As there is no objection to that, I will call on the Minister for Finance and Local Government to move the motions. Rebecca Evans.

Motion NDM8235 Rebecca Evans

To propose that the Senedd, in accordance with Standing Order 29.6 agrees that provisions in the Procurement Bill, namely Part 1 'Key Definitions', Part 2 'Principles and Objectives', Part 3 'Award of Public Contracts and Procedures', Part 4 'Management of Public Contracts', Part 5 'Conflicts of Interest', Part 6 'Below-Threshold Contracts', 'Treaty state suppliers: non-discrimination', Part 8 'Information and Notices: General Provision', Part 9 'Remedies for Breach of Statutory Duty', Part 10 'Procurement Oversight', Part 11 'Appropriate Authorities and Cross-Border Procurement', Part 12 'Amendments and Repeals', Part 13 'General' and related provisions in Schedules 1 to 8, 10 and 11, in so far as they fall within the legislative competence of the Senedd, should be considered by the UK Parliament.

Motion NDM8236 Rebecca Evans

To propose that the Senedd, in accordance with Standing Order 29.6, agrees that provisions in the Procurement Bill, namely 'Treaty state suppliers', 'Trade Disputes' and related provisions in Schedule 9, in so far as they fall within the legislative competence of the Senedd, should be considered by the UK Parliament.

Motions moved.

Thank you. I move the motions. Over £8 billion is spent on public procurement each year in Wales. Improving the way we procure can drive innovation and resilience and deliver benefits across Wales by supporting our local economy and saving the taxpayer money. Through this Bill, there's an opportunity to simplify the complex procurement landscape that currently exists for buyers and suppliers across Wales, and to develop a more transparent procurement regime.

All the matters of concern I raised in my legislative consent memoranda have how been resolved, aside from the international agreement matters, which I will address later. The resolving of these concerns is significant, and it's the result of good working between Welsh Government officials and officials in the UK Government. We have tabled two motions to ensure that the Senedd can explore the issues relating to the Bill and reach its decision on consent. 

Members will see in memorandum No. 5 that I am recommending consent to the core procurement elements of the Bill, but that consent is withheld for certain provisions of the Bill that concern international trade. As Members will see, there are good constitutional reasons for the recommendation to withhold consent.

I will firstly address the arguments for recommending consent for core procurement provisions of the Bill, which represent the majority of the Bill. Brexit, the pandemic and, now, the current economic crisis have left our Welsh businesses crying out for stability and certainty. There is an opportunity through the Bill to reform the existing rules and processes underpinning public procurement in Wales, and to ensure that they are streamlined and simplified for all users, whilst at the same time avoiding confusion, inconsistency and uncertainty for organisations that conduct business across the border. 

My officials have worked closely and constructively with officials in the UK Government to ensure Welsh objectives have been included in the Procurement Bill and ensure maximum alignment between the Procurement Bill and our Social Partnership and Public Procurement (Wales) Bill. Together, these Bills will establish an effective and efficient procurement regime in Wales, which maximises the opportunities to achieve greater value for money and deliver social, environmental, economic and cultural outcomes for Wales. 

One of the most significant benefits of the Procurement Bill is that it will embed greater transparency throughout the commercial life cycle. I'm sure that we can all agree that any measures to improve transparency are welcome, and will provide reassurance to the Welsh taxpayer that opportunities to achieve greater value for money are being maximised through our procurement activity. This increased transparency will provide the ability to collect more transparent, reliable and meaningful procurement data, which will support analysis of how Welsh public money is being spent. It will give us access to detailed information to monitor for signs of waste and inefficiency and to identify potential corruption.

It will also give contracting authorities the data that they need to collaborate better, drive value for money, and identify and monitor social value and community benefits in their procurements. This data will also help with making more robust evidence-based decisions for procurement policy in the future. Finally, and most importantly, we have secured stand-alone equivalent regulation-making powers in the Bill, which means that the Senedd will be able to fully scrutinise the detail of the secondary legislation as it's developed. It will allow for any future legislative changes to be made here in Wales.

I was grateful for the diligence and the support of the various Senedd committees in their scrutiny of the memoranda and the Bill. The committees highlighted important areas of concern, such as in relation to the commencement provisions contained in the Bill. In order to commence the provisions of the Bill regulating procurement by Welsh contracting authorities, the UK Government must obtain the consent of the Welsh Ministers, meaning that the Welsh Ministers have a say when the provisions of the Bill will commence in relation to Wales. If Welsh Ministers withhold consent, then the financial implications will be determined at that time.

