The next item is the statement by the Counsel General and Minister for the Constitution on a convention on our constitutional future, and I call on the Minister to make his statement—Mick Antoniw.

Diolch, Llywydd. In May, we secured a mandate from the Welsh people to deliver our manifesto, committed to creating a stronger, greener and a fairer Wales. In our programme for government we have outlined our plans for tackling the ongoing challenges presented by the pandemic, our departure from the European Union, and the climate change emergency. Our immediate priority is recovery, and, to that end, supporting our health service, our schools and our economy—all so essential for the well-being of our people.

What is also clear from the election result is the support for our manifesto for change and an acknowledgment of the need to reform and improve our constitutional relationship with the UK Government and the other nations of the UK. So, let’s be clear from the outset: reform is needed to enable us to deliver our commitments to support our public services, develop a prosperous economy, and tackle poverty and inequality to their fullest. To deliver policies that make a difference to the lives of people in Wales, we must have a comprehensive set of tools to do the job.

The last few years have exposed the deficiencies of our current settlement, as well as increasing tensions in the wider constitutional landscape of the United Kingdom. We have consistently iterated our support for a union and for a union that must change. We continue to lead the debate in Wales and doing so with practical proposals for positive change, most recently in the second edition of ‘Reforming our Union: Shared Governance in the UK’. 

Llywydd, in our manifesto we promised to establish a commission to consider the constitutional future of Wales, and today I want to set out how we intend to deliver on that promise. Given the direct impact our governance arrangements have on the people's lives we want to see the commission leading engagement with the public to raise awareness and to help build a wider public consensus. We want the commission to ascertain people's views on those issues that are most important to them in the way the constitution operates and the implications for the services that they value. And we want the commission to build a consensus with civic society on how we reform the constitution of the United Kingdom to build a stronger Wales and a stronger but fairer and more equal partnership.

The commission will be inclusive and it will reach beyond Wales to other nations, regions and communities of the United Kingdom to consider how we can build a better constitutional partnership. We expect the commission to be outward facing and to engage with civic society and the public as widely as possible, for a genuinely national conversation about the future of Wales. In particular we want the commission to reach out to those who might otherwise not come forward to participate in such a debate, to those people and communities who are largely disengaged from politics, or rather who have become sceptical about its relevance to their lives and to that of their families and its ability to make a difference.

We will establish a commission of citizens. They will be people who will represent the diversity of our society and communities, and it will include those with the skills and abilities that come from real-life experiences enabling them to reach out and engage. Their task will be to seek to identify and build consensus about our values and the sort of Wales that we want to be.

We will encourage the commission to think about how its work can support the seven well-being goals, as set out in the well-being of future generations Act, and to operate in a way that is consistent with the five ways of working the Act sets out.

We will encourage the commission to identify and learn from the best examples of citizen engagement and to be innovative in the way in which it approaches its task. It must be a people’s commission, engaged in a people’s conversation, with genuine grass-roots engagement, and how we achieve that will be our biggest challenge. We will need to develop a new language of engagement, one that avoids the language of politics and constitutions that we are so used to, a language that talks about the things that are directly relevant to people's lives. But to do this, we know that the work of the commission must be informed by robust evidence and analysis.

In addition to a traditional call for evidence and engagement with academics, we also intend to establish a panel of experts alongside the commission. They will undertake research and analysis from which the commission can develop ideas and recommendations. We envisage the panel comprising of established expertise from within and outside Wales. They will provide the expertise and the hard data and information, which, we hope, will free up more of the commissioners' time to focus on the big conversation we want to initiate.

Key to ensuring the commission's success will be its composition. It must be capable and independent. It must be as representative as possible of the society with which it will engage. This will include representation from a breadth of political and civic backgrounds. It must also be able to demonstrate expertise, and its members must represent all ages and be drawn from the widest possible range of sectors in civic society: public, private, third sector, civic and grass-roots organisations and social partners.

The role of the chair or co-chairs will be key and will need to provide leadership in its outward-facing role as well as building a consensus within the commission. Over the summer, we will be considering the issues in further detail and discussing the commission further with all the parties represented in the Senedd, and I intend to update you further in the autumn at the earliest opportunity. Diolch, Llywydd.

