 I welcome members of the committee and all those present to the 13th meeting of the Devolution for the Powers Committee. We have an apology from Duncan McNeill. I go straight to agenda item 2, evidence session, at stage 1 of the Scottish elections reductions on voting age bill. I welcome our final panel witnesses on the stage 1 consideration of the Scottish elections reductions on voting age bill to the evidence session. The witnesses are John Swinney, the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Finance, Constitution and Economy. Helen Clifford is team leader in the franchise team Gillian Cross, policy adviser in the franchise team Stuart Forbister from the divisional solicitor of the legal directorate and Willie Ferney from the Parliamentary Council of the Scottish Government. We have a bit of an hour to take evidence, folks. I appreciate that members made their questions as synced as possible and the same would go to witnesses. I think that the Deputy First Minister would like to make an opening statement and please proceed. Thank you, convener. I welcome the opportunity to give evidence to the committee on the Scottish elections reductions reduction of voting age bill. Can I start by extending my thanks to all those who have given their time and expertise during what has been a compressed timetable for the development of the bill? The committee has heard evidence from many of those involved last week, and I was pleased to note that they welcomed what we have made of the advice that they have provided to us in this process. Parliament's decision to extend the vote to 16 and 17-year-olds for the referendum and their subsequent participation is widely seen as having been a major step forward in democratic participation in the democratic process. The committee's report into the operation of the referendum concluded the decision on lowering the voting age had been a success. That assessment has been repeated on a number of occasions in Parliament since last September, not least during the consideration of the section 3063 order, which transferred the necessary powers to allow us to lower the voting age to 16 in time for the 2016 Scottish parliamentary elections. The order was approved unanimously by this Parliament and came into force on 20 March. Less than two weeks later, I introduced the bill. The powers that were transferred to the Scottish Parliament by the section 30 order are tightly drawn and will be followed in due course by full powers over Scottish Parliament and local authority elections, as recommended by the Smith commission. In the meantime, the powers that we have allow the reduction in the minimum age to 16 for Scottish Parliament and local authority elections, and I will allow the Scottish Parliament to make adjustments to registration arrangements to give effect to the reduction in the voting age. Through the bill and the associated practical arrangements, we are seeking to balance transparency of the electoral process with the need to treat young people's data with sensitivity and ensure that the youngest voters can participate fully in the democratic process. The arrangements are intended to put young voters on an equal footing with all other voters, not least because this is now intended to be a permanent reduction in the voting age for Scottish Parliament and local government elections, while at the same time ensuring that their data is treated sensitively and responsibly. The bill's general approach is therefore to replicate current registration practice for the youngest voters as far as possible. It does this by applying existing electoral legislation, amending that where necessary to take account of the reduction in the voting age to 16. The proposed arrangements also affect the introduction of individual electoral registration and draw on the success and the experience of the referendum. The bill provides for restrictions on access to and disclosure of information on 14 and 15-year-olds and provides for enhanced arrangements for particular groups of vulnerable young people such as those who require to register anonymously and those who need to register by way of a declaration of local connection rather than use their current address. The arrangements that we have put in place for the referendum are well received and supported by members of Parliament, child protection groups and electoral administrators before and after the referendum. As the committee would expect, the provisions in the bill are designed to create broadly the same effect as the arrangements that proved such a success last September. We are proposing to do something that is different than the bill, where it makes sense for the voter and provides for the more effective and efficient process for electoral administrators. I look forward to discussing the bill's issue proposals with the committee today. I will begin by asking a general question about how your consultation with organisations and those representing young people have influenced the outcome of the bill. I think that it would be useful to hear from the Government's perspective—obviously, we have taken a fair bit of evidence from individuals around that—so just knowing what consultation processes went on and how they managed to influence the bill and shape it would be useful. We essentially undertook consultation in two spheres, convener. One was with the electoral professionals who run the electoral registration process and all the stakeholder community associated with that. The electoral commission, the information commissioner and all of those organisations, the software providers and all of them, to make sure that the practical contents of the bill could be delivered if they were enacted. Secondly, we undertook discussions with a variety of other stakeholder interests around the interests of youth involvement in youth participation, child protection and some of the wider organisations looking at the welfare of children in particular circumstances, particularly organisations involved in supporting looked-after children, where there are particular and sensitive issues that have to be addressed. Essentially, the outcome of that work has been absorbed into the formulation of the bill as far as we possibly could do. I certainly think that from the discussions that I have seen the committee undertaking with a variety of those interests, that gives me the impression that, broadly speaking, the approach that the Government has taken in understanding and listening to the issues that have been raised by those organisations has been well received in the way that we have taken forward the bill. You mentioned specifically looked-after children issues in part of your response to every First Minister. I