A notable benefit of joining the Procurement Bill and commencing the provisions of the Bill at the same time as England and Northern Ireland is the certainty, consistency and continuity that this will realise for the Welsh contracting authorities, as well as ensuring our Welsh suppliers who conduct business across the borders can continue to do so without interruption or additional costs. Whilst I regret that the committees had some concerns with certain aspects of the legislative consent memoranda for the Bill, I was pleased that the committee reports on the memoranda largely concur with the benefits that this Bill will bring to Wales.

I'll now turn to addressing the arguments for recommending withholding consent to certain of the provisions of the Bill that relate to international agreements. The two outstanding matters of concern present a threat to fundamental constitutional principles and our devolution settlement. They relate to two clauses in the part of the Bill that deals with the implementation of procurement obligations in international trade agreements and concern the power to add international agreements to the list in Schedule 9 to the Bill, and the power to deal with procurement-related trade disputes relating to international agreements. The changes these powers would make are not controversial. However, both powers have been included as concurrent, meaning there is no requirement for UK Ministers to obtain the consent of the Welsh Ministers when they're exercising this power in relation to devolved areas.

This mirrors the position taken with the Trade (Australia and New Zealand) Bill, which the Senedd recently debated and refused consent to. The UK Government's continued approach to only including concurrent powers in legislation relating to trade deals is unacceptable, and, despite the exhaustive discussions at official and ministerial level, the UK Government is unwilling to make any amendments to these powers. Welsh Ministers have repeatedly committed to the timely implementation of international agreements.

It's important for Members to note that the clauses in the Bill containing these powers are about ensuring suppliers from countries the UK has trade agreements with can access the UK procurement market. They do not relate to the main purpose of the Bill, which is the reform of the procurement rules in the UK, rules that will apply to suppliers both within the UK and outside it. This is what I mean when I refer to the core procurement elements of the Bill. So, despite our outstanding concerns in relation to certain of the provisions on the implementation of international agreements, I hope Members will share my strong belief that the changes being introduced as a result of the Procurement Bill will make public procurement more accessible to businesses, including our SMEs, will drive greater value for money for Welsh taxpayers, and will maximise opportunities to deliver social, environmental, economic and cultural outcomes for Wales. Diolch.

The Chair of the Public Accounts and Public Administration Committe, Mark Isherwood.

Thank you, Llywydd, for the opportunity to contribute to this debate as Chair of the Public Accounts and Public Administration Committee, or PAPAC. The Business Committee agreed that the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, or LJC committee, and PAPAC should report on legislative consent memorandum, or LCM, No. 1 by 6 October 2022. On 11 July 2022, the Minister laid before the Senedd a supplementary LCM, No. 2, which was tabled on 27 June 2022. We reported on LCMs 1 and 2 on 22 November 2022. We worked closely with the LJC committee on scrutinising these LCMs, and wrote jointly to the Minister for Finance and Local Government. We invited members of the LJC committee to attend our evidence session, and wrote jointly to the Minister, as indicated, about our joint evidence session with the Minister in September 2022. We also undertook a consultation exercise and received valuable information from the Welsh Local Government Association, Caerphilly County Borough Council and Community Housing Cymru, and I thank them for submitting evidence. Since then, supplementary LCMs relating to this Bill were laid on 19 December 2022 and 7 February 2023. Each time a supplementary LCM was laid, our deadline for reporting was extended. Finally, the Business Committee agreed that the LJC committee and PAPAC should report on supplementary memorandums 3, 4 and 5 by 23 March 2023. Unfortunately, PAPAC had only one meeting scheduled within that time frame. We were disappointed by the short time frame provided to consider and report on the supplementary LCMs as this provided no opportunity for us to either raise concerns with the Minister prior to our reporting or to consider them in further detail.

We'd highlighted serious concerns in our report on LCMs 1 and 2 about the limited opportunities for detailed scrutiny and repeated these in our report on supplementary LCMs 4, 5 and 6. We concur with the LJC committee and disagree with the Minister's suggestion that the process is equal to that of the detailed legislative scrutiny of a Senedd Bill. We made six recommendations in our reports on supplementary LCMs 1 and 2 and LCMs 3, 4, and 5, and our report on supplementary LCMs 4, 5, and 6 raised several further issues.

