Thank you for those questions, and perhaps just one statistic to put in to add to those: of course, within Wales alone, in one year—or, I think, in the last two years—there have been produced an estimated 100 million plastic cup lids. So, that’s an indication, I think, of the scale. And of course you referred to the pollution of the seas, and of course that’s why our concern about the banning of oxo-degradables as well, because all they do is actually break down the plastic, but they don’t eliminate the plastic—the plastic just gets into even smaller items, miniscule items, to contaminate our seas, our waterways and our land.

You raised some very important issues with regard to the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020, and of course this is a matter I’ve spoken on on many occasions. In fact, I made a statement on 18 August with regard to the Supreme Court rejecting our application for permission to appeal the order of the Court of Appeal that our claim for judicial review of the Act was premature. So, we were disappointed with that, but that was a judgment very much to do with process. But in terms of this legislation, and I suppose in accordance with the points that the Member has raised, our position—and this is why we sought the judicial review through the Supreme Court—is that UKIMA does not have the capacity to take away our devolved competence, and I am confident that this legislation is within our competence. If a different view is taken, then there are options that are open. There are options for me, if I thought it appropriate, to refer the matter under section 112 of the Government of Wales Act 2006, to refer a Bill to the Supreme Court. I see no reason why that would arise on this occasion. It was also open, of course, to the UK Government to take similar measures. But our view is that the Bill is within competence. We do not expect the UK Government to refer the Bill to the Supreme Court, and if actions are taken, then obviously we will consider our position at that stage, and in particular with all the issues and arguments that we wanted to raise in the Supreme Court, where the Supreme Court said they would rather have an example of legislation that they could test it against. It seems to me that the appropriate course of action at this moment in time is to base the assessed competence on our analysis of what the competence is, and that is UKIMA does not have the competence to overturn our statutory devolution powers, and therefore it is within competence.

You correctly raise issues of scrutiny. We do want the Bill to move forward quickly. This is one of the reasons why the draft Bill was tabled as early as possible, to enable yet further consultation by the committee. But it is a relatively simple Bill. There are technical complexities—those, as I mentioned earlier, in terms of how you actually define something, and of course in legislation, as the Member will know, you have to be very clear about what you’re defining, what it is you are talking about and what action can actually be taken. But of course I will do everything I can, and I know the Minister will, in respect of supporting the scrutiny.

In terms of the longer term issues, of course there’s ongoing work that perhaps it’s fair for me to mention now—not within my portfolio, but certainly within the portfolio of the Minister—looking at the issues of reusable bottles and bottle banks and so on; deposit schemes, packaging and so on. Those are discussions that are under way. Policy is being developed and, in actual fact, this legislation also enables us not only to add to the list, but also to support adding to that list by looking at alternative schemes and encouraging those schemes, and also through educational processes and the work that governments naturally do to shift culture, to change culture in terms of our orientation, our reliance on and our addiction to the use of single-use plastics. But I think this particular Bill is a very significant step forward and is the most comprehensive piece of legislation in this area in the UK.