I welcome very much the Minister's speech this evening in asking and recommending that this Senedd does not give consent to this LCM. I think we should be doing that for two reasons: for the constitutional reasons, but also for policy reasons. I agree with my friend, the Chair of our committee. I keep forgetting the name of the committee, but it's a very good committee. [Laughter.] Legislation, justice and constitution. I do wish—. I'm far better with single words than acronyms, but it's a very good—[Interruption.] It might be my age. It's more likely to be other things, but we won't go there.

So, I'm very grateful to him, and I do agree with the points he makes about concurrent powers and the points he makes about the Welsh Government bringing forward its own legislation. But I think there's a more fundamental point at play with this LCM, and that is the nature of parliamentary scrutiny. The Parliaments, wherever you happen to be, in Westminster, here, Holyrood, or wherever, exist to scrutinise the actions of the Executive, and that is a key, fundamental part of our role. Last night in Westminster, legislation was passed that allows Ministers to legislate. That should never happen, and as a legislature, we should never allow that to happen. We should never allow Welsh Ministers the right to legislate in our name, and it shouldn't happen in Westminster either. But what this does is to enable Westminster Ministers to negotiate, without parliamentary scrutiny, trade deals that will have a profound effect on the livelihoods of people, wherever they happen to be in the United Kingdom. That should be subject to parliamentary control and parliamentary scrutiny before the negotiations start, and not simply a Bill that will be whipped through late at night, after the negotiations have concluded. We need to be able to say, very, very clearly, that all deals of this sort should be subject to clear parliamentary scrutiny at all stages, and we should all, on all sides of the Chamber, agree with that, because you on the Conservative benches insist on scrutinising Welsh Ministers. I welcome your scrutiny. I welcome that scrutiny. But I want to see the same scrutiny in London as we have here.

The second issue is that of policy, and the points that have already been made are very true and fair. What really worries me about this legislation is that it demonstrates that the UK Government are turning their backs on the farming community and embracing the money people in the City of London. This might be free trade, but it's not fair trade, and what we need are trade treaties that are hard-wired with our values. A few years ago, I met in Brussels the New Zealand ambassador to the EU and to Brussels. We had a long conversation about the nature of trade agreements, and he was very clear: trade agreements are not simply about trade. They're about who we are and what our contribution to the world is going to be. He spoke at length about New Zealand's values—the values of the Government of New Zealand—informing what they wanted to do and what sort of deals they were searching for when they were negotiating. And what we've got here is a UK Government that doesn't seem to have any values except making money for their friends in the City of London, and it doesn't matter who suffers as a consequence of that. And the sheep farmers of Wales deserve better than that. They deserve better than that, because they have farmed these hills and mountains for generations. It's one of the toughest jobs in this country today, and they deserve the support of people who say they speak on their behalf. And in this treaty, they've been let down and let down badly, and backs have been turned by a Government more interested in simply placating Tory donors. [Interruption.] I've said enough about you, so I should take an intervention.