We were concerned about whether an amendment to clause 123—commencement—achieves the Minister's policy intent. It is unclear whether an assessment of the potential financial implications of not giving consent to a Minister of the Crown to commence provisions in the Bill has been undertaken and what the financial implications would be for the Welsh Government or the wider public sector in Wales of not providing consent. The financial implications of a possible subsequent removal of provisions in relation to Welsh contracting authorities from the Bill are similarly unclear, as are any steps the Welsh Government may be required to take to introduce its own legislation to replace them.

We note that if Wales did not give consent to the UK Government to commence the Bill’s provisions in relation to Welsh contracting authorities, and Wales was carved out from the Act, the financial implications would be greater than currently provided for in the financial assessment, both in relation to the lost opportunity cost involved in developing the present Bill, and the additional cost of any alternate Welsh legislation. We recommended that the Minister gave further consideration to the potential financial implications of not giving consent to commence provisions in the Bill, given the insufficient detail in the financial section of memorandum No. 5. We were also concerned that the level of detail in memorandum No. 5 was lacking as to the effect of amendments made to the Bill. Our report on LCMs 1 and 2 noted that memorandum No. 2 included references that amendments are 'minor and provide greater clarity'. We believe this is a simplistic summary of the amendments, as some summaries within memorandum No. 5 do not set out how and why the new memorandum differs from the previous memorandum.

We support the conclusion of the LJC committee that emphasises to the Minister and all Welsh Ministers the importance of providing sufficient detail to Members of the Senedd within legislative consent memoranda, especially where timescales for Senedd scrutiny are compressed. Whilst the committee did not oppose these legislative consent memoranda, Mabon ap Gwynfor MS wished to record his view that he is opposed to the legislative consent memoranda in relation to the UK Procurement Bill. The committee will continue to pursue these issues with the Welsh Government.

The Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, Huw Irranca-Davies.

Thank you, Llywydd, and good afternoon, Minister.

We produced two reports covering the five consent memoranda that have been laid by the Minister on this Bill, and we laid the first report in October 2022, and our second report on 14 March this year. 

Minister, I think I'm right in saying that we still have not received a formal written response to the three recommendations we made in our second report to better inform this debate today. But I do thank you for the detailed opening remarks you've already made, which turned some of our remaining concerns and, indeed, I have to say, some of your outstanding concerns, as you just phrased them—. And I hope that you may be able to respond further to the points that I'll now put to you. 

As a committee, we've been closely following the Welsh Government's approach to legislating to reform procurement law as it applies in Wales, including this Bill, the Social Partnership and Public Procurement (Wales) Bill and, more recently, the Health Service Procurement (Wales) Bill. This Bill legislates extensively in devolved areas. The first memorandum covered 103 clauses, which I believe is the most number of clauses in a single UK Government-proposed Bill that makes provision in devolved areas by a good margin. 

Now, the Welsh Government accepted the UK Government's offer to include provisions for Wales in this Bill. However, from our perspective as the Legislation Justice and Constitution Committee, we believe that this decision has led to an approach to legislating on procurement law in Wales that is less than ideal. It's sub-optimal in terms of Senedd scrutiny and the ability to amend and shape legislation here in this Siambr. As we stated in our first report, there was a clear alternative available within the Welsh Government’s legislative programme, which has passed now, in the form of the Social Partnership and Public Procurement (Wales) Bill, whereby we could legislate in parallel with the UK Government on the processes underpinning procurement, whilst also including provisions on the outcomes of procurement. Now, taking such an approach would have ensured a far more accessible statute book in both English and Welsh, and more opportunities for detailed Senedd scrutiny of provisions on procurement processes. It would also have allowed the Welsh Government, I have to say, to fully reflect its values in legislation on procurement that applies in Wales.

Now, it would have also avoided this unsatisfactory position, where we find ourselves today, where Members of the Senedd are being asked to give consent to some of this Bill’s provisions whilst withholding consent to others. Now, Members will know that this has happened before. This does not provide the UK Parliament with an unequivocal decision of whether or not the Senedd has given its consent to legislate in devolved areas.