know that Lewis MacDonald and a couple of others had a particular interest in that, so I will come to Lewis first. Thank you very much. Clearly, the provision in the bill that makes particular provision for looked-after children is welcome, and the encouragement or the requirement for local authorities to support looked-after children in registering and so on. I wonder if the Deputy First Minister would like to expand a little on how that will work in practice and how local authorities will be assisted to deliver on their obligations in that regard. Essentially, there will be a number of approaches taken here. The first general remark that I would make is that the approach that has been taken is broadly consistent with what was undertaken in the referendum last September. For example, in relation to anonymous registration, which was particularly relevant in that area, existing electoral law requires proof in the form of a listed court order or interdict or attestation by the chief social worker or police officer of superintendent ranker above that the safety of an individual or someone living with them would be at risk if the register disclosed their name and address, and that is fully reflected in the proposals that we bring forward. There is also provision for the declaration of local connection where there can be a necessity to ensure that there is awareness amongst local authorities of the necessity to consider that factor in undertaking any registration that will be taken forward. In terms of the encouragement to local authorities to extend awareness of the provisions that can be taken forward to enable the registration, particularly if they are looked after children, we will work with local government to support them in ensuring that there is the widest possible awareness that those provisions exist and can be deployed so that the option is available to individuals. The bill requires each local authority to promote awareness of the registration arrangements amongst looked after children and local authorities will have to determine what action is necessary in that respect, but we will work with relevant organisations to provide the necessary guidance and support to local authorities that fits into the wider corporate parenting responsibilities for which local authorities carry that obligation. I think that that is a welcome approach. As well as the disadvantage that looked after children clearly have in many respects, there is a particular challenge for young people who are moving out of a looked-after environment into the wider community. Some of the evidence that we heard last week suggested that more could be done or should be done to ensure that those young people are aware of their rights and responsibilities, including in relation to voting if they are leaving care at 16 or 17. I think that that is a pretty significant and fair issue. I think that there is a general point, which I think that Mr MacDonald's question covers, which is about just the difficulty of young people moving out of a situation of being looked after just in general in society, but the whole multiplicity of different issues that they face. Therefore, I think that it essentially will be no different in relation to electoral registration, so it is important that we have a particular tailored approach to meet the needs of what is a relatively small cohort in our society, but an important cohort that needs to be supported in as much as the state would provide support for young people moving through this journey in relation to or should provide support to young people moving through this journey in relation to housing or employment or healthcare or wellbeing services. It is important that that is specifically taken forward in relation to electoral registration, so we will reflect on that suggestion and make sure that there is particular provision put in place to reflect the concerns that have been raised. There is nothing in the bill that prevents us from doing that than everything in the bill that provides the opportunity to do so, but I think that it is a fair and substantial point that we will take forward. Thanks very much. Stuart McMillan, I think that you had wanted to... So much of it has been dealt with with the First Minister's answers, but just one question, in terms of the points that have been raised thus far, has the Scottish Government actually had any discussions up to now with local government regarding these particular issues? That discussion has not started today other than the fact that we have obviously talked closely to the electoral registration officers and they will be at the very heart of the registration process. The discussion will predominantly be taken forward through the ERO channel, but obviously we have to make sure that there are appropriate connections to other social work and social welfare services that can provide the necessary input to ensure that the young people that are referred to Mr McDonald's question can be appropriately contacted and supported to ensure that they can fulfil their democratic rights if they wish to exercise them. A couple of other individuals indicated other supplementary marks, I think that you were for. Yes, it is probably the proper point to raise us at the last evidence session that I raised at the point that there is a lot of evidence around 16 or 17-year-olds in schools and colleges. There will be a small number—we hope that it is a small number—who will fall into the not-in-education employment or training category. Does the Scottish Government have any considerations as to how to promote registration to this cohort or would that be expected to be captured within a wider information programme? Essentially, that would be part of the challenge of electoral registration. There will be the normal canvas activity to identify who are the eligible individuals who should be added to the register. That, by its nature, is a comprehensive process involving the canvas activity that is undertaken to ensure that we get to as complete a register as we possibly can do. It will obviously also be complemented by the messages around the importance of registration, which will be more widely and publicly communicated. We have seen in the run-up to the current general election campaign really quite a sustained effort. We saw it also in relation to the referendum—a sustained public messaging campaign—to ensure that people take up the opportunity to register democratically. I think that there will be a comprehensive effort put in place there. I would be confident, based on our recent experience, that we can maximise that registration as a consequence of raising that awareness. The areas of the Children and Young People Act that deal