Absolutely, and I very much agree with the Member for Carmarthen East and Dinefwr, and that's why this inquiry should go ahead by the Committee for the Scrutiny of the First Minister.

Now, let me remind Members that a key part of this inquiry is the First Minister's response to a written Assembly question from an opposition Member. The First Minister made it abundantly clear in November 2014, in a response to my colleague Darren Millar, that no allegations had been made, and yet, in response to an oral Assembly question, the First Minister has indicated any issues that were brought to his attention at that time were dealt with. Indeed, the committee inquiry would not just consider the First Minister's conduct and that of his office, but also the First Minister's response and attitude to Assembly business. If Ministers can change their answers to Assembly scrutiny, then what does that say about our institution? Therefore, it is entirely appropriate that the First Minister faces questions from an Assembly committee and, of course, the Committee for the Scrutiny of the First Minister is the most suitable committee.

Let me also remind the Welsh Government that their own business manager made it crystal clear in the Business Committee meeting last week that she was happy to see this inquiry brought before the Committee for the Scrutiny of the First Minister as soon as possible. Therefore, it's deeply disappointing that the Welsh Government has chosen to renege on its initial position, and this sends yet another statement to the people of Wales that the Welsh Government only answers questions when it feels like it, on its own terms.

It's my view that the to-ing and fro-ing on this issue has not helped the Assembly's reputation at all, and it's now time for this matter to be dealt with effectively through our own robust scrutiny channels. If the name 'Committee for the Scrutiny of the First Minister' tells the people of Wales anything, it's that it convenes to scrutinise the First Minister. The remit of the committee, as stated on the Assembly's website, and I quote, is

'to scrutinise the First Minister on any matter relevant to the exercise of the functions of the Welsh Government.'

Unquote. Therefore, this inquiry could not meet the criteria of the remit more adequately. Now, if the Welsh Government amends this motion today by bypassing this scrutiny avenue, then it effectively tells the people of Wales that the committee only scrutinises the First Minister when the First Minister wants it to. And the view—. And the view of an unnamed Labour Assembly Member, in media reports last week, that this process would lead to a 'political bunfight' is absolutely absurd. It shows no respect for the Assembly Members sitting on that committee, which is, frankly, alarming, as every one of those Members is a committee Chair that was democratically elected to their role by this Assembly. The Committee for the Scrutiny of the First Minister is formed by not only some of our most experienced Assembly Members, but by those who are the front faces of Welsh Government scrutiny. And I can hear mutterings from the Labour benches. If somebody wants to intervene on that point, then I'm quite willing to give way. No.

Now, it's my view that, as part of the inquiry, the committee should take evidence from a range of witnesses. Those witnesses must include not just the First Minister, but also his staff and office at the time, as well as former Members and former special advisers, so that the committee can be confident that the range of evidence received is balanced and comprehensive. I also believe that the committee should prepare a report of its findings to the Assembly by February half term 2018. It's important that a focus and direction is given to the inquiry from the outset.

The remit of the committee's inquiry should also consider the points raised in today's motion. It's absolutely crucial that the allegations are thoroughly examined, as well as any action taken, as a result of bullying complaints. And, as I mentioned earlier, the validity of the answers given by the First Minister to the National Assembly for Wales in relation to such allegations is a vital reason why the Committee for the Scrutiny of the First Minister should undertake this inquiry in the first place. And so, therefore, the First Minister's response to Assembly questions must be given significant attention as part of this inquiry. At the very least, this needs to be clarified so that the people of Wales can have full confidence in the Welsh Government's operations.

The Welsh Government's amendment to this motion simply shows the First Minister's attempt to set his own scrutiny by self appointing an independent adviser to investigate his actions in the last two weeks. There's also no confirmation that that there will be any public scrutiny by the First Minister's adviser, and there is certainly no confirmation in the amendment that the First Minister's own inquiry will consider his responses to questions in recent years. In fact, it merely states that it will consider allegations made in the past two weeks. 

Therefore, in closing, Llywydd, there has been talk in recent weeks of delivering natural justice, and an inquiry that is set on the Government's own terms behind closed doors does not set that agenda. A public, transparent forum is one of the vehicles to deliver that, and so it's entirely appropriate that this motion is allowed to pass. Indeed, the Assembly has always prided itself on being an open and transparent forum, and it's crucial that we continue to operate in this manner. No Member should deny this process from happening. Therefore, I urge Members to support this motion and send a message to the people of Wales that the National Assembly for Wales is free to scrutinise the First Minister when the opportunity calls for it.