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.