Item 6 on our agenda is a debate on the Standards of Conduct Committee report, 'Creating the Right Culture'. I call on the Chair of the committee to move the motion. Jayne Bryant.

Motion NDM6870 Jayne Bryant

The National Assembly for Wales:

Notes the report of the Standards of Conduct Committee, 'Creating the Right Culture', which was laid in the Table Office on 13 September 2018.

Motion moved.

Diolch, Deputy Llywydd. The National Assembly for Wales must lead the way in ensuring it's clear that inappropriate behaviour has no place in our society. The committee’s report marks an important step towards creating the kind of environment in which we all want to work. As a committee, we were keen to highlight that it can sometimes be simple things that break down barriers and bring about change.

I’d like to take this opportunity to thank all the committee members—including Llyr Gruffydd and Paul Davies, who have since left—for their hard work and determination to ensure that every effort was made to come up with recommendations that will bring about real change. We know that this report does not produce all the answers, but it is an important step forward for this institution. I’d also like to thank everyone who gave evidence to the inquiry. Some of this evidence was gathered in a confidential environment, and we're incredibly grateful for the people sharing their experiences and expertise. I’d also like to thank everybody for their patience for the time it has taken. We have acted to make changes, such as incorporating the dignity and respect policy, as soon as we could, but we felt it was incumbent on us to ensure we received the widest possible evidence to inform our report.

Over the last few years there has been extensive coverage about inappropriate behaviour and sexual harassment across society. People from a wide range of sectors have spoken about their experiences of inappropriate behaviour in the workplace. In 2016, the Trades Union Congress and the Everyday Sexism Project conducted a survey that found that 52 per cent of women have experienced sexual harassment at work—and it is very worrying that 79 per cent of these women did not tell their employer. The #MeToo—a step that has allowed people across the globe to speak out and voice their concerns—has demonstrated the need for change is undeniable. Politics is certainly no exception. As elected politicians, we have a responsibility to ensure that we set the highest examples and standards to wider society. It's imperative that every one of us takes responsibility. We must not tolerate inappropriate behaviour within our institution, and it must be called out wherever we see it. This the very least we can do.

The committee made 21 recommendations in the report, which are intended to raise the bar. Listening to those who gave evidence to us left us in no doubt that things must change. We're intending to put into place a number of improvements that will make the complaints process more accessible and tailored to address the needs of people who want to raise concerns. These include the right of appeal and a longer time frame for complaints to be made. We must have a system that enables and empowers people to come forward and raise concerns, instead of unintentionally placing barriers in front of them. The system has to be flexible so that people are assured that their individual concerns will be treated sensitively.

We're also working on proposals to change the code of conduct. The committee believe that more can be done to make sure that people know what they should expect from us. The code was produced following the expenses scandal at Westminster and explicitly took account of the rules on financial propriety. While the code encapsulates complaints around dignity and respect by requiring Members to act with personal honour and integrity, we feel there should be clarity regarding what type of behaviour breaches the code.

The Llywydd took the Chair.

The committee is pleased that the Assembly Commission has responded positively to our recommendations and that it shares our vision of an inclusive Assembly, free from harassment. The committee looks forward to the Commission's updates on how these recommendations are progressing. The committee is grateful to the Assembly Commission for the recent updates that highlighted the work of the contact officers, which have now been in place since May. It is evident that individuals are approaching them for support and guidance through the available complaints processes. Members will understand that no details were shared, due to confidentiality, but it was encouraging to hear that this additional service is now being accessed. 

The committee were also pleased to learn that, following evidence to our inquiry, additional support has been provided to the independent standards commissioner's office. Assembly Commission staff have been working with the standards commissioner and have now secured an additional secondee to the support the office. This brings a greater gender balance to the office, something that, it is hoped, will encourage people to feel more comfortable talking about any issues of concern. It also means that more efficient and effective fact-finding and investigative work can take place, assisting the commissioner in progressing often complex cases. 

The committee recommends to the Commission that consideration be given to how people can report anonymously. We believe that the evidence from the higher education sector shows that, rather than pursue a formal complaint, people sometimes prefer a tool that allows them to register an incident online. This could also aid identification of an individual's pattern of behaviour. However, the committee recognises concerns over anonymous reporting and we're clear that a just process must be maintained during the formal investigation of a complaint. The committee acknowledges that it's necessary to inform the accused and difficult to maintain anonymity in such instances.

