 Welcome to the second meeting in 2016 of the SPPA Committee. Good morning to all the members of the committee. Our first item on the agenda today is a decision on taking business in private, which is consideration of the mandatory committees in standing order, all changes, and do members agree to move into private session to discuss these. That would be done at the next meeting of the private session. Our second item today is for business to consider the rules and membership of cross-party groups. Section 6.4.1 of the code of conduct requires that each CPG has at least one MSP member from each of the parties or groups represented on the parliamentary bureau. In private session, a number of CPGs seeking to re-register experienced difficulties in securing full cross-party representation, and it's anticipated that this situation may reoccur in this session. Members have been invited to consider whether they agree to general modification of section 6.4.1 of the code of conduct to allow CPGs that have at least one MSP member from the majority of parties represented on the parliamentary bureau to register. I would invite any comments from the members regarding this. It's a very sensible proposal, and it continues to require members to demonstrate a breadth of political interest in establishing new groups. I think that it will be welcome going forward with Mr Scott. Yes, I would support that proposal. It's very sensible one, too. I adore what Patrick said. I invite members to approve the general modification to section 6.4.1 of the code. Thank you very much. Agenda item 3 is mandatory committees remits. It's the final item today, and members to consider the remit changes for mandatory committees. This is a result of the decision by the parliamentary bureau and the passage of the Legislation of the Scotland Act. I invite members to make general comments about the paper that has been proposed by the clerks. I am broadly content with that. I think that there has been a reasonable degree of discussion between the political parties before reaching some consensus about the remits that should be allocated to the newly established committees. I wouldn't have a problem agreeing this as it stands. I think that my only comment would be to acknowledge the representations that we have received from external groups regarding equal opportunities and equalities and maybe suggest to the committee concerned that they might want to look at the recommendations of the frequency of their meeting so that they feel that they can deal with their remit adequately and deal with the concerns that have been raised in that representation. I know that the same representation has been made to the members of what is currently the Equal Opportunities Committee. Expanding the remit of that committee is not an onerous task for either the convener or the people who are on the committee. I am sure that the introduction of human rights to the committee is such an important issue that I am sure that it will take a nice sense of what has been said, but I will be able to mitigate the concerns that have been raised. I understand where the concerns are coming from. It is worth noting that a number of significant equalities organisations have expressed that, but many others who have not expressed those concerns. It might be perfectly reasonable to ask if the clerks or the convener would be able to meet the organisations who have been in touch to discuss their concerns, but comparing the remit of the Equalities and Human Rights Committee as it would be if that is what is agreed, I think that it compares favourably with the remits of other committees, for example justice, which is where human rights issues have traditionally sat. That has been limiting in the sense of framing human rights arguments always in terms of justice and specifically the criminal justice system. There is a long-standing view among the human rights advocates and organisations in Scotland that it needs a broader understanding in terms of its position in the parliamentary committee system. I think that that is the appropriate way to do it. Would you like the convener of the Equalities and Human Rights Committee as it stands to meet the organisations? I think that they choose to. I think that we should certainly offer the option to meet the committee if that is possible. I am happy to do that, if the clerks could organise that for us next term. I completely concur. I think that that is exactly what is required, so that we ensure that everyone is being accepted and that their views are being expressed. If there are any concerns, they are being tabled and they are being said to the right people so that everyone understands where we are going. We all move forward in that new structure that they are looking to achieve. It would be beneficial for us all. Thank you very much, Mr Stewart. I will just reserve my judgment until I see the working paper that is brought forward. I think that Patrick Harvie raised elsewhere and suggested that there might be more to do for the finance committee than might be reasonable. I am not sure if that is the case. I am never having served in the finance committee. I do not know what the burden of work on that committee is, but I would like to withhold my view until such time as we see the working document that is brought forward. I would like to echo what Mr Scott was saying, that I would like to see the document in the autumn and then express it to you. The suggestion would be that we do not approve the draft report to the Parliament setting and standing order rules and changes after summer recess and not make a formal approval of the suggestions today. I will ask the clerks to take back their concerns about capacity for the new powers and that the new powers should be normal in terms of the ordinary working and scrutiny of the committee. I will also ask them to consider whether, although we are in a very fluid situation and things are very difficult at the moment to make any firm plans about how they should go forward, but to look at where existing remits of the ministers could be reflected in the committees that would normally scrutinise that kind of work. We will look forward to that paper in the summer, as everyone agreed on that. That is the last agenda item. I wish everyone, hopefully, a recess of some kind over this summer. We will see you all again whenever, as we do not know if Parliament might be called, but a very happy summer to everyone. We will see you soon. Thank you.