concrete ideas about how it would work or what it would do. What is clear, however, is that it would mean the UK Government hijacking the funding that formerly came unmediated to Wales from the European Union and hobbling this National Assembly and Welsh Government from using it to realise a coherent development strategy. It's clearly an attack on the powers of the Assembly, and I think a party committed genuinely to devolution couldn't support that proposition. We've been clear that if and when the UK transitions out of the EU structural funds, not a penny should be lost and not a power stolen. 

Next, the union. As a Government, we want the union to flourish. But, unlike the motion, we recognise that that can only happen if there is radical reform of the constitution, including inter-governmental relations—reform that the current Government is, at best, neglectful of and, at worst, uninterested in. Llywydd, at no time has the union been under greater strain. Devolution is or should be an embedded element of our constitution, not something which is seen as a gift from Westminster and Whitehall, and the debate about devolution is not just about the separate relations between the UK and each of the devolved nations—it needs to address how the UK as a whole should be governed. And we need to recognise that power ultimately flows bottom up, not, as the outdated doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty and the royal prerogative, top down, and that the future of the union relies on the consent of the peoples and electorates of Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and England.

A key principle for the devolution of powers, used by independent bodies that have recommended the devolution of air passenger duty, rail infrastructure, policing and justice to Wales, is subsidiarity. We support strongly the devolution of further powers in those areas, and for the powers of the devolved institutions to be founded on a coherent set of responsibilities allocated in accordance with the subsidiarity principle. What the First Minister has called the 'grace and favour' model of devolution has most dramatically failed in the case of Brexit, where the UK Government has repeatedly failed to live up to its commitments to work with the devolved Governments and institutions to agree an approach to the negotiations, and the fact that the current Government sees no reason—as a Minister told the External Affairs and Additional Legislation Committee on Monday—to share papers shared with the EU negotiators not merely in advance, but at all, with us is both telling and very disturbing. And it’s Brexit that, of course, most obviously threatens the future of the union, with a ‘no deal’ Brexit recklessly taking a wrecking ball to the UK constitution, making it likely that Scotland will vote when it’s allowed to for independence, and also boosting the case for what would almost certainly be a divisive border poll in Ireland.

So, in ending, let me turn to Brexit. We do indeed note that Wales, like the UK as a whole, voted to leave in 2016, and, as we have made clear here many times, as a Welsh Government, we tried to honour that result. But it’s about time that those who campaigned to leave started to honour the promises they made. [Interruption.] Many of the claims made by the leave campaign have been left in tatters, which is why the Member barracks me a sedentary position. 'The easiest free-trade agreement in history', it was said. The German car manufacturers begging the EU to sacrifice their political values, having our cake and eating it, more money for the NHS, an abrupt end to immigration—where are those claims now as we face the potential of a 'no deal' Brexit that threatens deep and lasting damage to our country and our people? Tomorrow we will publish a full, evidence-based case for our decision to call, after three years, three wasted years, of mismanaged, disastrous negotiations and with jobs and investment leaching from our economy, for a second referendum and to pledge to campaign to remain in the EU. The objective case is unanswerable, and our amendments, unlike the original motion, emphasise reform, democracy and the well-being of the people of Wales, and I urge Members to support those principles in amending the motion.