I probably haven't got time, Alun, I'm afraid, unfortunately—I'm really sorry to Members on this.

We have heard from Conservative Members a consistency, and it's a consistency that was clear as well in their leadership even while the committee was sitting, I have to say: no more Members et cetera, et cetera. It's been repeated and repeated, and here we are today.

What was also mentioned today, interestingly, was some comments against positive discrimination. But, that's as it is—that's a point of disagreement. This is very strong in terms of measures that will need to be taken, including legislative measures here.

The arguments against more politicians have been, I have to say, regardless of the evidence for what that does for improved scrutiny, and I'll turn to some of those in a moment. From those who had different opinions in terms of support for this today, I welcome that strong support that we've heard evident today. Yes, there are different views on the shape, the form, the nuances, the detail and so on—I get all of that—and so there should be. I have my own personal opinions, which I've struggled to avoid putting into this report and to hold back from it; one day, I'll be allowed to say them. But, I do think that this is a major step forward in terms of the quality of scrutiny here. It was Silk himself who said that you can't actually cut corners on scrutiny; you need the right number of Members. Simply to say to my colleagues on the benches, I've come to this place because I believe firmly in this place and I believe in the voice it gives to the people of Wales, but we're not doing it well enough. I sat on, I presided over and I chaired a committee in Westminster that was 17 strong. It was the only one I sat on; I didn't have to do anything else—one committee. On that committee, I had the most green of Conservative Members—on the Environmental Audit Committee—the most green, attacking the Government. I had the most climate-change-sceptic attacking the Government. There were 17 members—there were mavericks and there were outspoken individuals. We don't have the capacity to do that deeper dive, that hard-nosed scrutiny, and that's what this is all about.

So, I would simply say that if this does go through today, then be constructive and engage with it, because what this is about is genuinely, as we've titled the report, a stronger voice for the people of Wales. It's not to do with more politicians; it's to do with holding this lot to account, from all of us—from all of us.

Let me just turn very briefly, Dirprwy Lywydd, to some of the detailed points. First of all, on the issue of cost-effectiveness, we deal with a £20 billion budget here—the Welsh Government does. That needs to be scrutinised effectively. As I've mentioned already, it was the Silk commission itself that said that good scrutiny means good legislation. Good legislation pays for itself—a point that has been made by other Members.

The question was raised about linking ourselves to Westminster boundaries. I do get that there were other models put forward as well. But if I can turn your attention to paragraph 232, which says,

'As previously noted, although we have recommended that the Senedd’s constituencies should initially be aligned to those of the UK Parliament constituencies, they should not be automatically linked to them'—

—forever and a day.

'This would mean that deviation from the UK’s constituencies could occur in future full reviews.'

And we've set up review bodies within this. It's a building block to get us to 2026.

On the type of voting system, what this would say, even with the differences of opinion, what this would do is it would see us finally moving away from the much criticised mixed-member electoral system in favour of a proportional system that is actually widely used in modern democracies, for all the criticism that we've heard. It will put an end to having two classes of Members of the Senedd, and avoid the confusion around the need for two different ballot papers for two different Members. And it's also a system that is highly compatible, we say in the report, with measures to encourage gender equality.

On legislative competence, the point picked up by my colleague the Counsel General, if I can refer Members to paragraphs 152 to 158 in particular, where they deal with this issue and culminate in recommendation 17, requiring Welsh Government to craft these proposals to minimise the risk of any successful challenge. And there are different views on the issue of competence and the confidence around it, but we have heard, Darren, on the committee—we've heard in evidence to the committee—that some of those giving evidence had great confidence in the competence issue. But what has to be tested now is by the way that the Government actually crafts it. And we've had much discussion around the type of the voting system.

Just finally, on the issue of this referendum—a final point in many that came out, and I can't deal with all of them—the UK Parliament's Act in 2017, drafted by the UK Government, devolved powers to this Senedd in relation to its size and electoral arrangements. Under that Act, any such reforms are a protected subject matter. They require a supermajority—two thirds of the Members of this Senedd—to vote in favour at the final legislative stage in order for any such reforms to be passed. Ultimately, this was the safeguarding mechanism selected by the UK Government, and the committee agrees and says that is sufficient.

And just finally, on the issue—I take my hat off as the committee Chair for a moment—of Welsh Labour, one thing that hasn't been mentioned is we actually signed off on the increase in Members several conferences ago, not in the last manifesto. It was several conferences ago. [Interruption.] Because you're not a member. I've told you; I'll send you the membership card and you can come to our conferences.

Just finally, I've said all I need to say. Other Members have said all they need to say already. There are differences of opinion. Even amongst those who support these reforms, they'd like to see different types of reforms; we get that. This is an important step, however, today, and I come back to the point I made in my opening remarks: for all of us, including those who have spoken in opposition today, if we fail to take this step today we may not have this moment for another generation, and we will not tread water; we will go backwards as a democratic institution. We cannot allow that to happen, our committee would argue strongly. So, in thanking again all those who gave evidence to us, the committee members, the fantastic team that supported us, and also for the contributions today, I urge you strongly: support this motion, give a stronger voice to the people of Wales in this Senedd.