Now, we know that the Minister has expressed concerns with the drafting of powers that allow for the addition of international agreements to the list in Schedule 9 to the Bill, and for the making of regulations to deal with the procurement consequences of a trade dispute under an international agreement. The Minister indeed first raised concerns with the UK Government in respect of the power to allow for the addition of international agreements back in May 2022. However, it's our understanding that that provision continues to be included in the Bill. So, we've asked you on several occasions, Minister, at which point you would use the inter-governmental relations dispute avoidance and resolution process, which has now been set out, to resolve any of these concerns. You've told us it's not anticipated that would be necessary. But, Minister, in the circumstances, I would be really grateful, on behalf of the committee, if you could update us on whether these concerns have now been raised through that process, and, if not, your reasoning for not doing so.

Minister, for a while, you had also expressed concerns about the absence of commencement powers for the Welsh Ministers within the Bill. You've touched on this in your opening remarks. In memorandum No. 5, you said that you were now content with the position in respect of commencement powers, as UK Ministers' commencement of devolved Welsh aspects of the Bill will now be subject to the consent of Welsh Ministers. But we have to ask the question of why this position is satisfactory, as the Welsh Ministers continue to have no powers whatsoever to commence the Bill's provisions in Wales. So, again, Minister, I would be very grateful if you could just explain to us why you are now, therefore, content with this position.

Finally, Minister, you also say within memorandum No. 5 that if the Welsh Ministers refuse to provide consent to UK Ministers' commencement of the Bill's provisions in Wales, the UK Government would be able to amend the Act resulting from this Bill so that it no longer applies in respect of devolved Welsh procurement. Now, it seems to us to be highly unsatisfactory that a disagreement on when to commence powers might result in the UK Government disapplying the provisions in the Act as they apply to Wales. So, Minister, as we have highlighted and recommended in our report, it would be really helpful if you could set out in your response the Welsh Government’s assessment of the implications of a refusal to consent to the UK Government's commencement of the Bill's provisions in relation to Welsh contracting authorities, and also the Welsh Government's assessment of the implications of a subsequent decision by the UK Government to remove those provisions from the Bill. And I look forward to your response, Minister. Diolch yn fawr.

The Conservative group is pleased to be supporting both motions that have been laid relating to the LCM today, which will be introducing revised legislation for the processes and procedures of Government public procurement. This Bill will take advantage of the post-Brexit opportunities, allowing the United Kingdom to shape its own procurement rules while complying with our international obligations, including the World Trade Organization's agreement on Government procurement, giving businesses across the UK guaranteed access to £1.3 trillion-worth of public procurement overseas.

The Procurement Bill will also slash more than 350 complicated and bureaucratic rules that govern public spending in the EU. Removing these and creating more sensible rules will not only reduce costs for businesses and the public sector but also drive innovation by allowing buyers to tailor procurement to their exact needs. Not only will this Bill speed up and simplify public procurement processes, it will place value for money at the heart of procurement and create greater opportunities for small businesses and social enterprises to innovate public service delivery. 

The Procurement Bill will also make it easier for small businesses to win more of the £300 billion-worth of goods and services that are bought by Governments, across Wales—indeed, access to the £8 billion in Wales, as the Minister mentioned. It will also introduce new rules to help the UK Government procure, in emergency situations, such as during health pandemics, ensuring that contracting authorities can react quickly to tackle any emergencies, similar to those we experienced with COVID-19. And obviously, that benefits Wales. So, Llywydd, I ask all Members to join with us and the Welsh Government in supporting this LCM and its two motions. 

Can I begin by stating clearly Plaid Cymru's strong opposition to the use of LCMs as a matter of principle? Decisions affecting devolved matters in Wales should always be made in this place. The increasing and worrying use of LCMs by the UK Government symbolises their disrespect for devolved administrations and signals their intent to plough on with the increasing centralisation of UK politics. 

As someone who was closely involved with social partnership and procurement legislation over the past few months, it's disappointing that the Welsh Government did not use the opportunity provided by that Bill to make stronger provisions on public procurement procedures. On behalf of my party, I tried on many occasions to establish principles and benchmarks in public procurement through Senedd legislation, rather than relying on a UK Government-driven Bill. Unfortunately, the Labour Government was not for turning. As a consequence of this decision, a vast and far-reaching range of provisions affecting Wales will be implemented with little actual oversight by the Senedd. It cannot be repeated enough times that scrutiny within the legislative consent process is a vastly inferior substitute to that which is afforded by a Senedd Bill. Not only is this approach a poor reflection on the Welsh Government's management of its legislative agenda, it also undermines the Senedd's credibility as a law-making body. The Welsh Government should give greater consideration in future of the democratic deficit caused by the LCM process. 