The committee recommends that the ministerial code be placed under the investigative remit of the standards commissioner. We felt that those wanting to make a complaint relating to an Assembly Member would benefit from a single point of contact. There would be no need to consider which role was being undertaken at the time the inappropriate action occurred. The First Minister considered and rejected this recommendation, as he feels the independent oversight system he is introducing will add sufficient separation. The committee recognise this is consistent with the approaches of many other Governments, but we did feel this was an opportunity to add clarity and full independence to the system. I note there will be a written statement on this shortly, which the committee will consider with interest.

Cultural change cannot happen overnight—it takes time and commitment, and this report is not a final position. The committee want to make it clear that we need everybody's help to shape an environment based on dignity and respect. In this report we have sought to act where we have seen action was needed. We're open to suggestions on how to improve, and we're determined to get this right. We ask that everybody works with us, because together we must ensure the Assembly as an institution sets the highest example. 

Can I put on record my sincere thanks to the Clerks of the Standards of Conduct Committee for their hard work throughout this inquiry, and producing this report? Creating the right culture in any workplace is imperative to a conducive and effective working environment, and I believe that all parties in this Chamber are committed to nurturing that environment. Therefore, I'm pleased to have sat on the Standards of Conduct Committee for the duration of this inquiry and I hope that the publication of this report brings us a step closer to promoting a culture of dignity and respect within the Assembly.

I believe this is a good report, and I'm therefore disappointed that, in responding to this report, the Welsh Government has rejected the recommendation for the First Minister to refer complaints regarding Government Ministers to the office of the standards commissioner so that the commissioner can subsequently report to the relevant body. I think the rejection of this recommendation sadly sends the statement that there's one rule for Assembly Members and one rule for Government Ministers, and, to be perfectly frank, I don't think that this will wash with the people of Wales. The Assembly must do everything that it can to instil public confidence in its procedures, and I believe that, by rejecting this recommendation, the Welsh Government is sending a statement that the First Minister will deal with his own inner circle behind closed doors and away from any independent scrutiny.

The Welsh Government's rationale behind rejecting the recommendation explains that, where a Minister was clearly acting in a capacity as an Assembly Member when the alleged misconduct occurred, the First Minister would, under those circumstances, consider it appropriate for the standards commissioner to handle the matter. Well, surely, Government Ministers are always Government Ministers. I think the people of Wales will struggle to understand when a Minister has clocked off, so to speak, and is only conducting business in their role as an Assembly Member. Surely, it would be simpler to understand and easier for the public if initial complaints and investigations were dealt with by the independent standards commissioner. The Welsh Government will no doubt argue that this isn't the case for other parliaments, but the Assembly doesn't always have to follow other legislatures. There is nothing to stop us from setting our own agenda on this matter.

Now, one of the focuses of the report is to ensure that individuals feel empowered to come forward with concerns or complaints. I know that, as a committee, we took evidence on this subject. The overwhelming message received was that, at present, the current culture did not adequately support complainants or encourage people to come forward with complaints and concerns. In response to that, I know that the Assembly Commission took immediate steps to update its website to attempt to make it easier for people to navigate and understand the complaints process. But, of course, much more needs to be done.

The confidential hotline, coupled with a series of posters, is now displayed throughout the Assembly estate. Again, that action too is very much welcome. It's also good to see that the existing processes will be routinely monitored via a mystery shopping exercise to ascertain if the existing material on how to make a complaint is effective, easily understood and workable going forward. These steps are important in demonstrating the Assembly's commitment to ensuring that complainants are aware of how they can make a complaint and how the process will be navigated. 

Now, as the Chair said, the committee's report also calls for the development of an online reporting tool to allow people to report incidents of inappropriate behaviour—either anonymously or through a named disclosure. I understand the sensitivities around anonymous reporting, but committee members heard that Cardiff University has done some groundbreaking work in this area and so it's good to see the Assembly Commission reflecting on the successes of other organisations' work on this. 

