I will start with my amendment, amendment 11, which clarifies that, where the ombudsman makes revisions to the complaints handling statement of principles in a material way, those revisions will be subject to the same Assembly procedure that applied to the first statement of principles. That is, they will be subject to a negative resolution procedure, in that they will be laid before the Assembly and, unless they are annulled before the end of a 40-day period, they can be published.

Turning to Mark's amendment 47, this amendment seeks to apply an affirmative resolution procedure to the first draft statement of principles that the ombudsman must lay before the Assembly. The Bill currently provides for the statement of principles to be subject to a negative resolution procedure, as we've heard. But, of course, this mirrors the procedure that applies to the own-initiative criteria that will be laid before the Assembly. I believe that the same negative resolution procedure should apply to both the criteria and the statement of principles, given that they are both the ombudsman's documents. That's the key point here, I think. It's the ombudsman that consults on them, he drafts them, he publishes them, and he enforces them. That's why the Welsh Ministers' regulations are subject to the affirmative procedure. If the Welsh Ministers wish to amend the ombudsman's document, then it's only right that the affirmative procedure should apply. We have to remember that the ombudsman is an appointment independent of the Welsh Government and it wouldn't be right for changes to be made by Welsh Ministers not to be agreed in this Chamber. Therefore, I don't believe that amendment 47 is required.

Turning to Mark's amendment 48, this amendment puts a duty on the ombudsman to have regard to the resources of community councils when he is preparing 'the' model CHP, to use Mark's words. I am unable to support this amendment for a number of reasons. Firstly, there is no 'the' model CHP. There are likely to be a number of different model complaints handling procedures, each tailored to the needs of different listed authorities. This in itself means the ombudsman can tailor 'a' model complaints handling procedure to the needs of community councils if—and it is an 'if'—the ombudsman decides to require community councils to comply with a model CHP. There is no obligation on the ombudsman to have a model CHP for community councils. Indeed, so far this financial year, the ombudsman has received in excess of 2,000 complaints in total and of these only 22 have related to community councils, out of, I think the Member said, around 730 such councils in Wales. So, I'd argue that the CHPs aren't necessarily aimed at problems with community councils.

Secondly, as a public authority, the ombudsman of course must act reasonably in everything he does. This would include having regard to the resources of any listed authority he is considering specifying as being subject to a model complaints handling procedure. And thirdly, I question why the ombudsman should have specific regard to the resources available to community councils when this consideration applies to the other listed authorities, such as county councils, local health boards and Social Care Wales, et cetera. So, I acknowledge the issue the amendment is seeking to address, and I have included some commentary on this issue in the revised explanatory memorandum to the Bill, but my view is that that sufficiently addresses the concerns expressed and, therefore, I would urge Members not to support that particular amendment.