Thank you, Deputy Llywydd, and I just remind the Chamber that one of the functions of CLAC is to scrutinise the constitutional efficacy process and procedure, which sometimes means our reports are not necessarily the most exciting of reports, but are relevant in terms of the approach to scrutiny of what is important legislation.

We considered these regulations at our meeting on 25 March and reported on 28 March. We considered the Government’s response yesterday. We noted a technical point about the potential lack of transparency about the use of the word 'month' in the regulations. While the meaning of 'month' is the meaning given in the Interpretation Act 1978—that is, a calendar month—that may not be of great use to many readers of these regulations. And the draft report notes correspondence between this committee and the Counsel General last year, where it was agreed that the use of footnotes to expand on the meaning of certain important terms would be useful, but there's no such use of a footnote in these regulations, which could have helped clarity and transparency.

In its response, the Government sets out its view as to why an amendment to address the technical point is not considered necessary. The first of three merits point notes that the regulations allow Qualifications Wales to set monetary penalties, subject to a cap and subject to reasonableness and proportionality. Our report draws attention to our report on the Qualifications Wales Bill and that the explanatory memorandum that accompanied the Bill states that the Assembly will have

'the opportunity to debate and scrutinise the amount of the penalty'.

However, the regulations give Qualifications Wales a wide discretion as to the setting of monetary penalties, leaving little for the Assembly to scrutinise as to the actual level of those penalties. The report also notes the position in England, where the extent of Ofqual's discretion is set out on the face of primary legislation, and not in subordinate legislation.

In its response, the Government indicates that the regulations reflect a policy choice, and that the Assembly is being provided with an adequate opportunity to scrutinise the way in which the penalties will be set.

The second and third merits point note concerns that were raised during consultation about the potential for both Ofqual and Qualifications Wales to impose financial penalties on the same organisation, and the potential for confusion as to what factors Qualifications Wales is likely, or will, take into account when making monetary penalty decisions.

The Government response notes the second point, and helpfully indicates that the explanatory memorandum will be revised to address our third merits point.