Can I say that I welcome the fact that you've made this statement to the Chamber today rather than to the media first? I think that some of your colleagues have a lot to learn from you, Minister.

As we've said in the past, we don't believe that there's a public appetite for this to be a priority at the moment, but we accept that the Welsh Government has different views, and that's why you've brought this particular statement forward. We do think that all of the energy of the Welsh Government should be focused on other priorities, such as getting to grips with the economic recovery, making sure that our NHS is able to cope with the backlog that it now has as a result of the pandemic, and, indeed, helping our schools and education system to recover from COVID as well. But, given that you've made this statement, I would just ask a number of questions today about it. First of all, you've said that

'from the outset: reform is needed to enable us to deliver our commitments to support our public services, develop a prosperous economy, and tackle poverty and inequality',  yet the reality is that the reason that we haven't tackled poverty, the reason that our economy isn't more prosperous, the reason that our public services aren't as good as they ought to be, is nothing to do with this Senedd not having the powers that it needs; it's because we have a failing Welsh Labour Government that's failed to address these particular issues over the decades.

Now, you've talked about the importance of this commission going forward. Can you give us a timetable by which you expect its work to be completed? You made a long list of individual organisations and other stakeholders that you want to participate in the commission. How big is this thing going to be? How much is it going to cost? Are these positions going to be paid positions? You know, how long is a piece of string? I do think that if you have a significant size to the commission, then it is going to potentially be far too large, far too unwieldy to be able to deliver any reasonable outcomes.

You've mentioned having a chair or possibly co-chairs. I don't know what the arrangements are that you might envisage co-chairs being able to look at the work and co-ordinate the work of this particular commission, but is that a chair and co-chair for both the expert panel and the commission? You've said you want a commission that has expertise, and yet you're setting up an expert panel alongside it. Will that be competing with it in terms of the expertise that you expect this commission to have? What do you think the output of this commission is going to be? I'm assuming you're looking for a list of recommendations for the Government to consider, or is that for this Senedd to consider as a whole?

Will this commission, importantly, not just look at the constitutional arrangements across the whole of the UK, but will it look at the devolution and constitutional arrangements in Wales? Will it look at the clamour in our local authorities and our regions of Wales for more responsibilities to be devolved to them—to north Wales, to west Wales, to Swansea and the Swansea city area, as Mike Hedges reminds us on a regular basis? I do think that these are things that the commission should not be fettered looking at, and I do think that there is an appetite for those things to be considered, and, indeed, if they are, I think that would be a very useful conversation for us to be having.

What sort of questions are you asking the commission to consider? You must have an idea of these already. You've obviously already set out the Welsh Government's stall in your 'Reforming our Union' paper. Is this commission simply going to look at your paper and determine whether those things are sensible or not, or will it really have the free range that I believe any commission needs to be able to have if it's going to be able to do something useful that cannot be done in other ways?

I'll stop there because I've asked many, many questions, Llywydd. But I do welcome the fact that you've made a commitment also to engaging with all political parties on this, and we look forward to being able to contribute in a meaningful way to the development of the commission and the important work that you want it to do going forward.

Well, can I thank Darren Millar for the very positive and the very constructive statement he's made, and a lot of very valid questions that have been asked? The issue of reform and the delivery of services, which is an issue that frequently gets raised within this Chamber, is one where I think it is well recognised now that there are levers that we just don't have in order to actually fulfil some of the policies that we are actually elected upon. We've argued for a long time, for example, in justice areas—a whole range of areas that are within our responsibility where, for example, key levers just aren't with us. We look at the areas of youth justice, of probation and family. Those things would just so naturally fall within one umbrella where some of the levers are with us, but some of the key ones aren't. And there is a logic to further progress within those areas.

We've also looked at the area of the police on many occasions, and, of course, not only do we make a substantial financial contribution towards the cost of the police, and in addition towards community support officers—who, let us not forget, came in because of the reductions in police numbers, so we had to take that step—but when you discuss things like community safety and you realise that you don't have some of the key levers to engage with the police and in terms of the planning and the direction of community policing, then clearly there are real issues in terms of those particular levers.

