Thank you very much for that. I proposed in an amendment—and I understand, of course, it's not been selected—that we should actually have a real consideration of this by the public at large in the form of a referendum. Angela Burns said in an earlier debate that the Welsh Conservatives say 'no' to referenda because ultimately we should have the power to proceed or not using our collective political judgment here, in line with our mandates. Well, of course the collective judgment of politicians is that there should be more politicians. I don't think that that's a very convincing argument to the electors. We all know what happened on Brexit, where 85 per cent of the Members of this place wanted to remain in the EU, but 53 per cent of the Welsh population wanted to get out. Indeed, many of the proponents of this argument for increasing the size of the Senedd wanted a second referendum on the Brexit referendum even before the result of the first has been implemented.

The Commission's argument is that the voice of the people can be adequately represented by what they call a citizens' assembly, but of course that wouldn't be the voice of the people, it would just be the voice of the Cardiff Bay establishment. It would actually be another shield against public opinion, and it would be just like, I think, those sham parliaments that we see in dictatorships like North Korea, where basically they're rubber stamps to produce what the establishment wants. These organisations would be filled with wannabe politicians themselves, or Cardiff Bay hangers on, or people who are funding beneficiaries of the institutions of Welsh Government and so on. The third sector I'm sure is very worthy, but they're all quasi politicos as well, and they're all sucking on the taxpayer teat, so of course they have a vested interest in continuing the existing organisation. A lot of these organisations are funded either directly by Welsh Government contracts or grants, so I don't think we should regard any of them as independent, and they're run by the political friends of Welsh Government. Wales isn't a democracy, it's a chumocracy, as has been comprehensively revealed in the Jac o' the North blog, for any of those of you who read it.

And, in practical terms, are we currently overworked as Members of the Senedd? I say that we're not. Members of the Senedd are in my experience very conscientious and I pay tribute to them, but I think they can cope with the existing workload. I was for a while a party group leader and on four of the Assembly committees, and I represent, along with others, Mid and West Wales, which is the most diverse, in geographical terms, region in Wales. Yet I could cope, and I enjoyed it, and we sit in Cardiff only three days a week—two days in Plenary and one day, usually, on a committee. Compared with other countries, we're not overworked. In the United States they're about to have an election to the House of Representatives; there are 330 million electors in the United States, and 450 Members of the House of Representatives will represent them. Italy has just had a referendum on whether to reduce the size of their Parliament. Seventy per cent of the people voted in that referendum to reduce the size of both houses of the Italian Parliament from 900 to 600.

This report has ignored the argument of those who are opposed to increasing the size of the institution, and of course David Rowlands resigned from the committee, and we got—UKIP, that is—a one-line mention in the report. So, all that this report does, I think, is to confirm that the Senedd is an echo chamber for Cardiff Bay politicos, and not really the voice of the people. So, I look forward in the election in May next year to debating this, and it's a very good thing that it's not being decided upon, as Siân Gwenllian and her colleagues wanted, during this Assembly. Because I think that this will be an extremely useful issue for those of us who think that devolution has actually been a failure in practice, and I very much look forward to joining battle on the hustings.