I realise that these Standing Orders will pass, and for the efficiency of what we need to do, I think we have to accept that. However, it would have been much better if we were amending this afternoon Standing Order 25 to accommodate the new needs that are on us, in relation to taxation powers.

In response to the Business Committee's preference, the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee—and I think the Chair will speak later—suggested a new Standing Order 25. Bizarrely, we are now having to accept a bifurcated Standing Order 27. In the event, this is the wrong Standing Order, because it breaks the logical sequence laid out in Standing Orders, and it effectively places a new Standing Order within an existing Standing Order. This is not clear or transparent, and will have a big effect on anyone trying to read our Standing Orders, to gain an understanding of how these matters are dealt with.