There are also key levers in respect of funding that have an impact. We have lost substantial amounts of money in funding by virtue of our leaving the European Union, and that money not being replaced and coming back to this place, where it would fund a comprehensive programme of implementation in terms of our public policy objectives. So, clearly there are issues there that are very important, and are among some of the many issues that would be the substance of what we would want to see the commission discussing.

In terms of the timescale, I have delivered several lectures so far to talk about the general concept of the commission, and it seems to me that one of the objectives of the commission would be to try and complete work within about 18 to 24 months, but also to make a recommendation in terms of the establishment of a longer standing constitutional commission. Because, really, if they're going to come forward with a series of important recommendations and proposals, if they're able to build a consensus around key areas that could make governance within Wales better, then we need to have those carried through beyond that period of time. But the sort of citizens' commission that we're talking about at the moment would not be that particular body.

And, in terms of co-chairs, well, whether it's a chair and a vice-chair to support, or co-chairs, those are options that are there to consider how the responsibility of leading such a commission might be shared, how it might be shared with better gender balance and so on.

In terms of the issue of governance and devolution within Wales itself, I think one of the things it would want to look at certainly would be governance, not just in terms of this place, but in terms of local government, the decentralisation of policy, how governance might be better, brought closer to the people, more effective and so on. So, I think all those issues are issues I raised not so long ago within questions when I was asked about this as well.

And, in terms of an expert panel, well, of course, in considering options, it is necessary also to look at the hard data to actually form a proper evaluation to test and to probe some of the ideas that may be coming forward, some of the things that people might suggest. So, I think that is important.

In terms of the actual terms of reference, those are things I think that when we're able to identify a chair and vice-chair or co-chairs, and begin work in terms of drawing up a list of people that might be appropriate for the commission, that we will want to engage with those people in order to identify and develop what would be the sorts of terms of reference and what would be the mechanisms whereby the commission could go forward. So, as I said, the biggest challenge is going to be how we actually develop an engagement programme and how we actually put together a commission that is as diverse and representative as possible.

The Member asked what size; the size isn't absolutely fixed. I suspect it's going to be a commission of around nine to 11 people, so there are going to be obviously difficult choices. That is not an absolute, but that would seem to me to be the sort of operational structure that we would want to see established.

In terms of the conversation itself, well, you can't go out to the people of Wales and say, 'We're going to have a conversation about the future of Wales, the governance of Wales, the values of Wales' and to try and predetermine the parameters within which that can take place—that is in terms of excluding views that people would want to make. Because if you engage with people, they will come up with a whole variety of views, maybe things we've never thought of, but it is important that it is inclusive and that it is an open conversation, that it is a genuine conversation as well.

Thank you, Counsel General, for your statement, and I thank Mr Millar also for the acknowledgement that his party will be willing to collaborate with this convention. Now, Counsel General, as a fellow lawyer, I welcome this convention and the opportunity to discuss constitutional issues, but this shouldn't just be for legal nerds. It needs, as you said, to include all of the people of Wales, from different backgrounds and cultures. I agree with that, and that might be the biggest problem for you. It's not just the job of one party or faction to create the new and radical Wales that we need.

Rather, it should be the work of the entire nation, including the Tories, all of its people, all of its perspectives, working together. A convention can start the work of creating a truly new Welsh democracy, something we really need. It can't be another talking shop for the old guard to maintain the status quo.

Independence, therefore, has to be part of the mix of options considered. The increase in the support for independence cannot be brushed aside as being rejected by simplistic comments that it was rejected at the ballot box. It wasn't, and in any event, as you mention, Counsel General, there was a substantial endorsement for further powers from Westminster to Wales in the election, whatever some on the Conservative chairs might claim.