I appreciate that contact officers have already been established, as outlined in the dignity and respect policy and associated guidance, and they have a role to report cases to the head of HR anonymously, who then monitors, records and reports patterns of behaviour. However, I understand that the Commission will want to take further advice on this early in the new year before coming to a firmer conclusion on anonymous reporting, once there's been an opportunity for those processes to develop. Perhaps, in responding to the debate, the Chair of the committee will confirm whether the committee will be returning to this specific issue in due course. 

Finally, Llywydd, the committee identified social media as an area where there are increasing levels of inappropriate behaviour, and, in this fast-paced technological age, it's crucial that parliaments are responsive to online threats. We all know that social media has immense benefits—namely sharing information with the public and engaging with constituents—and I'm pleased that the committee is working to develop guidance on the use of social media and that it intends to establish a much more explicit link between what is acceptable on social media and the code of conduct. I look forward to hearing more about those developments as they take place.

In closing, it's crucial that all Members seriously understand the importance of this inquiry and that robust action is taken and routinely reviewed to ensure that the Assembly creates a culture that empowers people to come forward when they witness and/or are subject to inappropriate behaviour. The Assembly as an institution must be forward looking, progressive and willing to address its weaknesses. So, I urge every Member in this Chamber to support all of the committee's recommendations and commit to establishing a complaints process that is fair, transparent and fit for purpose. Diolch.

I'm very pleased to have the opportunity to participate in this debate as a new member of the committee, and in doing so I'd like to begin by thanking the Chair for her welcome and the other committee members, the committee staff, who've been very supportive in the last couple of weeks in getting me up to speed, and to thank Llyr Gruffydd for having represented Plaid Cymru so ably on the committee in the past. 

Llywydd, the issues that this report addresses are not new. We will sometimes hear people say that standards and expectations around conduct have changed. The truth is that this is not the case. People, particularly women, have always known what is and isn't appropriate. We have always known the difference between humorous interchanges and even romantic attachments between consenting equals in the workplace and sexual harassment and sexual abuse constituting an abuse of power. What has, however, begun to change—and I would say, 'About time, too', is the culture that has tolerated and minimised these abuses of power. 

It is undoubtedly the case, as this report highlights, that the political nature of our organisation inevitably leads to a heightened power imbalance, and it is all the more important, therefore, that we get this right, creating a culture here in which harassment of any kind is not tolerated, where bystanders routinely call out unacceptable behaviour, and where survivors are empowered to report and are believed. Thereby, we can contribute to wider cultural change. 

I warmly welcome this report and the Commission's prompt and positive response to the recommendations. 

Now, the Chair and Paul Davies have already referred to the Government's response to recommendation 12, and I feel that I have to address the bulk of my remarks to this. I can't express how disappointed I am by the First Minister's response. I would have expected unanimity across this Chamber that not only must the highest standards of conduct in public life be expected of all of us as Assembly Members, but that those standards must also apply to all Ministers, and not only must those standards apply and be enforced, but they must be seen by the public to be upheld and be enforced. 

I am really surprised that the First Minister says in paragraph 5 of his response to recommendation 12, and I quote,

'the Committee’s view that public confidence would be improved if the Standards Commissioner undertook that role'

—the role of investigating complaints under the ministerial code—

'is not one that is shared by the First Minister.'

Now I can, up to a point, accept what the First Minister says about potentially needing to make a difference between the role of an Assembly Member and when a person is acting as a Minister, but I would concur with what Paul Davies says: we may make those differences here in this Chamber and we may understand them, but to the public, I simply cannot understand how they should be expected to perceive the difference. And I find it more difficult to accept and understand the First Minister's view that it would somehow be confusing for the standards commissioner to investigate alleged breaches of the ministerial code. Surely the person we've appointed to this important role must be able to undertake investigations under two different sets of expectations. I can't see why using the standards commissioner as the investigator would in any way muddy the waters with regard to the separation of powers between the Executive and the Assembly, and at any rate, as Paul Davies has said, that is for the public a moot point. The standards of behaviour are the standards of behaviour. 

