The hon. Gentleman has made that point already, and I agree with it. In contrast to the EU internal market, the nature of the UK internal market appears to be self-evident and a matter of common sense to many people. It might be great and it might be something that has grown organically and suits us all, but how often have we seen apparently simple, clear and-crucially-unregulated systems descend into a writhing tangle of irreconcilable and conflicting interests? That is what might happen. We might wish for a simple UK internal market, but we might regret it if we wish for it. We will vote for new clause 64 but, if it is passed, we will give close consideration to how it could be improved through further amendments. Subsidiarity is supposedly one of the governing principles of the European Union. Powers are supposed to be exercised as close to the citizen as possible. That model does not exist in the UK, where the UK Government remain sovereign. We rely on the separation of competences listed in the newly enshrined reserved powers model in the recently passed Wales Act 2017. This Bill, as it stands, undermines and reverses 20 years of the existence of the National Assembly for Wales. Professor Rawlings, the professor of public law at University College London, in evidence to the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee on 31 October, highlighted the concern over what he describes as the double-hatted nature of the UK Government, meaning that they simultaneously represent the UK-wide Government and the Government of England. I raised that point during my speech on our first day in Committee. As I said earlier, this raises a concern not only about conflicts of interest, but about the fact that the subcultures, networks and assumptions of large Departments, including the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, are focused, almost unconsciously, on England. That has been a recurring theme throughout Select Committee evidence sessions. As I said with reference to the Department of Health, this is a long-standing difficulty. In evidence to the Brexit Committee on 17 October, Laura Dunlop, QC said:“In our prototype framework-whatever our internal market is destined to look like-at the moment, there is one party in the discussions that is wearing two hats, and that is the UK Government, who are also required to speak for England. That is a significant difficulty, in my view.â€The hon. and learned Member for Edinburgh South West and I were there to hear Laura Dunlop say that. On 24 October, Dr Viviane Gravey told the Welsh Affairs Committee:“What I mean by giving greater powers is that during that period planned in the Withdrawal Bill, UK Ministers will be able to change the law that has been given back from Brussels, but the devolvedâ€Governments“will not. There is then a question of whether any changes made will be in the interests of the whole of the UK or just of England.â€That is the question. The United Kingdom consists of four countries-four political bodies-not just one. Democracy requires and values all voices, not just one. Devolution demands that all countries within the United Kingdom have a say in the future, not just one. Members will have the opportunity today to stop this Westminster power grab. If all the Opposition parties turn up to vote, and vote together in the interests of the devolved countries, we can stop this encroachment on Welsh sovereignty and put all four UK countries on an equal footing.