Diolch, Dai. If I can begin at the end with one regent and move on to another then, certainly the Henry VIII powers, we consistently—and in line with our predecessor committee as well—try to push back on the use of Henry VIII powers. It’s a constant dialogue with Ministers and with Government, but our principles are very firm on the committee, for very good reasons, that we want to minimise—. We recognise that there will be occasions where Henry VIII powers, in limited, restricted areas, might be appropriate, but we’re trying to constantly push back. We have to keep going on that journey, I think, and have the dialogue with Ministers on that. It is quite an interesting dialogue that we do have because, as I alluded to earlier, there is good practice. We do find, within some areas of legislation, and with some Ministers, that they do indeed try very hard to stamp down on the use of Henry VIII powers, and in other areas it unwinds a little bit. We’re going to have to keep on working on that. But I think the important thing, curiously, in respect of the way that we see this place working, and the transparency of this place, is that we have these discussions fairly and amicably. But there will be points of difference, I think, sometimes, from us as the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee and Ministers, but we’ll keep on arguing, because I think there is a good point of principle that we shouldn’t be relying on Henry VIII powers or trying to avoid, wherever possible, the use of them. I’m sure that the former Chair of the committee would agree with that as well.

To turn for a moment to Hywel Dda, as Dai rightly points out, he was the original progressive legislator, innovator and pioneer. We sometimes forget in Wales that we can look back a long, long way to where we began a process of legislation and how we learned some of those lessons, and perhaps bring them forward now in terms of how we deal with those issues, such as equality issues. We were the nation that pioneered on that.

Dai mentioned that we genuinely need to improve the institutional working. I agree entirely and I would recommend to anybody to go back and have a look at Lord Murphy’s evidence session. Lord Murphy was, of course, twice the Secretary of State for Wales, but also the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland and many other roles within the Government. He has a long pedigree, and he himself has been on a journey, but one of the interesting things that he was alluding to was the difficulty sometimes of persuading Whitehall colleagues, also with long experience, of where we were in this devolution journey and so on. So, I’d recommend that.

But there is good practice. We do see good practice. We do see Ministers and committees working on a day-to-day basis, even on cross-border issues, very well. In other areas it’s not so good. What we must try and establish is: what is the best practice and how do we ensure that that best practice is absolutely the norm for every part of the Westminster-to-Wales relationship? I agree entirely when he says that there is a lot of work to be done. Yes, there is. This is why I think it’s an appropriate moment here, after we have finished with the new Wales Act, to reflect and also see how this looks forward. Why is that particularly appropriate? Also because we need to have a look now, as we have this situation where we are in this transition period as we look at article 50 and exiting the European Union: these mechanisms and relationships must be exemplary in the way that they function. So, I think that we can provide a service not only to Wales but also to the UK Government at the same time—and our devolved colleagues.

Finally, he mentioned citizens’ engagement. I entirely agree—a huge body of work here to do for us. I think, probably of all of the committees, because we are not a thematic committee, because we are not something that, very often, is easily translatable to the experiences of my neighbours and so on—it’s not health, it’s not social care, it’s not the buses, it’s not whatever—and yet, if we do not have the right processes in place, much of this good work in those themed areas can fall asunder. So, we have to find a way. I would pay tribute to our team that underpins our work as committee members—the clerks, the researchers, the communications people—for their efforts to try and find those innovative ways, such as the citizens’ panel, where we can go forward and work on it to find ways that we can—. As is often said, people don’t talk about this constitutional stuff in the Dog and Duck, wherever that fictional Dog and Duck is. What we need to find are the clever ways in which citizens can engage with this, because it really does matter. We need to get this right. So, Dai, thank you very much for those comments.