Now, if it were true that there was some muddying of powers between the Executive and Parliament in the suggestion the committee has made, the First Minister must, at the very least, establish a separate, permanent and independent investigative system to which all complaints of possible breaches of the ministerial code should be referred. It cannot be in the interests of transparency or conducive to public confidence for any First Minister to have discretion to determine whether or not a complaint or concern actually constitutes a possible breach of the code and needs investigating. And I would concur with what Paul Davies has said. I am not suggesting that these decisions are in any way grubby or made behind closed doors, but the risk is that that is how people will perceive them. At any rate, it is not right for the First Minister to have the right to decide whether this constitutes a possible breach or not, and referrals to an independent process at the very least ought to be automatic. And I concur with what the Chair has said, I hope that that will be offered to us in the statement that we are to receive automatically. 

And I would also say that what other Parliaments do is not relevant here. We have consistently decided in this Assembly to be better than other Parliaments, whether it's establishing the children's commissioner, for example, long before other parliaments in the UK got their act together to do the same. I believe, as Paul Davies has said, that we should be setting higher standards for ourselves, and those should be higher standards with regard to transparency. 

When it comes to the oversight of the ministerial code, I still believe that the committee's original recommendation is a practical and sensible solution. And we will, of course, one way or another, have a new First Minister soon, and I'd like to ask the committee Chair whether she believes it would be appropriate for us as a committee to approach the new First Minister, whoever she or he may be, and ask them to reconsider this response.

To close, Llywydd, the public have a right to expect that we, in this place, set the tone for the whole of public life in Wales. If we are to do so, we must be as sure as we can possibly be that everyone who works here or who visits here, or who co-operates with us, feels respected and is treated with dignity. This report and the Commission's actions and positive response to this report, are a huge step in that right direction, and I commend this report to the Chamber.

Can I welcome this debate on the report of the standards committee, 'Creating the Right Culture', and can I thank the Chair and members for undertaking this inquiry and producing this report with recommendations that I support?

It is appropriate to hold this debate during the week of the white ribbon, which we wear in recognition of the ongoing drive to eliminate violence against women. As we heard yesterday, in response to my question to the First Minister, this is a scandal of the twenty-first century modern world. We've a responsibility in government—local and national—and as elected representatives, and as individuals in the public, private and third sectors, to respond to this scandal.

We recently debated 'Is Wales Fairer?', the 2018 report of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, where points were made relevant to our debate today, with a statement that said, and the Chair also repeated this:

'#MeToo put the spotlight on women’s and girls’ experience of high levels of violence and discrimination' which are

'too readily accepted as part of life'.

Angela Burns made a very powerful point yesterday, I believe, on this point.

The Women's Equality Network manifesto reported that 55 per cent of girls aged seven to 21 say that gender stereotypes affect their ability to say what they think, and 52 per cent of women report being harassed in the workplace. I think it's that point about affecting the ability to say what they think that is so important.

The Chair of the standards committee alerts us to the evidence received by the committee and reports in the media that suggest that there have been a number of incidents of sexual harassment at the Assembly, and that these haven't been formally reported. It is to our shame that individuals have not felt they could come forward to make these complaints and expose the fact that our culture is not right here in this Senedd. We must now take responsibility to address this.

The Women's Equality Network manifesto says

'We understand that gender inequality is both a cause and consequence of violence against women and girls. We know that to prevent violence we need to educate, challenge and change our unequal culture and society.'

That means that we must challenge ourselves. Yes, we have had the respect and dignity training—I hope this has permeated throughout this organisation and has been made available to both the Commission and Welsh Government teams, about where people have power over other people. It's where power is exercised and abused that the culture can go so wrong.

There are a number of recommendations with a timeline, which I welcome, but we must be vigilant in meeting those timelines and monitoring their delivery, from the five to be delivered immediately—that does mean immediately—through to December and the spring.

I want to finish by updating Members on the new cross-party group on women's equality, which has met twice since its inauguration in May. At its first meeting, we heard from Professor Laura McAllister on 'A Parliament that Works for Wales', with a positive response from the women who attended, including external organisations such as the Women's Equality Network, Chwarae Teg, Women Connect First, Women's Institute and Soroptimist International, who fully endorsed her recommendations regarding job sharing and 50:50 representation of women for this Senedd and the Welsh Government.