Turning to the specifics of the LCMs in question, a particular area of concern is the fact that the Minister has seemingly rowed back on previous Welsh Government objectives for amending the Bill. As noted by the recent Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee report, an amendment to clause 123 of the Bill, which makes UK Ministers' commencement of devolved Welsh aspects of the Bill subject to the consent of Welsh Ministers, does not actually achieve the aim set out by the first memorandum to equip Welsh Ministers with the relevant commencement powers themselves. This means that Welsh Ministers continue to have no power to commence the Bill's provision in relation to Welsh contracting authorities. Could the Minister therefore explain why she is satisfied with the aforementioned amendment, despite achieving significantly less than the Welsh Government's initial ambition in this area?

The amendment in question also allows the UK Government to effectively carve out Wales-related provision from the Bill in the event that Welsh Ministers refuse consent, on the application of the aforementioned commencement powers. Could the Minister therefore confirm whether, under this scenario, the Welsh Government would need to introduce primary legislation to address the resulting gaps?

Finally, it's worth reflecting on the implications of the Bill in terms of reducing the accessibility of law, especially at a time when the Welsh Government is undertaking work to improve the accessibility of law in the areas of historic environment and planning. On this basis, will the Minister reverse her stance on undertaking an internal review of its approach to legislating on procurement law, in order to inform future practice, as recommended by the LJC's report on the first LCM? Diolch yn fawr.

In the absence of any controls on food imported into Britain, we will continue to attract criminals intent on presenting food that is not what it says on the label, whether it's imported meat, reared to lower animal welfare standards or avoidable carbon emissions, or whether it's honey adulterated with water or cheap sugar syrups. Exiting the EU has left us naked to fraud by criminals, and the question is whether or not this procurement Bill fills those gaps. I appreciate that there's a huge amount of value in enabling businesses to trade across Britain without having to have another layer of regulations. Transparency is essential, but unless there is enforcement of the regulations, then they're not worth the paper they're written on. So, for example, our success in obtaining PGI status for a range of Welsh produce, whether it's salt marsh lamb, Welsh leeks, cockles or honey, will come to nought unless we have simple, transparent enforcement of regulations.

I note the first bullet point in the legislative committee's report on the subject of international agreements being added to the list in schedule 9, which means that there would be no requirement to obtain consent of Welsh Ministers, either if the UK Government decided to change regulations overnight, which could have an immense impact on Welsh producers, or it could decide to do nothing in the face of significant change in international trading arrangements. We've all seen the impact of the war in Ukraine, which has caused havoc to food supplies from Ukraine to developing countries and starvation beckons for some countries. But the concern I have is that, for example, the international agreement that was signed with Australia and New Zealand by Liz Truss hasn't yet had much impact on Welsh farmers, because they are selling everything that they produce to China at the moment. But if international trade with China was interrupted on a massive scale, the result could be absolutely catastrophic for Welsh producers. And if Welsh Ministers don't have the powers to act and ensure that UK Ministers have to consult Welsh Ministers, then I don't see how Welsh Ministers are going to be able to take appropriate action, which has been provided within the agriculture Bill, to take action when there are food security risks to our country. I find the whole landscape here very fragmented.

We have the social partnership and public procurement Bill. We have this procurement Bill, and then we have the agriculture Bill. All of these things should really be meshed together, and I am not confident that they are. So, I understand and I have heard from what Rebecca Evans was saying about the importance of having clarity for producers to be able to sell to other countries, but I think we should be seriously concerned about the potential for other countries to dump stuff on us, or to adulterate things and try and sell us things that are actually not what they say on the tin. So, I look forward to hearing the remarks of the Counsel General on this important matter, because this seems to be quite serious.

The Minister for Finance and Local Government to reply. Rebecca Evans.

