We will be supporting the amendments in this group. Scrutiny is supposed to be one of the core functions of this Assembly, and there has been a weakness with previous legislation in that, often, that post-legislative scrutiny hasn't been given the prominence it should have been given. So, we will support amendment 19 on this basis, and I really don't think that it's for the Government to decide what the National Assembly should be doing in relation to the role of the committee structures. I think it's something that we should decide as a legislature, and I think that's something, obviously, I hope that we do now, but I don't think that should be an imposition of a viewpoint, which I feel, in this regard, it may have come over as, unfortunately, even if that wasn't the intended consequence. 

I think there is an argument that binding future Assemblies—and it's likely this binds ourselves, rather than a future Assembly, anyway—into post-legislative scrutiny is a good thing, and it's been a weakness of the process so far that we can address here. 

Turning to amendments 5 and 13, we will be supporting these as well. They may seem minor procedural amendments that the Government may claim are not necessary, but something being not necessary doesn't make it harmful. We can, of course, have an assurance that directions may not contain substantive provisions, but laying them before the Assembly carries that extra check in case a different Minister or Government changes their mind. It won't cost the Government anything or change policy, but they add reassurance, and, as I outlined earlier, we do have concerns about the unforeseen consequences of this Bill. So, giving the extra protections of these amendments would be helpful.