This was followed by a talk by Jess Blair from the Electoral Reform Society on their report, 'New Voices: How Welsh Politics can Begin to Reflect Wales', which also endorsed the need to increase the representation of women in the Assembly. This is particularly relevant today, as we mark 100 years since the passing of the Parliament (Qualification of Women) Act 1918, where women could legally stand for Parliament. This is being celebrated in Westminster, as we can see.

We're now holding a joint cross-party group with the Cross-Party Group on Violence against Women and Children alongside our new group on women's equality, strengthening cross-party support for, and understanding of, these issues we're debating this week. We cannot, in what is largely, sadly, a nearly empty Chamber today, just leave it for this debate—it must permeate everything that we're doing in this Assembly and in Welsh Government. 

A few weeks ago, I welcomed a poll that drew attention to public support for using legislation to ensure we get gender parity in this Assembly. Like smoking in public places, I believe the public are ahead of us in many ways, and yet we tend to think that we are in a good place in this Assembly. We are not yet there on these issues. At our joint committee scrutiny of the equality impact assessments last week, we received evidence from the Equality and Human Rights Commission, and they said that the prevalence of societal gender norms in education and employment, and experiences of harassment and violence, is obstructing this progress of women's equality.

We can accept the recommendations today, and clearly, there is much to discuss in terms of the implications of those and from the Welsh Government. We can take them forward, but I think we also need to consider policy and legislation in every aspect of our work here, including legislation to change this Assembly to reflect the Wales we represent. And we should take this on board if we really want to reflect the strength and courage of the suffragettes a century ago, and follow their lead with deeds and not just words. This must include, if necessary, legislation to help to create the right culture in the heart of democracy in Wales.   

I want to pick up on the comments made by Helen Mary Jones and others in referring to the power balance, and how there is an imbalance, not only within the culture that exists in this area, but within some of the rules that we have also, and how we need to change some of those rules in order to convey a clear message that we are tackling that imbalance, and that we are introducing a better balance between the complainant and the person who is the subject of a complaint. That’s not to say that we are reducing the defence of and the fairness to an individual who is complained about, but we also need to empower that individual complainant.

I will give you a few examples in the few minutes' contribution I will make to this debate. If someone were to bring a complaint against me and that the standards commissioner and the standards committee came to a decision that that complaint was valid, then I would have the right of appeal. If the commissioner and the committee came to the conclusion that the complaint was invalid, then the complainant would have no right of appeal. Now, to me, that is an imbalance and it’s unfair. A complaint must be made within 12 months, and we know, of course, that people who have suffered aren’t necessarily ready to bring a complaint in 12 months. It takes far, far longer for them to do that. But after 12 months, that’s it. What can you do? So, we need to change that in order to empower individuals. I would go as far as to say that we don’t need any deadline at all, because we see now how some historic cases from decades ago, perhaps, are emerging. So, I do think that we need to consider that issue too.

There is also a situation in that if I were no longer an Assembly Member, then there would be no means of bringing a complaint against me. But what happens then if I was re-elected after a few years? Well, the timetable has lapsed and you can’t make a complaint. So, there are a number of fundamental issues that we need to address in order to achieve a better balance within that balance of power that I mentioned.

And the only other point that I would want to make is that I too regret and I’m very frustrated and shocked that the First Minister has responded as he has to the suggestion that the standards commissioner should have a role in looking at the ministerial code. I know that that would require legislative change and so on and so forth, I know that it would make it easier for people to understand the system, but most importantly, it would make it easier for those with a complaint to know where to go. Imagine a situation where someone, after great pain, has decided, ‘I will make a complaint.’ They go to the standards commissioner, and then they are given to understand, ‘Well, no, you can’t come to us, you have to go elsewhere with your complaint.’ What kind of message—? And I know that the standards commissioner would do that in a sensitive and responsible manner, but it’s another barrier for an individual to feel that they are able to make a complaint, and I do regret that that First Minister feels—. 