Thank you very much to colleagues for their contributions, and, again, thank you to committees for the work that they've done. We're absolutely committed to facilitating Senedd scrutiny, and, as I think has been recognsed, the scrutiny periods for the memorandum were originally shorter because of the anticipated timing of the conclusion of the Bill's committee stage in Westminster, but the reporting deadlines for memoranda 3, 4 and 5 were extended by several weeks when it did become clear that the timetable for the Bill had changed. So, at any opportunity, we have built in more time. And the various recommended extensions for each of these memoranda, and the rescheduling of the consent motion debate today, I think, have been a result of our attempts to ensure that the Senedd has as much scrutiny time as possible. 

But, I think, one of the most important things to recognise is that Welsh Ministers have secured standalone, equivalent regulation-making powers for the vast majority of the powers in the procurement Bill, so the Senedd will have the opportunity to fully scrutinise the detail of those regulations in due course. 

Turning to the issues around commencement, we are absolutely committed to commencing at the same time as the UK Government, to avoid the detrimental impact on cross-border suppliers and buyers of doing otherwise, and the UK Government is absolutely in the same space as us; we are intending fully to commence at the same time. However, if we were to withhold consent to the date of commencement of certain provisions in the Bill, there could be a potential delay in the commencement for Welsh contracting authorities. It wouldn't be the case that they were removed from the Bill entirely, and it's not possible to carry out a financial assessment at this time, as the financial impact would be dependent on the length of the delay. But, as I say, we're absolutely committed to not finding ourselves in that situation, and, to reassure colleagues, I have spoken to officials earlier on today, and they reassure me that we're very much in step in terms of the preparation of the regulations that we will need to put in place. So, work is very much in step either side of the border. 

So, on that question, really, about why there is more than one Bill, well, officials have worked really closely across this organisation to make sure that there is maximum alignment between the procurement Bill, our own Social Partnership and Public Procurement (Wales) Bill, and also, the work, of course, that my colleague, Eluned Morgan, is taking forward in respect of the Health Service Procurement (Wales) Bill. And I think that they do dovetail very well, and I'm confident that the approach taken does give certainty and clarity for buyers and suppliers across Wales, because I think it is again important to recognise that this is the preferred approach of suppliers and contracting authorities here in Wales. We consulted with them before deciding to legislate—or asking the UK Government to legislate on our behalf—and it was very much their preferred approach, because they recognise the benefits of doing this in this way. 

We have managed to protect Welsh interests, though, in terms of the legislation. The amendments that we've secured—I know they were areas that the committees were interested in—related to the definition of a Welsh authority. So, there was an amendment accepted and tabled in the House of Commons on 25 January, which provided clarity on that. We asked for an amendment in relation to the commencement powers contained within the Bill—I've described that, and that was tabled on 2 February—and an amendment to powers to make consequential provisions to reflect the Welsh Ministers in the areas of the Bill, and again, I've referred to those, and that was tabled in the House of Commons on 25 January. And, also, then, there was interest from committees in an amendment that has the effect of ensuring that a Welsh contracting authority's duty to have regard to the Wales public procurement policy statement will not be enforceable in civil proceedings; they should be enforceable through judicial review only. Again, that was an amendment that was accepted and tabled in the House of Lords. 

So, I think I would agree with what my Conservative colleague has said, actually—that this Bill does provide significant benefits for businesses in Wales, in the sense that there will be a duty on contracting authorities to have regard to the barriers that SMEs may be facing, and look at how they can be removed. There'll be increased transparency measures, meaning that suppliers will see all of the opportunities, including the pipelines of future opportunities and advertised below threshold procurements, all in one place, and the new competitive flexible procedure will provide more opportunity for innovative procurement. And I've already talked about the improvements in terms of transparency. 

And, then, just to finish, because I do realise I'm over time, the Bill does have opportunities for some suppliers through reserved contracts, which is obviously important to us in Wales. So, it's retained the current provisions allowing contracting authorities to reserve procurements for supported employment providers, for example. So, there is a range in which not-for-profit and mutuals will be able to benefit as well. So, I think that the legislation is an important new opportunity for contracting authorities and suppliers here in Wales. The kind of consistency across the border is important, but let's not forget how important the public procurement Bill, which my colleague Hannah Blythyn is leading on, is in terms of driving forward our own Welsh values through procurement as well.

The proposal is to agree the motion under item 11. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is objection. Therefore, voting on item 11 will be deferred.

Voting deferred until voting time.

The next proposal is to agree the motion under item 12. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is objection. We will therefore defer voting on that item.

Voting deferred until voting time.