Plaid Cymru, in the past, has called for a citizens' assembly to establish, to discuss constitutional matters and also the climate emergency. I'm glad that your statement mentions that you're going to look at that and look at other, previous experiences. There have been some fantastic examples of good citizens' assemblies. Experiences in Ireland have demonstrated that they've been able to discuss historic, complex matters in a way that creates a shared understanding and common ground. And the Member for Blaenau Gwent will be pleased that I mention the example of the climate assembly there in Blaenau Gwent: a successful citizens' assembly organised by the Electoral Reform Society as a way to build consensus on how we can improve Welsh society for a way forward with regard to the climate emergency. Learning from such examples, foreign examples and also examples here in Wales, is crucial as we begin our next step in the devolution journey: a thoughtful and hopeful discussion with the people of Wales about the future of our nation.

Because the devolved settlement, as it stands, is unsustainable. It is subject to the whims of the Westminster Government. We are not sovereign; it's the Westminster Government that still says that it's sovereign. The sovereignty should rest here with the people of Wales. The power grab by the Boris Johnson Government is a real concern for many of us across the political parties. The TUC recently said that they would have a commission to look at more powers for Wales because they are greatly concerned about the power grab from the Westminster Government, undermining the rights of workers here in Wales.

We know, don't we, what the Tories' plan is, although I hope that the Tories here in Cardiff will stand up and will be different to the Tories in London. Mr Millar says that we should focus on constitutional issues, but this is from a party in London that is placing a union flag over eight floors in the middle of Cardiff, and a party that criticises the Welsh Government for encouraging its workers to learn to say 'Good morning' in Welsh and how to say 'Llanelli' correctly. We know what the Government in Westminster is trying to do; that's why we need a strong convention here in Wales to strengthen our devolved settlement. 

A few questions from me quickly. How are you going to ensure that you have that very broad range of people, which includes businesses, trade unions and members of the faith community? For me, that was the great failure of the commissions of the past; they weren't representative of the people of Wales. 

Considering again past commissions, a huge difference with this convention is the broad remit. The Thomas commission was very broad, but it was to look at the justice system. The Richard commission was to look at reform here. The task is so vast, and that can be an issue. What do you want from this convention?

How are you going to be able to ensure that, when things move quickly, the convention remains relevant?

And finally, I've raised this point about the fact that independence needs to be a part of the question. How much support have you had from your party in London and from the Westminster Government for this convention?

There are several questions to answer. I look forward to working with you over the summer months, and other parties, to create a convention that can build a better Wales, a greener Wales, a fairer Wales and a more prosperous Wales. Diolch yn fawr. 

I thank the Member for his comments. He's absolutely right that those of us with legal backgrounds like to indulge in the minutiae of constitutions and legal niceties. Important as they are within the operation of a parliament, and particularly a legislature, the crux to change, and the crux to determining the sort of change that we could envisage for Wales, how we might govern better and differently, has to be something that belongs to the people of Wales. It has to be owned by the people of Wales, and it means the language has to be a language that relates to the lives of people, otherwise I don't think they will engage. 

I've said previously that I think, when we look at governance, that we have democracy in crisis, where so many people are disengaged from political processes or have so little confidence in it, as we see from the turnouts in elections. I think the points you make are absolutely right in terms of how we construct a framework, a terms of reference, that is sufficiently wide to raise the breadth of debates for people to engage, to participate, to consider all options, but yet, nevertheless, has a focus on a number of key points. What sort of Wales do you want to see? What should Wales's future be? What are our values? What should our future relationships be? That may be in terms of a whole variety of consequences. What should our relationship be with the UK Government, with other countries around us? I think all those are very complex issues that need to be put together. And it is a difficult task of work. As I've said, it is one of the big challenges, to put that together, because this convention, this commission, has to be something that is really different. It's a stepping stone to the future for Wales.

You raise, quite rightly, the issue of examples elsewhere, because we are not alone. Many other countries face these similar challenges in terms of their society, their democracy, their governance. You mentioned Scotland; Scotland are very interested in the publication imminently of their long-standing report from their Scottish citizens' assembly, which was funded and supported by the Scottish Government over the last two years. I think there may well be lessons there. There are certainly lessons from some of the processes in Ireland and Finland, and I'm sure in many other parts of the world. It's very interesting to see developments in Catalonia, in Spain, where they're actually moving towards a system where they are now talking about doing that, with a view to having an engagement with people as to what the people in Catalonia actually want, with a view to, undoubtedly, a referendum there. But the fact is that people are starting to say that you have to have a consensus of people, you have to have support of people to make really radical and long-standing change.

