Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd, and can I thank Members for their contributions to the debate? I think many of the contributions were important contributions to the reflections of this Chamber on some of the challenges that are inherent in the consent process when trying to marry the parliamentary timetable in Westminster with the needs of our Senedd here in Wales. I hope I can address some of those key points, at least, in the closing remarks.

On Mick Antoniw's point about the role of Government in standing up for the democratic accountability of the Senedd, I absolutely agree with him that that is one of the roles of Government, and I hope that Members will acknowledge that this Government has never been shy of not recommending that the Senedd consent to legislation that we do not think is in the interests of the Senedd and the people of Wales, and indeed, most recently refusing to participate in what was a mockery, in parliamentary terms, in Westminster, of the consent in relation to the future relationship agreement. We have always taken the view that consent ought to be sought where it's sensible to do that, and that circumstances in which legislation is brought forward in Parliament are a proper consideration in that process.

Mick Antoniw also made the point about the breadth of some of the powers in the Bill, and I would absolutely accept that the language in some of the provisions around the powers to Ministers both in Westminster and in the devolved Governments is broader than we would ordinarily wish to see. I would be content myself with much tighter language. That being said, I think the particular circumstances of the uncertainty around the basis on which we have been operating around Brexit, in the negotiations and in the end of the transition period, I think do provide some justification for a slightly different approach in relation to this, but that isn't to resile from the broad commitment to making sure that powers are appropriately narrowly defined in legislation.

In relation to the points Mick Antoniw made about clause 2.6, the point he made is about seeking amendments to the Bill in order to protect the Government of Wales Act and other constitutional legislation. Welsh Government did, in fact, seek amendments to the Bill in relation to that, albeit in the House of Lords rather than in the House of Commons, on the basis of what I think is a sensible judgment that that was the better route to success. Obviously, that route also, unfortunately, did not succeed. I have, in fact, written to the committee with an explanation of that. I think I took it from Mick Antoniw's remarks that that letter may not have been received, so I will, in fact, check to make sure that's the case, but certainly an explanation was given to the committee in relation to the circumstances around clause 2.6.

Both Mick Antoniw and David Rees have made points of great significance, I think, around the role of despatch-box commitments and non-legislative mechanisms, if you like, to provide clarity and reassurance. David Rees mentioned that those are sought when amendments could be achieved; actually, the case is customary that they are only given when we have failed, effectively, to get commitments on the face of the Bill. So, there is absolutely recognition, I'd imagine, amongst all devolved Governments that they are an imperfect solution to the problem, and we would prefer, obviously, to see amendments on the face of the Bill. But his contribution acknowledged, I think, that that isn't always possible.

As one final point if I may, Dirprwy Lywydd, in relation to the supplementary LCM that was tabled yesterday, obviously, that was very shortly before this debate. I don't myself think that the amendments referred to in the Bill meet the threshold that the Standing Order presents, but they arguably do meet the lower threshold that Ministers sometimes take into account in bringing forward an LCM. I felt that, on balance, given that the debate was happening in relation to other questions of consent, it was in the interests of full consideration by the Senedd to bring forward those further amendments, even though they are slightly more arguable in terms of whether they trigger the LCM. But I thought that it was in the interests of the Senedd to have those in front of it today as it considers this motion, and I hope that the Senedd will approve the motion in the terms laid. Diolch yn fawr.