Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. Can I thank most Members for their contributions? [Laughter.] Just to explain first of all—to deal with the amendments. I know that Members are concerned that the ministerial code should be open—it is; that it gets amended and reviewed from time to time—it is; and that Members are aware of what the ministerial code actually says. What the amendment does, of course, is ensure that I continue to review the ministerial code and indeed the way that it operates and that will continue for the future.

The second amendment, in the name of Paul Davies, about the commissioners, is related, I suppose, to openness in Government, but I really ask the question: is this really a problem? We know that the commissioners should be independent and they are once they are appointed. They would be no more independent if they were appointed by the National Assembly; somebody has to appoint them. What’s important is that they are able to operate independently as soon as they are appointed. That is something, I believe, that has indeed happened. They don’t operate in the name of the Government any more than they would operate in the name of the Assembly if the Assembly appointed them, and so, from my perspective, certainly I believe that commissioners have operated independently and have fulfilled their duties properly. At no time has it been suggested that the commissioners are in some way hamstrung in terms of being able to express their views and express those views properly.

In terms of special advisers, this is not something that happens at Westminster. Special advisers are appointed by me; they are subject to a code as well and that is something that I, again, keep in mind as they are appointed. Special advisers are expected, of course, to keep to rules in terms of their job and particularly in terms of the way in which they separate their political life, in terms of campaigning, from their work as a special adviser.

On the third amendment—