You referred to the Wales TUC commission; I think that is a really positive step, and I think it shows very effective and dynamic leadership, that they are looking at all those issues, so many of which have arisen during COVID. Isn't it in many ways bizarre that one of the reservations in our devolution settlement is equal opportunities, when so much of our work is about equality and equal opportunities? On the dilemma in terms of the perception around the UK, you mentioned the example of the flags, and I don't want to reiterate that debate. But it seems to me that the message is this: you have buildings—say, tax buildings, HMRC—which are down as 'UK Government in Wales' or 'UK Government in Scotland', but in England they're just 'HMRC'. Why are they not 'UK Government in England'? I think that sends a particular message, which identifies part of that particular problem.

How to build up the commission and make it representative? I'm not quite sure that I should use a footballing analogy, but I think it's actually trying to work out how to build up the squad that you want, and what's the size of the team you want out of that, and to picking. I think the diversity of the squad is probably going to be appropriate, and obviously we may well want to look for a few Gareth Bales within the civic engagement process.

In terms of remaining relevant and the purpose for the future, I'm very clear, I think, in my mind now that there has to be a further stage, which is that, when it does produce recommendations, when it does produce a report, when we can see the conclusions of the important work that it will do, it should consider also the recommendations as to how these can be taken forward—how you might establish, perhaps, a standing commission that would actually carry these recommendations through, so they're not something that are just an 18 to 24-month process and then forgotten about, and then we go on again a couple of years and try and repeat the same thing. This has got to be a process that leads to, ultimately, a conclusion. As I said, I think change is inevitable, and I think these are the mechanisms by which we can build a consensus for that change, and to make change happen.

I welcome the setting up of a constitutional commission. Up until now, only Plaid Cymru, with independence, and abolish supporters have been consistent and have had an end point. Despite that, the majority of the Welsh people, in every opinion poll we've seen, want devolution either as we've got it now, or extended. I welcome the co-chair suggestion. Can I just remind the Minister that somebody who's been educated at Oxford, who's public school educated and a barrister—whether they are male or female, or if there's one of each, it does not give you diversity; it gives you exactly the same background.

We need to discuss where devolution ends. I have three questions. What discussion has taken place with the English regional mayors? Because I cannot see devolution working with England being between five and six times the size of the other three put together. Following on from Darren Millar's point, devolution has always been about taking things into Cardiff, either from local authorities or from Westminster; can we have some discussion on what ought to be devolved to the Welsh regions and to the Welsh local authorities, so we can have some movement in the other direction? And I ask again a question that I've previously asked to the First Minister: can you produce a list of items, such as currency, defence, national security, that should not be devolved—the end point? Otherwise, we have only two possible end points: independence or abolish.

I thank Mike for those comments. They are very pertinent comments. He's absolutely right; people clearly do, when you ask them about devolution, want decision-making processes as close to them as possible and to know that they can have the opportunity to influence those.

Can I say that I do agree also that how we reach out and we build engagement with others in various forms of devolved government, whether it be the regional mayors, whether it be the other nations of the UK, is equally important? It's building up alliances—building up and recognising common interests. I think one of the weaknesses to constitutional reform within the UK is that there hasn't been any civic hegemony around the fact that there is a need for change, and that everyone has a common interest in it. This isn't just about Wales. Obviously, we are here to look at the future of Wales, to have a commission to look at that, but this is equally as important, in terms of the democracy and civic engagement, within England as well. Our harmony, our engagement with England and with the other nations of the UK is as important to us as many other matters. 

In terms of governance, and the issue that he raises of further decentralisation of power, that is something that I've always supported, but when I said that it would be looking at governance within Wales, that has to include how governance can be better, and how governance might need to be closer to people. We often use this quote, don't we, that Nye Bevan said:

'The purpose of getting power is to be able to give it away.'

Others talked about the withering away of the state over many years, but all these come back to one thing: how do you give greater empowerment to people as close to people as possible?