And of course, he would still make the final decision too. No-one is suggesting that any power should be removed from the First Minister, and it’s quite right that the First Minister should make that decision, of course. But, what it would mean is that that process of inquiring into a complaint would be taken out of the hands of Government and would be entirely independent—because there are complaints and doubts, and perhaps they are incorrect perceptions that that process isn't entirely independent—but it would give the public more confidence that it was an independent process. And just as the standards commissioner then brings a report to the standards committee in the context of the code of conduct for Members, that report would be submitted to the First Minister in the context of the ministerial code so that the First Minister could consider the evidence and come to his or her own conclusion and come to his or her own decision. So, any suggestion that power is being withdrawn from the First Minister in the context of the ministerial code is a complete misreading of the situation and sends exactly the same incorrect messages that we are trying to tackle and challenge in this debate this afternoon. So, I would echo the demand for any prospective First Minister to be willing to commit to relook at this issue. Because if we are serious about creating the culture that we want to see here, then it's these steps that are the minimum that we should be delivering.  

I call on the Leader of the House and Chief Whip, Julie James.

Diolch, Llywydd. Can I begin by adding my thanks to the Chair and to the members of the Standards of Conduct Committee for their report and for their very hard work, and indeed for this opportunity to respond to their report? As all Members have pointed out, there is only one recommendation for the Welsh Government, but I welcome the committee's wider intention to foster a culture of dignity and respect within the Assembly through the remainder of its recommendations, and also would very much like to add my voice to those of the various Members in the debate today who've talked about the need for a culture where people can come forward and expect that their complaints will be taken seriously. The suggestions of changing the timescales and the rights of appeal are very interesting ones that the Assembly could, I think, benefit from. 

However, turning to the one recommendation for the Government, the ministerial code sets out the First Minister's expectations in respect of ministerial conduct and this is underpinned by the seven principles of public life. Members will of course be aware that it provides guidance on a range of matters including relationships with the civil service and how to deal with Ministers' constituency, party and private interests. It also contains procedural advice on Cabinet and governmental processes and obligations. In particular, the code makes clear that Members are expected to be personally responsible for their conduct, but that the First Minister is the ultimate judge of standards of ministerial behaviour. He also determines any appropriate action in respect of any breach of those standards. In addition, he will call upon an independent adviser or advisers where appropriate to investigate complaints and to provide him with advice on which to base his judgment about any necessary action.

Will you take an intervention, leader of the house? 

Of course.

I think the concern would be that very point, that it is the First Minister making a decision about whether or not independent investigation should be undertaken. I'm concerned that—I'm not suggesting in any way that that's ever been improperly used—but I'm concerned that from a public perception point of view, that is putting a lot of responsibility on the First Minister. As Llyr Gruffydd has said, it is entirely appropriate that she or he should be the person who receives the evidence from an independent investigation and makes the decision because she or he is the person who makes the appointment. But in terms of deciding whether or not that independent investigation needs to take place, I think that, at the very least, that could be seen from the outside as problematic. 

I see the point you're making, but I have to say I don't agree with it. I think there are circumstances in which it clearly isn't appropriate to refer to an independent adviser and there are other circumstances in which it very clearly is appropriate and I think that's a judgment call myself. But I take your point and it's something we can consider as the system runs out.

Sorry—. So, as I said, he would be looking to see, where appropriate, to call on the independent adviser or advisers. The Government as a whole supports the position that inappropriate behaviour, however and wherever it occurs, will not be tolerated. As I said, we have spoken long and hard in this Chamber on a number of occasions—around the gender review and the equality and human rights report that we received only recently—about being standard bearers for those kinds of conducts, and I certainly would like to add my voice to all of the calls that this place should be standard bearers for the right kinds of conduct. 

The First Minister, in the light of that, has carefully considered his response to recommendation 12, which would require the establishment of a protocol to refer complaints about Ministers to the office of the standards commissioner with the commissioner reporting to the relevant body. There is a comment within the report that the requirement under the ministerial code that states,

'Ministers must keep separate their roles as Minister and Assembly Member' is potentially confusing. This is not a view shared by the First Minister. The primary purpose of the clause is to ensure that a Minister avoids the potential for an actual or perceived conflict of interest if they are asked to make a decision within their portfolio that impacts directly on their own constituency. The code is designed to ensure that Ministers do not use Welsh Government facilities and resources for constituency or party political activities outside of the parameters set out elsewhere in the code.

The rationale for the committee's conclusion that there is potential for confusion regarding Assembly Member and ministerial roles is not apparent. To involve the standards commissioner appointed by and accountable to the Assembly to investigate complaints about the behaviour of Ministers when clearly operating as a Minister rather than as an Assembly Member could in itself create the sort of ambiguity of accountability that the committee is actually seeking to avoid.

