 Gweinwch. Rwy'n gweithio i chi yn cael ei ddweud. Rwy'n gweithio i chi'n ddiddordeb yn y Cymru i ddweud yn 2022. Rwy'n gweithio i chi i'n gweithio i gael unrhywm yn ei chweithfawr sef hynny o bethau sy'n ddweud yn ddiddordeb. Y Cymru 1 ydy, mae'r drosion gyngor i gydagiau yn y prif. Rwy'n gweithio i gael eu gydagiau yn 3, 4 i 5 i gydagiau. Y Cymru 3 ydy o ddiddordeb i gydagiau'r gael yn y prif, in relation to an inquiry into future parliamentary procedures and practices. Item 4 is for the committee to consider an amendment to the draft code of conduct rule changes and item 5 is for members to consider some draft correspondence. Are the committee in agreement to take that privately? I'm grateful. Agender item 2. This is on committee substitutes. Our second item today is to consider the ond yr oedd yn gwybod i'r swyddog cymaint, ac mae'n ffordd o'r pryd ar y cyflau ar gyfer o'r pandemac, dill yn y ddysolwyddiad dechrau a'r parlymyn ar y cyflau ym Mhwy Ffain. Mae'n gwybod i'r pethau o gydag fflexibiladol, i'r cymaint ei oedd yn gweithio gydag cymaint, ac mae'n gweithio gydag cymaint ymddangos i'r pethau cymaint ei fflau. Mae'r gwrth fath yma yn gweithio'r gwybod i'r cymaint, ac mae'n gweithio'r cymaint o'r cymaint, yng nghydfawr—gwheitio i sefydliadau'r Gwgurth 잔 mynd i'w gwybod hi'r gyrdd gennym ffórhywdedd sgaf. Gwyddoedd y mae'r Gwyrdd sydd wedi'u gwaith i'r Gwyrdd sydd yma yn y rhaglen 12-2-A a'r ffawrhaethau a'r Gwyrdd i'u gweithio rhanol. Ac mae'r Gwyrdd yma, nid Gwyrdd rhanol i ffawrhaethau, o gychwyn iawn, ond bydd i'n cyfnogi i ddweud ar gyfer gwaith hwnnw, felly i'r gyrdd i'n mynd i'r adferst travel conditions beyond the member's control, a requirement to attend other parliamentary business or urgent constituency business. That's when a substitute can replace a member on the committee today. Can I open it up to the committee for any comments? Bob, do you want to— Thanks, convener. I think that the committee members were looking at each other to see who was going to make a comment first. I don't know if I get the short straw or not, convener. First of all, I would like the deputy president and the convener's group for writing to us to raise this issue. I think that it is important. Having previously sat on the convener's group, I know that you get a very well-considered and well-rounded view from committees across the Parliament. I think that we have to take seriously their desire for continuity in committee membership, including substitutes. That said, I can see that they are trying to be helpful. They absolutely acknowledge that during the pandemic, which is not quite over yet, sadly, that significant flexibility—in fact, complete flexibility, quite frankly—was absolutely required. That flexibility continues just now, but at some point that has to draw to a close or be formalised in a way that is more in keeping with the continuity that the conveners are seeking by having two-name substitutes. I think that we should give serious consideration to that suggestion. I would be very interested to know what the Parliamentary Bureau's thoughts are in relation to the convener's group's suggestions, which I am very open to, but why they feel that it is potentially beneficial to have that open-ended flexibility embedded in parliamentary practices. I am not so sure that that is required, but, of course, it is the job of members in this committee to look at the evidence and to a well-considered, well-rounded view in relation to that, and perhaps we need a wee bit more information before we can do that. Thank you, Bob. That's helpful. Sue, what would you like to comment? Yes, thank you. Given that I am here as a substitute, I think that it's quite canny timing, shall we say, but I think that just reiterating what Bob Mr Dorris has said there, I do think that having that continuity and the consistency of your substitutes is key. I would like to point out that this is, as I would say, the standards procedures in Public Affairs Committee and I think that the Appointments Committee ran. Having that consistency on this committee is particularly relevant, so I think that it may have to be scoped out in terms of if, even if there are some committees, may have more flexibility than others, I think that it is certainly may be considered, but I've certainly found it helpful to have the consistency, and I'm sure I hope that you might have found it helpful to have the consistent substitute being here as well. Thank you, Sue. Absolutely, your consistency and the tendency has been incredibly helpful. Collette. Thanks, convener. From a subs perspective and having been a sub on net zero, it was excellent being on that. It was really good, especially with COP26. However, from a planning perspective, from a subs point of view, I'm obviously on this committee and also on criminal justice. However, if I was to then sub on a Tuesday from a planning perspective as well, I think that that would be challenging. It's weighing that up in terms of if it was going to be a long term again, sub and long term, being on three committees as well as trying to balance constituency work as well. You'd have to weigh that up and have a really good conversation with your business manager as well. Equally, it would be good to get comment and feedback from the clerks on that, in terms of how often they are used and the amount of work that the clerks put in and having to scramble about trying to find a sub as well. It would be good to hear back from them as well. I think that that's very helpful, Collette, because in the letter to this committee it does state that no issues appear to have arisen as a consequence of the temporary, but we don't actually know what that is. I seem to find an inclination towards an agreement to request the bureau to provide their view. Perhaps if we request the clerks to look into how frequently substitutes have been used over this period of time, we'll be in a better position to make our suggestions soon. In terms of the substitutions, when the clerks are reporting back to us, is it possible to know the reasons why the substitution was taking place without it? Obviously, so even if there's some sort of renew, if it was health, or Covid-related, or constituency-related, or just so that we could get some sort of sense as to where the challenges may lie, I understand that, may not be possible for personal reasons. I think that that might be a challenge. There are only, in essence, the reasons that are set out in rule 12, 2A, and I know that the way that that is reached is usually with the discussion between the convener and the individuals, so I'm not sure that the reasons will be centrally held all, but it has to be one of those reasons for a substitute to be used, so I'd be confident that that is the case, which may be useful. Very briefly, I think that Sue Webber raises a really interesting point. In relation to illness and family requirements, you'd expect absolute confidentiality and privacy for the members, but some of the other reasons, and I'm not suggesting that we police it whatsoever, but some of the other reasons such as require parliamentary business could be open to interpretation, such as a ministerial visit in the constituency, for example, where some MSPs may deem that to be require parliamentary business, others may not, and it may be a great area for some others, so it would just be quite helpful to know for the required parliamentary business aspect of it whether that was particularly used, not that we should police it, but just to get a feeling whether the flexibility has been used for fairly obvious and evident public health reasons due to the pandemic or whether the flexibility has been used for other purposes, either entitled to be, but just to make sure that we get a sense of the spread of reasons for why it's been used with complete anonymity, of course, for the MSPs involved. I think that that's very helpful, so we'll ask for a slightly wider report from the clerks going beyond just the statistics, but what other evidence is available as to when it's being used. Are we happy with that? Good. Very grateful. Just before I close the public part of the committee, I would like to extend my thanks to Samantha Currie, who has served this committee as one of its clerks since 2012, and in that time she has organised 287 committee meetings. She has published 124 committee reports. She has ensured compliance for over 300 cross-party groups and published 24 revisions to standing orders. The clerks are an essential cog in the machine of the committees and Sam has gone above and beyond over her time, and her knowledge of CPGs is possibly among the most detailed that sits within this Parliament. So on behalf of myself and indeed the whole committee, and indeed all previous members of the committees that you've worked with, can I say an enormous thank you, Sam, and wish you all the very best in the future. I would now like to close this public part of the meeting and the committee will move into private.