That brings us on to the other point that Mike raised, which is directly relevant, and that is also recognising our interdependencies. I think, no matter what position you take, whether it be unionism, whether it be federalism, confederalism, independence or whatever version, they still all bring you back ultimately to how you engage with your neighbours, and what level of interdependency you have on issues, whether it be finance, whether it be currency or whatever, but what the mechanism should be to enable that to happen fairly within all the participants. And that seems to me the crux of that issue, so I agree with you on that very much. 

I fully support the Counsel General's approach to this. I think it's bold, and it is Wales leading the way. We can't have asked for more than that. But I also feel some disappointment in that this is a longer term plan, which relies on the agreement of others, whereas right within the Welsh Government's grasp is a chance to produce 'A Parliament that Works for Wales'. That work's already been done, and the Minister hasn't made any statement about that in what he said. Therefore, can we please see some movement on that? It will take a political party to lead the way. Why can't it be Welsh Labour?

Thank you for the question. I have to say, I wasn't quite sure what the question was within that. I was grateful for the comments you made about Wales leading the way, and I think you were mentioning the issue of Senedd reform as well, which is an issue, obviously, that's going to be considering how a Parliament for Wales actually works, how it can work better, and all the issues around that. What I would say is this: over the course of the summer, I will be seeking to engage with Members, and with political parties, and many others outside, to actually seek views as we start trying to put together a terms of reference as to what should be the sort of framework that we want to lead. There is a conflict; on the one hand you want to create an independent commission, but equally so you want it to be able to work effectively within a framework, and that the experts that you put together are capable of giving it the sort of support and backing that it needs in those particular areas. I hope that answers—. I don't know if I missed part of the question. If not, I'll certainly address any other issues in writing to you. 

Before coming to a question, with your permission, Llywydd, I would like to say a few words about Elystan Morgan. We lost Elystan during last week, and, of course, he was a giant of the Labour Party and the Labour movement, but also of Welsh politics. One thing was consistent throughout Elystan's life was his belief in our democracy and the right for Wales to govern itself. I well remember him talking in a Labour conference, some years ago, about how that is progressing, and how we are moving forward with devolution. I remember his saying that dominion status for Wales was desirable, and he talked about the Statute of Westminster. Some people have heard me mention this in this Chamber. I think it's important that we do bring people together, and one of the things that Elystan could do, of course, was to bring people together. I very much hope that he would have welcomed this statement from the Minister today.

I would like to ask you, Minister, as you proceed with this work—and I welcome it and I welcome the comments made by Darren Millar, too, because if we are to create a new and different Wales, a Wales for the future, then it has to be a Wales for everyone, for each and every one of us, wherever we live and whichever part of the Chamber we choose to sit in. And I very much hope, Minister, that you, through your work, can create the kind of Wales that we all want to see, which will give a voice to each and every one of us to express the kind of Wales we want to see for the future, but also a Wales that is part of us all—and I am coming to a question, Llywydd. 

I tend to think that devolution is dead. The time of devolution is over. It was over last year when the UK Government decided to ignore the wishes of this Senedd, so we have to move forward and we have to create a new democracy. And I very much hope we can ensure that when we do that, we do discuss the roles of our regions in Wales, the role of the whole of Wales, and the role of our neighbours across Offa's Dyke. Because if we are to succeed through your work, Minister, then each and every one of us has to feel comfortable with the direction of travel.

Well, thank you for those comments. And, of course, it's not through my work, it's going to be through our and many other people's work that success will be achieved. Just commenting on Elystan Morgan, I had the great honour of actually working with Elystan Morgan for quite a number of months during the build-up to the 1979 devolution referendum, along with others. And he was one of a great generation of Welsh politicians: Cledwyn Hughes, Jim Griffiths, John Morris—Elystan Morgan is within that grouping, and there are many others as well. But Elystan, certainly during that campaign, showed not only his incredible oratorical skills, but his ability to win people's hearts and minds to an idea. Unfortunately, as we know, with the referendum, the 1979 referendum was not really about devolution for Wales, it was really about the tail-end of the Labour Government at that particular moment in time. It was probably the worst time to ever have a referendum. But I think it's important that we recognise and remember that legacy. And I had the opportunity to talk with him when he came to the Labour Party conference a few years back, and his mind was still as acute and sharp and as focused on these issues and about the future of Wales. He was certainly a great Welsh patriot, certainly a very committed socialist, and just a wonderful person in whose company you could actually be. So, rest in peace, Elystan. 

