May I thank the committee Chair for her statement? In listening to the statement, I think it’s become clear that there are three tasks among the many other tasks that we need to deliver here that we should be mainly focused on. First of all, we do need to create a better understanding within this institution of the institution’s expectations in terms of behaviour among Members and staff, and the broader Assembly family. We need to create greater clarity too, I think, among the public, particularly on what we believe is acceptable and what is unacceptable in terms of behaviours. Also, there is an entirely practical job of work to be done: we need to raise far more awareness of the processes in existence to make a complaint, to secure justice for victims and to hold offenders to account.

There is one thing highlighted in the fact that I used the word ‘processes’—the plural—and this has already been raised in the evidence sessions that the committee has had in this inquiry. We do have a code of conduct for Assembly Members, but we also have a different code of conduct for Ministers, and there are important questions to be asked in that regard. Are the expectations of those two codes in alignment? Is there consistency in terms of what is acceptable and isn’t acceptable in the AM codes and the ministerial code? And of course, there are two different processes for making complaints.

Much of this may be very clear to us because we are living among it every day, but put yourself in the shoes of a member of the public and I don’t think that this situation is quite as clear as perhaps we would want. One could approach the standards commissioner, and the standards commissioner may explain, ‘Well, no, you have to take your complaint to the office of the First Minister’. I have every confidence that the commissioner’s office would do that in an appropriate and sensitive way, but it’s another step and it’s another hoop that that individual has to jump through. It’s these factors that make it more difficult for these individuals and make it less likely that these individuals will proceed with their complaints, at a time, of course, when they are vulnerable and they are lacking in confidence. We have to make these processes as accessible and as simple as possible.

Don’t forget, of course, that the AM code is relevant to Assembly Members not only in our professional lives but in our private lives. So, why not encompass the ministerial roles within that single code, and give the responsibility to the independent commissioner for standards to scrutinise that and to make recommendations in the context of Assembly Members to the standards committee and in the ministerial context to the First Minister? So, may I ask: wouldn’t it be better, in terms of meeting the laudable aims that you’ve listed in your statement—in terms of having a clear and consistent process that’s easily understood and that is accessible—wouldn’t having a single process for all Assembly Members in all capacities be more true to those principles, rather than having two separate systems as we currently have, never mind the regimes of the political parties, as we’ve already heard reference to?

There are a number of other questions that have already been raised. Many feel that there is inconsistency in the right to appeal within the current system, where an Assembly Member can appeal against an adjudication but a complainant can’t. The limit of 12 months to make complaints is also something that I think needs to be questioned, because many people who bring complaints forward don’t feel that they’re able to do that or aren’t able to do that for a longer period of time, perhaps, than that 12-month period, and we have to be sensitive to that too.

So, there are many factors that do need to be taken into account, and I know that the standards committee will look at all of these. But, of course, it all comes to the central point of the statement, namely that we need a broader culture change, as you said, and that won’t happen as a result of one inquiry. Everyone recognises and acknowledges that there isn’t a single solution to this. There’s a great deal that must happen in order to tackle all of these issues. Of course, we need broader conversations on some of these important areas that we are covering here—conversations within the institution, yes, but we need conversations throughout society too. I would like to conclude by asking the Chair what role she feels that we as Assembly Members have, and the standards committee specifically, perhaps, in leading that process to ensure that those important conversations do happen.