The report rightly refers to the facility the First Minister has to refer any matter regarding ministerial behaviour to an independent adviser to investigate. Having only been asked to investigate and advise on one case, which was undertaken diligently and comprehensively by James Hamilton with a report culminating in a Plenary debate, it is difficult to understand the report's suggestion that public confidence would be improved if the standards commissioner undertook the role. Independent advice is just that, whether an independent adviser or the standards commissioner performs that role.

The exception to this would be that, if a Minister were clearly acting in their capacity as an Assembly Member when the alleged misconduct occurred, the First Minister would under those circumstances consider it appropriate for the standards commissioner to handle the matter rather than it being dealt with under the ministerial code.

Therefore, for these reasons, the Government is unable to accept the recommendation made by the committee, but I would like to end by asking you all across the Chamber for your support in promoting the culture of dignity and respect throughout this place, which has been so ably and properly referenced and which so many Members have spoken passionately about today. We do absolutely agree that we can all help change behaviours and culture and that we should do so by leading by example. Diolch, Llywydd.

I call on Jayne Bryant to reply to the debate.

Diolch, Llywydd. I'm very grateful for the contributions of members past and present of the Standards of Conduct Committee. I'm not quite sure what it says when I'm the only original member left of this committee, but I'm still here for now anyway. Thank you, all.

Paul mentioned in particular the work that has been done, but recognising that we must not take a step back, and I can assure you that we will not be taking any step back. Paul also asked me to confirm whether the committee will be returning to anonymous reporting and the contact officer and work around social media and the guidance, and we will be returning to that and we are looking to do a big piece of work on social media guidance as well, which I think everybody here would agree is crucial. So, there's that point.

I welcome Helen Mary to your position on the Standards of Conduct Committee, and thank you for your contribution as well. Paul and Helen Mary and Llyr mentioned the ministerial code. For us, with recommendation 12, we feel that the system of separate codes existing in Wales is comparable with other provisions in other UK Parliaments, but we did believe as a committee that Wales could take a bold step to improve provision and increase confidence in the system. As a committee, we concluded that bringing this under the responsibility of the standards commissioner—. Although this has been rejected, the committee is open to working with Government to improve transparency. We're obviously interested in the written statement that's to come before us, and I'm sure that the committee will want to pursue this further with the next First Minister.

Jane Hutt, a very powerful contribution from you mentioning the respect and dignity training that has been open to all Members and staff here. I hope that everybody has had the opportunity to take that up. Also, you pointed to the cross-party work that is going on, not just within the committee but in other forums as well, but there is much further to go.

Llyr and many colleagues also mentioned the power imbalance and that came through when we received the evidence as well. I think we have a real clear aim about empowering people, and we need to make sure that we do listen to everybody who is coming forward and make sure that we are as fair and transparent as possible.

Llyr also mentioned the right to appeal, which is our last recommendation, recommendation 21. On that, the committee will bring forward proposals for amending the appeal provision in a procedure for dealing with complaints by the end of this year. So, we will be doing some work on that.

I'd like to thank the leader of the house for her comments and the commitment to work on creating the right environment, although I'm sure you've heard Members' concerns on the rejection of recommendation 12.

Everybody must have an understanding of what constitutes inappropriate behaviour so they'll know if they experience it themselves or see it happening to somebody else. We want to encourage a wide and diverse range of people into politics, and to do this we need a culture that is inclusive and enabling. Evidence received by the committee suggests that there have been a number of incidents of sexual harassment at the Assembly and these have not been formally reported, and the committee is of the view that it's completely unacceptable that people have felt unable to report their experiences.

And, just finally, I'd like to say that the cultural change required is not achievable overnight; it's going to take a long-term commitment and dedication. This report is the very start of that important conversation with the committee, and we welcome feedback on our recommendations. We encourage people to make suggestions regarding further steps that might be taken in future, and we will continue to learn and listen to others on this. We all have a responsibility to ensure that we set the very highest standards, and we're determined to create the right environment.

The proposal is to note the committee report. Does any Member object? No. The motion is therefore agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Motion agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.