I thank Rhun ap Iorwerth for his questions and for his general welcome for this process, the development of the process and the need for more formal guidance, perhaps, so that everyone can understand how committees operate with Government.

May I just say, first of all, that I feel that the committee ultimately did have an opportunity to assess the candidate and an opportunity to hold the candidate to account in a public forum, where she was questioned in a very thorough manner? I think that’s entirely appropriate, and, therefore, that process is clearly one that committees do and one that we could do ourselves.

Rhun ap Iorwerth raised a number of points that we need to understand and which need to be included in formal guidelines. For example, what powers? We had no veto on this occasion, certainly, but if the committee had been unanimous in reporting unfavourably against a candidate, and had done that on a robust basis, explaining why, then I’m sure that the Cabinet Secretary would have had to reconsider just how he was going to proceed with that appointment. But it is a question that arises—whether the guidance should put a specific veto in the hands of some committees. That is something that would need to be negotiated between the Assembly and the Government. It is a discussion in the Assembly, because, although it’s the Finance Committee that had the opportunity to carry out this first pre-appointment hearing, this will be something that other committees will be interested in, and I would suggest that it is something that the Chairs’ forum should look at in this place as we develop that in due time.