in particular with aftercare and the expansion of continuing care to an older age group, and particularly those who are not necessarily looked after at this point, but who were looked after in the past and are now in receipt of new and additional services that were not entitled to before the Children and Young People Act came into effect, are currently going through the Parliament, through the Education Committee, in the form of subledge. The bill could be amended to give consideration to effectively ensuring that local authorities promote awareness and registration and support for this particular group. I wonder if there has been any thought about how the work of local authorities and the bill itself will effectively match up with the expanded support provided by the Children and Young People Act? I think that the terms of the bill are cast in such a fashion to give us the opportunity to take forward that and fulfil the obligations of the Children and Young People Bill in terms of the powers that the bill takes forward and the obligations that it takes on in relation to registration. Having said that, I am open to considering the issue that Mr Maxwell has raised, because I think that I want to signal to the committee this morning my desire to ensure that we fulfil this capability as much as we possibly can do. If there is another level of legislative provision that we need to consider, we will certainly consider that. However, I do not see anything in the bill that impedes us from fulfilling this obligation, but I will consider the issues that have been raised. If I feel that there is further provision, the Government will engage constructively at that point. Alison Johnstone, your question of disabilities would fall quite neatly into the question area. I am following on from the questions about looked after children who are often overlooked. Young people with disabilities, we are hearing from organisations representing them last week. There is a feeling that, certainly in the past, people with physical disabilities and learning disabilities have often been persuaded that voting is not something that they should take part in. I wonder whether the bill gives us an opportunity to address that, just to make sure that it is as easy as possible to get to a polling station, where it is not possible that postal votes have been discussed with the young people. Even thinking about the materials that come through the post from political parties, are they really appropriate for all age groups and for those perhaps with learning or other disabilities? The general provision of the bill, I am satisfied that it is cast in a fashion that essentially creates the opportunity for all 16 and 17-year-olds to be able to vote in Scottish Parliamentary and local authority elections. In terms of that legislative provision, I am absolutely confident that it is defined in a way that makes it possible for everybody to be eligible to vote in that age category. We then go on beyond that to the questions around the messaging and the motivation to enable young people to participate in the electoral process. In that respect, I think that it comes down to how we design the campaigns that encourage voter registration and participation. Some of that needs to reflect the particular circumstances and needs of individuals either in terms of physical access to vote. All polling places will be obliged under the existing legislation to be physically accessible for all individuals. Postal votes to opportunities are now, if I think back to when I started out in this activity more than 30 years ago, postal votes were—you had to have a really good reason for having a postal vote that was not available as openly as a postal vote was available. Just now, you really had to prove that you had an absolutely definitive reason why you couldn't get to the polling station. Postal votes are now much more readily available with the right scrutiny in place, but I do think that those opportunities have to be made available to people. They need to understand that they are available to enable them to then exercise their participation. As for the leaflets of political parties, I am going to take absolutely no responsibility for them whatsoever. That is for the political parties to get on with. It is hard enough to get agreement about the contents of political party leaflets without getting agreement around the committee room tables about what should be in party leaflets. I do think that Alison Johnson makes a fair point about the need for materials and messages to be available in the accessible form to all individuals. Certainly, for our part, on registration campaigns and participation campaigns, we would ensure that all of our approaches were structured in a fashion to make that possible and practical. We have had discussion in this committee, and we have taken evidence from young people when we were scrutinising the referendum process that there was a discontent about how local authorities and gross schools participated so that 16 or 17-year-olds could have full discussion of what was going on. We raised this last week at committee, and I was quite surprised at the strength of feeling among those who represented young people and those who were very well articulated by the chair of the Scottish Youth Parliament that they felt that what happened over the referendum was entirely inadequate. There was a strong view stronger than I thought it would be, that, despite being the responsibility of local authorities, there should be national guidelines on what was put forward. Local authorities and education authorities could tap into to determine openness in schools. I hesitate to say education, because a lot of these young folk do not need education in their discussion and the ability to discuss openly, like everyone else, how education authorities and schools deal with elections when 16 or 17-year-olds their pupils will be able to vote. I would just like an initial view from the Deputy First Minister as to how his Government sees this and whether that is something that can be discussed perhaps by other colleagues. My general view is that there should be absolutely nothing that stops a fair and dispassionate understanding of the political process and the political choices within the education system. It is absurd that there should be any practical impediment in that happening. During the referendum, I picked up some anecdotal experience where there was a sensitivity being expressed about the referendum debate coming into the school and somehow that was not desirable. However, in my experience of interacting with young people, particularly the eligible 16 and 17-year-olds and the very frustrated 15-year-olds who could