109 essentially sets out a mechanism for changes to legislative competence, and it is a detailed legislative mechanism which depends upon the scrutiny of either Parliament alone, in the sense of enactment of primary legislation, or the joint collaboration, to use a word we used earlier, between Parliament and the Assembly, where it comes to changes within schedule 7 by means of standing orders.
So these are, and I don't want to provide too much of a categoric hierarchy but I think one can see if you have a change to the forestry or agricultural provisions of schedule 7, that is no doubt an important change in many instances, but it is not seismic, but what is seismic is taking out the EU component. And yet this is said, it is said to be Parliament's intention in GOWA, the acronym for the Government of Wales Act, that this can be done by the prerogative. We say that is -- and that is a deliberate choice to put that in the legislation, because the point raised against us by the Advocate General, we didn't(?) need to do it. Well, you did it; and why did you do it? Answer: because it was felt to be important for the permanence of the devolution settlement to contain statutory provisions setting out detailed mechanisms for changes of competence.
So we say that it cannot be other than that Parliament intended in the Government of Wales Act to provide for statutory changes in the event of seismic changes to, radical changes to, legislative competence.