Well, they're informal discussions with relevant groups rather than negotiations, because of our peculiar interpretation of EU law. The bits that Labour have highlighted and tried to make a big thing of, none of them appear to me to be a smoking gun. I think the issue about patents is the one they've probably twisted the most. But, broadly, the UK and the US patent system are relatively similar in terms of the level and length of protection given. What happens in the US largely reflects their market structure and the way the insurance companies work. Because we have the NHS as the monopsony purchaser of drugs, and because we have the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence to deal with whether it's going to be cost effective, those are the two things that keep costs low in the UK market.

What makes drug prices ridiculously high in parts of the NHS—and actually GlaxoSmithKilne and AstraZeneca benefit also from that when they're selling into the US—is a structure where the insurance companies buy these drugs without effective cost control. And that's partly because many employers still give employees schemes where they can go to whatever doctor they want, and if that doctor prescribes, then the insurance company will pay the drug company. So, hence, there's neither effective market competition nor an overall regulation or monopsony provider, as we have.

None of those things are going to be influenced by trade discussions. So, for that reason, I consider this as scaremongering. I agree with what has been said about the opioids, and I think that reflects prescribing behaviour in the market and the nature of the patient-doctor relationship, which we don't have in this country, and wouldn't have irrespective of any trade deal with the US. 

To deal just quickly with point 3, we don't agree with a veto in trade policy because it's reserved and we don't support an independent sovereign Wales in the way that Plaid do. We will support the Conservative motion, which we think plays a relatively straight bat given it's pre-election period, and we will abstain on the Government motion, because we have some sympathy with what the Government is trying to do and we do think Wales should have a proper consultative role in trade negotiations. But we don't believe in vetos or having a federal constitution with the Supreme Court overseeing that in the way I think they imply.