In terms of the other comments you made, a Wales for everyone, that is really what this is ultimately about. It's a Wales for everyone, but it's one where we build the consensus for everyone. And I say 'consensus' because, when we take certain terminology out of our conversations, we actually have such an enormous area of common agreement, and it's turning that common agreement into a process of change. And that is going to be part of the real challenge of what this task is about. I don't underestimate the difficulties and the pitfalls that exist, because I think we are doing something that is radically very different, and of course the challenges are there. There is no guide book to how you do this sort of engagement process. We look to other countries, other examples, but at the end of the day, it's in our hands to make it work.

You made—. The final point, really, where you said devolution is dead, I think what has happened is that devolution originally was a process of decentralisation of administered powers and responsibilities from Westminster. The moment Scotland and Wales became legislatures and the moment this place became a legislative parliament, sovereignty shifted to the people. Unfortunately, the problem at the moment is our constitution as it exists in practice has not yet caught up with the reality of what sovereignty is really about, and that is the power of people being exercised through their elected representatives. 

And finally, Huw Irranca-Davies.

Diolch, Llywydd. Constitutional matters matter. Back in 2015 in Westminster, we marked with a series of events the eight-hundredth year since the Magna Carta. Many people regarded the Magna Carta as the defining moment constitutionally and legally of Great Britain, the United Kingdom and of many other countries. Actually, many others said it was only the starting point. Of course, the monarch reneged on that within weeks if not days of that agreement and of course subsequently it was followed by events such as the Tolpuddle martyrs; many centuries later there was the Chartist movement, acts of suffrage and so on.

The point is, constitutional matters matter, and they move along as well in response to fitting the constitution to the needs of the people that it serves during the day, and actually this statement you've brought forward shows that very clearly. But it is exceptionally ambitious, because it looks to produce a citizens' conversation, a people's commission engaged in a people's conversation. That is quite an undertaking; it is different from what has happened before. So, all I would ask the Counsel General and Minister to do is by the end of this summer—as he's indicated, he's posited the questions today, the how, the when, the why—but actually, by the end of the summer, I would ask him to come back and scope that out; how we're going to do this, where is the expert support that will do this unusual departure, and quite brave and radical departure, and make it focused around the citizens—and not the elite and not the politicians—and to set out the milestones as well, over which this period of work will be done and what he might anticipate this will produce. But it's a good tradition that he's in, and we would be strange politicians, frankly, if we came here and we didn't agonise over whether the constitution today of Wales and the UK fitted with the needs of the citizens we're sent here to serve. It's a good mission to be on.

Thank you for those comments and for those sentiments, and it's always a pleasure to hear someone quoting about the Magna Carta and about sovereignty and the origins of sovereignty. I notice where the Llywydd sits, there is the mace, the symbol of sovereignty. Of course, the mace was a weapon, which shows, I suppose, the origins of where sovereignty originally emerged from: who had the largest mace. But we won't go there. The point you make in terms of how, when and why: those really are the challenges. And listen, I'd be a fool if I were to say, 'I have at this moment in time all the answers, the complete picture as to exactly how this will work.' There is a lot of deep thought going on on this; there's going to be a lot of engagement and again with yourselves here, and I certainly agree, by the end of summer or by the time we return to this place, you will expect me to be able to deliver a picture that delivers on all those principles and commitments that I've identified today, and quite rightly so.

I thank the Minister.

And I'll have to remember that—that the mace is a weapon. It may come in useful at some point. [Laughter.] We'll now take a break for changes to be made in the Chamber. 

Plenary was suspended at 15:53.

The Senedd reconvened at 16:02, with the Deputy Presiding Officer (David Rees) in the Chair.