Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I move amendment 1. I hope—to some degree, anyway—I'll be able to answer Mark Reckless's comments during this group. The amendment here was tabled on the back of discussion of a similar amendment at Stage 2. The original Bill allowed for the programme to improve accessibility of Welsh law to be revised periodically. The Government's amendment at Stage 2, for which I thank the Counsel General, introduced a duty to report annually on that programme. I think perhaps now it's up to this Parliament to consider exactly how we scrutinise those reports.

But this amendment does go one step further, and calls for the formal mid-term review of the effectiveness of the programme, which I think speaks to some of what Mark Reckless was speaking about. So, it's not an additional review—it can be combined with the annual review—but it is something with more meat in it, and something that I hope we will be able to influence in the way that I'll describe now.

At the moment, the content of the annual report is not prescribed. For me, it was important that this Parliament had some say in what was reported upon so that we weren’t presented with just extensive detail of activity that the Government had been involved in without any sense of whether our constituents were finding Welsh law more accessible as a result of that—hence the word 'effectiveness' being included in this amendment.

We have run into this issue before of Welsh Government undertaking reviews of its own policy progress without this Parliament having any influence over the questions that might be asked in that process. We met with great Government resistance during the passage of the minimum alcohol pricing Bill, for example, where an amendment was rejected even though it specified questions that we believed that our constituents would like to see answered.

So, this time, the amendment allows time for discussion about what a review should achieve and how effectiveness might be measured. Once again, I'm grateful to the Counsel General for his willingness to work with this Parliament and for his letter to the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee of 18 June, which has moved the discussion on somewhat.