Thank you for those comments, and they very much reflect, I think, the views I hope I've expressed, although we've not had the opportunity obviously to have a detailed discussion of what happened. When the report was presented, I actually went off message and made a very specific comment that I thought was important, and that is: it is not for Government to determine the mechanism for its own scrutiny. It is a fundamental part of the legislature. And I think the Government's response at that time was actually supportive of that. It is recognised. It is almost the rule of law of parliaments. So, this statement is not so much to do with the actual issue of the binding nature of the role of a sifting committee; it is actually about the principle whereby Government agrees, we all agree, that it is for the Assembly to determine the scrutiny of Government, and where that has been breached, it is certainly my role as the Chair of the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee, and its members, to actually stand up and draw attention to the fact that this is a matter of principle.

I recognise the points that were made and I recognise the comments that have been made by the First Minister in the letter to me, but time I don't think is a justification for that sort of breach. I note that when the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee was asked to scrutinise, for example, the continuity Bill at very short notice, Members went to considerable lengths to ensure that they were available and put the time in to actually carry out that process. So, this is a matter that I think is very important that it does not happen again.