Now, given the number of recommendations contained within our second report on memoranda No. 2 and No. 3, we did provide the Minister with an early copy so as to better inform this afternoon’s debate, and I thank the Minister for formally responding to our report this morning as well.

Llywydd, our report on memoranda No. 2 and No. 3 was, just to note, our twenty-third report now on legislative consent memoranda. This is my third contribution this afternoon. So, with your invitation, Llywydd, I will speak in the three separate debates on legislative consent motions today for three distinct UK Bills, such is now the extent to which the UK Government is indeed legislating on devolved matters.

Our first report included eight recommendations to the Minister. In our second report, laid before the Senedd yesterday afternoon, we have indeed acknowledged the progress that's been made since last December, whilst we also make some further recommendations to the Minister.

I will not go through each of our reports on the memoranda in detail, but they are available to Members if they wish to read the points we've made and our concerns in full before voting this afternoon. However, I will turn to highlight just a handful of significant matters.

Let me start at the end of our second report. Many of the provisions in the Bill have been included at the request of Welsh Government. Now, while we have made some recommendations in our reports to address our concerns in some areas, they are no substitute, we would argue on our committee, for the ability of Senedd Members to test and improve legislation by means of tabling amendments to Welsh Bills introduced to the Senedd—the point that was picked up by my fellow Chair.

We're aware of the challenges that the Welsh Government do face, which, indeed, we are investigating as a committee, but that shouldn't overshadow the constitutional risk to the devolution settlement that arises from the continued and cumulative use of UK Bills in devolved areas to deliver Welsh Government policy objectives.

Indeed, the Minister has acknowledged and accepted that that constitutional risk does exist. It's in black and white in memorandum No. 3. This Bill contains broad Henry VIII powers, powers that would enable the Secretary of State and the Lord Chancellor to amend Senedd Acts and Measures, as well as, indeed, the Government of Wales Act 2006, without the consent of the Senedd.

The Minister has accepted an assurance from the UK Government, from a despatch box commitment, to satisfy her concerns regarding the use of these powers, and we heard that. But despatch box commitments, despite being part of the toolbox of government, are not binding. They're vulnerable to change, they do not provide a role for this Senedd. While the Welsh Ministers consider them to be an appropriate compromise, we do, respectfully, not share that view.

The Minister has stated that the agreed outcome of negotiations between the Governments has resulted in, and I quote, a 'minor constitutional risk'. In our view, this conclusion, and the Minister’s acceptance of it, indeed, isn't acceptable. Elements of the Welsh devolution settlement should not be put at risk because a UK Bill is being used to legislate in a devolved area.

So, we asked the Minister to explain and quantify what is meant by this 'minor constitutional risk', and, Minister, you outlined this for us in the third memorandum. We do note what you had to say on this in the letter we received this morning. You've provided an update that the despatch box commitment, which I've just referred to, has now been made. However, we feel you've still not fully clarified what that constitutional risk is, which you brought to the Senedd's attention, other than stating in the Siambr this afternoon that that risk is 'acceptable'. So, Minister, I wonder if you could please say more in your closing response on this risk and perhaps provide a fuller written explanation to the committee as soon as possible.

In our second report, we repeated a recommendation from our first report that the Minister should seek an amendment to the Bill so that its powers cannot be used by UK Ministers to make regulations that amend the Government of Wales Act 2006. Senedd Members can see the importance of this. So, we asked the Minister to confirm that she has sought such an amendment and provide an update to the Senedd on the latest position.

So, Minister, we do find it disappointing that you've confirmed to us that you've not approached the UK Government to request that such an amendment be made, and we'd be interested in the reasoning behind not making that approach, because there is an important point of principle here that is relevant: how one Government intends to use powers at any one time could be very, very different from how a future Government may use them in years to come. I would, therefore, encourage you, and the committee would encourage you, to reflect further on this matter.

Finally, I'd like to address clause 136 of the Bill, which relates to the implementation of international healthcare agreements. The position here now is an improvement when compared to the Bill as first introduced to the UK Parliament last year. This clause previously gave regulation-making powers exclusively to the Secretary of State to implement healthcare agreements for Wales. Amendments to the Bill mean that the Welsh Ministers will now also have these powers, and that's a welcome development. But, having now been given these powers, it is our view that the Welsh Ministers should be the ones to exercise them. Where they do not, and instead they ask or they rely upon the UK Government to do so, meaning that the Senedd would be circumvented once again, the Welsh Government should provide a detailed explanation to the Senedd in advance of such regulations being made—not 'should' but 'must', we would argue—and explain why it's not been legislated for in Wales. So, I hope that the Minister in her response can confirm that this is her intention now and can give us that assurance. Diolch yn fawr iawn, Llywydd.