 We are now moving on to agenda item 2 of the 11th meeting of the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee of 2018. The committee has been considering a complaint about an MSP this morning, and I will now read a statement that sets out the committee's findings. On behalf of the committee, I would like to make the following statement in relation to a complaint against an MSP. In accordance with the rules, I will first cover whether the committee agrees with the Commissioner for Ethical Standards in Public Life in Scotland's findings, in fact, and conclusions on the complaint. The committee has considered a complaint from complainers whose identity has not been disclosed at their own request about Liz Smith MSP. The complaint centres on Liz Smith's disclosure of information, which was sent to her on a confidential basis by the complainers. The Commissioner for Ethical Standards in Public Life in Scotland investigated the complaint and found that Liz Smith had not breached the code of conduct for MSPs. The committee is unanimous in the decision that it has reached on the complaint. It agrees with the conclusion of the commissioner that there has not been a breach of the code of conduct. We do differ from the commissioner on one significant finding, however. The commissioner took the view that Liz Smith was not dealing with the correspondence provided by the complainers in her role as an MSP. We take a different view on this point since Liz Smith was approached in her capacity as a committee member. However, we accept that this does not have a bearing on the commissioner's final conclusion in relation to the code of conduct. While the circumstances surrounding the complaint do not constitute a breach of the code of conduct, the complainers did ask that the material that they sent to Liz Smith be treated in confidence. Notwithstanding that, Liz Smith forwarded the material to a third party with whom the complainers were in dispute. We believe that Liz Smith should reflect on her decision to forward material that she had received in confidence to a third party with whom she herself had a long-standing professional relationship. It is our view that members of the public have a right to expect that MSPs will normally respect their wishes with regard to confidentiality. At a later date, we intend to reflect more fully on the provisions in the code of conduct relating to confidentiality. Meanwhile, the committee urges all MSPs to carefully exercise judgment about how they handle information to which they have privileged access in the course of their roles as MSPs, particularly where a conflict of interest arises. Full details of the complaint and the commissioner's investigation of it will be concluded in the committee's report, which will be published later this afternoon. We will now move into private session to consider the report.