not get to vote, there was a real appetite and a zeal to be involved in this discussion. If there is a need about that within the education community, I think that it is unfounded, because I think that part of the education process—if you look at the foundations of curriculum for excellence, curriculum for excellence is the whole concept of citizenship education and enabling our young people to fulfil their potential within our society. In my view, part of that involves fulfilling their potential in the democratic process. The absolute stipulation must be that it all has to be fair and dispassionate. It has to give young people the opportunity to participate equally, to understand all the choices, to understand all the choices fairly and squarely and without prejudice. That, to me, is the crucial characteristic of what should be taken forward, and there should be no impediment to that within the schools of Scotland. Guidance and educational resources for teachers on political literacy are available from the Education Scotland website. That guidance emphasises the importance of young people receiving information on political events such as elections in that balanced and impartial way that I have talked about. I think that the provision is all there to make sure that it happens. I think that we have to make sure that it is delivered in that fair and balanced way. I would take it from your answer, which I thought was very fair, that the Government has not received any overt representations on that point from either local government, from other sectors, including for that matter the Scottish Youth Parliament. There has not been a great outpouring of angst about this issue to government in respect of this bill, and therefore the need for the guidance that Linda was very fairly describing earlier on. There is nothing that has come to us on that, no? No. Your view would be that what is currently there in terms of the Education Scotland website, and that being fairly available to all, is adequate in relation to local thought, proper role in this area? I think that the heart of the guidance is the necessity, but it is really the points that I mentioned there, the importance of young people receiving information on political events such as elections in a balanced and impartial way, and I think that that is the foundation of the guidance that is available. I think that when the guidance leaves the website and goes into the school, we may come across some of the issues that I referred to in my earlier answer to Linda Fabiani, that there may be a sensitivity about this debate is getting very intense, should we have this in the school etc etc. However, in my experience, the guidance can all be handled in a perfectly rational, considered, dispassional way, and it is important because it then gives young people the access to the knowledge and the information that they can then mine to their own convenience or to the extent of their interest to find out more on those questions. I am very interested in any of myself because in the evidence that we took from the Electoral Commission, I felt that they had in this regard had a pretty hands-off approach and they have a duty to promote etc. Do you think that there is a stronger role for the Electoral Commission to be involved in helping education Scotland and education authorities to fashion something that at least provides a minimum base requirement of what goes on? From all of our experiences during the referendum, the period where it became most disjointed between local authorities was the very time that young people wanted to be engaged and that was during PURDA. Local authorities across the country took a different view of what they should do during that period. There may well be some real issues that the Electoral Commission could help. The various education authorities in Education Scotland produced at least some minimum standard that needs to be set. Do you feel about that? I would certainly be happy to explore those issues, convener. I think that the Electoral Commission has a statutory role to set out the manner and the style and the content of awareness that is raising on the electoral process. I do not think that that is particularly different for people over 18 and under 18. It is the same type of material. The commission in that respect has to fulfil that statutory test and the Parliament has to be satisfied that that is being undertaken to our confidence. When it comes to how that flows into schools, my answer to Mr Scott is my view that I think that the guidance that is available is perfectly adequate to enable that issue to be handled appropriately and dispassionately within our schools. I think that we will perhaps get into trouble if we then have—as happens, I know that the great word, perda, sends people into almost frozen status that nothing can happen because it is perda. It is a nonsense. There is a lot of things that can happen and there is an election for heaven's sake. Young people have got to participate. I certainly would not dispute that perda gets used as an almighty excuse for nothing happening and for things being stopped because it is perda. I am very sympathetic. I might be displaying some of my irritation about this point, which is currently with me. I quite accept that there may be a problem of the translation of the guidance into what actually happens because people get frightened by, oh my goodness, I do not want to do something that breaks perda. It is going to be hard to do if there is an election on and you are handling things fair, square and dispassionately within the classroom. I could certainly foresee circumstances where a classroom teacher might be put into a position where they are dissuaded from taking forward some part of the electoral awareness process because some local authority official has warned them about the great P word. I would certainly concede that point. That is what we need to make sure that the guidance is properly understood, not improperly understood, which in certain circumstances is around the question of perda. I would accept as the case. I follow on from that, convener. Morning, cabinet secretary. I think that we have got the situation where the problem of translation of guidance is something that really is down to a degree of confidence in the organisation's concern. Having been a teacher, I think that the problem of risk aversion from teachers to head teachers to local authority managers is a big one. I think that the evidence that we took and received during the referendum campaign highlighted that considerably. When the electoral commission says in further evidence to us after last week that people should be confident that their voice is count, that