US pharma would want to deregulate the whole market, so that US drugs could compete. And we've all read the stories, Mark, about how pharmacies in the UK at the moment—for example for any kind of paracetamol, the price is a lot lower than what it would be for an equivalent drug in the US. So, if you have evidence to the contrary, in your contribution, which I'm sure you'll make later, I'd be very glad to hear it.

But as I was saying, US drug prices are obscene and very few companies have the expertise to navigate the complicated process that governs that. This allows unscrupulous vultures to acquire off-patent drugs on the cheap, then, to hike prices. So, when Trump says that drug prices in Europe are too low, what he actually means is that they aren't artificially hyper-inflated in order to increase the profits of the pharma industry. So, this is the nightmarish reality that could face us in the UK. If the US was successful in changing rules around patents and prices, the UK would either have to dramatically increase the size of the NHS budget to pay these huge additional costs, or move NHS funds from services to drug expenditure.

Now, the second biggest threat is the effect that deregulation of drug prescriptions would have on the health of patients. To see how this can affect public health you only need to look at the opioid crisis in the US, which has led to nearly 0.5 million deaths over the past 20 years. The pharmaceutical industry successfully shifted the prescribing policy in US states so that opioids were prescribed for a wide variety of reasons above their intended use, leading to widespread abuse and dependence. So, the threat is real.

Our NHS is facing a clear and present danger. The question is what can we do about it? The easiest way of taking the threat completely off the table would be to not leave the EU. If we decided to remain following a referendum, the threat to our NHS would disappear, and we would also have more money to spend on public services because we would have avoided an expensive divorce and a likely recession. But if a Tory Government is returned a week tomorrow, it's difficult to see how a hard Brexit followed by a dangerous trade deal with the US is to be avoided, unless we do something about it. That isn't something we can ignore because it's not politically expedient to admit to the possibility during an election period.

Plaid Cymru is today proposing three measures to protect the Welsh NHS. First of all, we want the devolved legislatures to hold a veto over UK trade deals that have the potential to affect devolved fields. The UK would not include measures that were unacceptable to Wales, Scotland an Northern Ireland, when Stormont is reconvened, because they'd want to avoid the veto being used. Our proposal is not without precedent, since the Wallonia region in Belgium possesses this veto and uses it in a responsible way. They've only invoked it once over the CETA trade deal between the EU and Canada, before allowing the deal to go ahead once they'd secured the concession they required. By voting against our proposal, Labour will be voting against giving themselves a veto over NHS privatisation. They may want to think this over before doing that.

We're also calling for Welsh MPs to support the NHS protection Bill, due to be introduced in Westminster in the new term by the SNP, with Plaid Cymru support. This would give added protection to the NHS against the effect of a future trade deal.

And finally, we want to repeal or modify section 82 of the Wales Act to take away the powers Westminster currently has to force Welsh Ministers to implement directives in order to give effect to international agreements. Our fear is that the UK Government could use this little known section to force damaging privatisation measures on the Welsh NHS. Again, I am at a loss as to why Labour does not agree with this. Surely, they'd rather not allow an Alun Cairns to tell them what to do in devolved fields? I hope Members will support our proposals to defend the Welsh NHS from the dual threat of Boris Johnson and Donald Trump.