There were five questions in that set of interventions. The first is about the actions of the Prime Minister. They were decided by the Supreme Court to be unlawful. The second point that she made is my assessment of the impact of the recent legislation around a 'no deal' Brexit. I'm afraid I won't share, in accordance with the Counsel General's convention, my advice to the Welsh Government in relation to that.

She asked me for the proof that I have that the Prime Minister intends to act unlawfully. Well, I have access to the same information that any other Member has, which is the Prime Minister's repeated assertion that we will leave the European Union on 31 October whether that is with a deal or no deal. The Act requires something other than that. So, continuing to assert that appears to put him at odds with the requirement of the legislation. She asked what arrangements we have made to inform people of our actions in relation to shortages. Well, obviously, we've published a 'no deal' action plan, and we're giving statements today.

Lastly, she asked me about the impact, or the risks, of not respecting—as I think she would put it—the referendum. Let me just say this in relation to that last point: we don't take lightly the fact that the 2016 referendum concluded what it did conclude. We spent an awful lot of time seeking to advocate for a version of Brexit that did the least possible damage to Wales, the Welsh economy and our communities. That failed in Parliament because of the Tory leadership contest. In effect, it brought that to an end. So, we have been clear that the solution to the situation that we are in is to seek a referendum. I regard that as a democratic event in itself.