Members are being put in an appalling position this afternoon by the Government, and the Deputy Minister recognised that, I think, in the tone that he used and the words that he used in order to introduce this debate, because whenever we are asked to debate legislative consent motions, we do two things, don't we? Ministers focus on the content, on the legislation, and Members will then focus on the process, and that tension is inevitable, and it's a good thing that that sort of tension exists. In this case, we have had from Government a number of different reasons why a UK Bill is being used to address a serious issue that affects people in Wales, and each one of the reports from the legislation committee contains different rationale from the Government for doing so. We were told last summer, when this matter first came in front of us, that it was a matter of expediency and that this could reach the statute book in a way that would provide far earlier protection and far more protection for people living in Wales, and on that basis, although many of us were unhappy with the process, we were content to consent to it. Well, now, with Glamorgan starting the cricket season next week, we are still being told the same thing. Now, all of us who have been in this place for more than a few months will understand and know that there are numerous processes that the Government could have used in order to deliver legislation onto the statute book within the timescale that we've had available to us. We also know that policy development has been taking place throughout the whole process of this Bill going through Westminster, so what the Government was seeking to do back in July is not what the Government is asking us to agree to now at the end of March. So, there have been changes through that, and I'm content with that, as it happens, as long as we have the opportunity to scrutinise those changes, the reasons for them and what the Government wishes to put on the statute book. None of those things are happening today, and none of those things have happened over the last seven months. This is a bad way to legislate, Deputy Minister. This is a bad thing to do, and it is not good that you ask Members to vote for it in this way.

We've heard a speech from the official opposition that asks us to support this because of the importance of what the legislation contains. They haven't had an opportunity to read the Bill. They don't know what's in it. None of us do. We haven't had the opportunity to scrutinise it. We established a form of legislating in this place that's different from Westminster because of the importance of scrutiny and because of the importance of involving stakeholders and those affected by legislation, through the Stage 1 scrutiny, which is an important and integral part of how we understand the impact of legislation. None of that has happened. None of us have had the opportunity to study it. So, to listen to an opposition saying, 'We're happy with this legislation, let's put it straight on the statute book. Let's not bother with scrutiny, let's not bother with examination, let's not seek to amend it, send it straight to Windsor castle for Royal Assent' beggars belief. It's an extraordinary abrogation of the role of opposition in scrutinising legislation.

And that brings us back to where we are today. I'm going to vote for the LCM this afternoon because we are forced to do so. But, Minister, don't believe for one moment that I am convinced by your arguments, don't believe for moment that I accept the position that you've put forward, and don't believe for one moment that my vote in favour of this supports the way in which you—