 Rwy'n cael ei ddweud y cwestiynau ymddangos, mae'r Ffonsion 2895 yn y ffonsion hwmzae Yusif, ond y transvaginal mesh remuvel Costry Ymddangos, ysgolodd Bill B, yn ymdegi, ac mae'n gweithio'r ffonsion i'r gwaith. Ymddangos ymddangos. Mae wirionedd pethau mewn gwaith hyn o bosion 2895 yn y fath gael Humsu Yousif, dda. Mae yna 120, mwy o wawr. 85 yn cynnwys. Mae'r Lewis Moeaghau yn bwysig wedi'u eu cyfrifio gan i. Mae'r Transfoginail Mishtromuvel Imbруscolans Gwlllwn Sgoldd yng Nghymru iawn yn adeilad. Mae'r ydw i gefnogiadau'n 2934 am y mewn gwaith George Adam, on behalf of the parliamentary bureau on committee membership be agreed? Are we all agreed? The motion is therefore agreed. That concludes decision time and will now move on to members' business. Point of order, Emma Harper. I wish to make a point of order in relation to 7.3.2 and 7.4.7 of the MSP code of conduct as it refers to members' conduct in committees. I seek the advice on a situation that has occurred in which Sandesh Galhany MSP has misrepresented in the press the intent of the committee's proposed inquiry into alternative pathways and made comment in the media which has promulgated misinformation, undermined the committee's work and disrespected the convener and other colleagues. Yesterday Dr Galhany gave comment to a newspaper which appears to uphold a false intention of an inquiry agreed by all colleagues across parties into the availability, capacity and public uptake of alternative health pathways in community settings. An agreed press release went out from the committee quoting the convener. A newspaper has decided to willfully misinterpret that intent and has reported it as the Government wanting to curtail access to general practitioners, as specifically our convener has been cited as wishing this result. As the Presiding Officer understands, as most members of this chamber understand, committee inquiries and scrutiny is not government work. It is not government policy design and the comments of any convener are not representative of any party or government position. I am certain that all committee conveners pride themselves in upholding this important standard by failing to challenge the false assertion of our committee's work and, in fact, upholding the false assertion on our inquiry being an SNP policy move. It is my belief that Dr Galhany has undermined the committee's work, falsely preempted any committee recommendations and deviated from an agreed committee purpose with intent with regard to this inquiry. As a result of Dr Galhany's actions, several of my colleagues have repeated the false assertions online, which I believe has been the cause of targeted abuse, and phone calls to constituency offices, including mine and I believe the conveners. I would be grateful for the Presiding Officer's guidance on how this deviation from the MSP's code of conduct can be addressed. I thank the member. However, the matter that the member raises is not a point of order, and in terms of the code of conduct, conduct at committees is in the first instance a matter for the convener of the relevant committee. If a member wishes to raise a concern under the code of conduct, then the code of conduct sets out how to do that. We will now move on to members' business, and I would ask members who are leaving the chamber to do so quietly.