word confidence jumps out at me. I do not think that it is a matter of the guidelines. I think that it is a matter of the ethos, the way in which we are encouraging people to be a part of this process that has to be conveyed to the people from the classroom to the administrators. Somewhere or the other, that is not captured just in the bare question of the guidelines. I agree with that point. Mr Gibson sums up perfectly what I have been trying to say. I think that it is in the guidance to me seems absolutely comprehensible and crystal clear as to what can be done. However, I do concede that there will be on occasions a nervousness within the school system that somehow they may be transgressing across guidelines and clearly. Members of the teaching profession want to operate within the correct statutory framework, so we will give some further consideration to that issue. Obviously, the committee may wish to deliberate on that point into the bargain. However, I do think that it is about the distinction that Mr Gibson makes between the guidance and the ethos. It is, in my opinion, the resolution of those issues all within the ethos and not the guidance. Stuart Maxwell, I think that you had questions about data issues. The policy memorandum talks about the existing rules on protecting voter data will be put in place as far as possible and also talks about the data for those under 16 will be treated with particular sensitivity or more sensitivity errors. I just wondered if you could expand on exactly what that means in terms of more sensitivity in relation to young people's data and, in particular, the safeguards that the bill would bring in relation to those under 16. Essentially, the contents of the bill are designed to ensure that only electoral registration officers and those working for them will have access to information on those aged under 16. Essentially, out of the collection of information about who would be eligible to vote within the 14 to 15-year-old age group, that information would be held by the electoral registration officers and only available to those who work for them. There are three limited circumstances in which that information can be made available to anybody else, and the breach of that duty would be a criminal offence. It is at the highest level of scrutiny in that respect. Information on 14 to 15-year-olds will be suppressed from any version of the full local Government register that is published, sold or otherwise made available. That would be out of that version. However, shortly before an electoral event, returning officers, the Electoral Commission and candidates will be entitled to a copy of the register for electoral purposes. Of course, that comes with similar issues around statutory offences for unauthorised use. That version of the register will contain details of those entitled to vote who are already aged 16 or over or those who will become 16 on or before the date of the electoral event. In practice, only those aged 15 years and 46 weeks and upwards would be on that more publicly available register. The only other exception to the principle that electoral registration officers and their staff cannot disclose information is where it is necessary for the purposes of a criminal investigation or criminal proceedings in relation to issues around voter registration. There are very limited circumstances in which any of that information can be accessed by anyone other than those involved in the Electoral Registration Office and their staff. Any unauthorised disclosure of that information carries with it the risk of criminal penalty as a consequence. Thank you very much for that. There was some discussion last week about whether or not there was a possibility of other groups or organisations accessing some of this data. You seemed to be very clear that that would not be the case. The examples given were, for example, credit agencies and other organisations that legitimately accessed the record of electoral data. I can expressly rule out the fact that it makes clear that the credit agencies will not have access to that information on under-16s. That is good. Can I just ask one other question, convener, which is to do with those children and young people? I should say young people who, for very obvious reasons, may not wish their name to be published on an electoral register. Because of their particular family circumstances, those fleeing difficult situations such as abuse and a whole variety of other reasons, I wonder if you could expand on what the Government's view is on protecting the interests of those young individuals who, unfortunately, found themselves in such circumstances but at the same time allowing them to fully participate in the electoral process. I think that there are two points that I would make in response to Mr Maxwell's question. The first is to say that there is provision for anonymous registration. That exists where it is judged by a court order or an interdict or the view of a chief social worker or a police officer above the rank of superintendent that the safety of an individual or someone living at them would be at risk if the register disclosed her name and address. There is a specific mechanism that enables anonymous registration and participation. In a statutory basis, the circumstances that Mr Maxwell raises are entirely covered by the bill. The second point is that that is only as good as people are aware that that is an option. If people are not aware that is an option, then that is at risk that that young person may not be able to do as Mr Maxwell suggests to fulfil their democratic participation. In the awareness raising around the question in the whole registration process, there has to be an understanding that it is possible to undertake anonymous registration in the circumstances that I have set out. It is important that that point is understood and reflected more widely within the process. You come to my final point, which is exactly that. What are the circumstances that you envisage in terms of the process that will be undertaken by local authorities, electorate registration officers or the Electoral Commission in order to ensure that families and individuals, particularly young people, will be provided with the information that you have said correctly that they should be entitled to? The general canvas process is designed to identify all those individuals who are eligible to be on the register and able to vote. In that process, the circumstances of individuals who may need to be registered anonymously would crystallise, because individuals—I can only assume—would present and say that I am concerned about my name being on that register because of whatever issues of implications there may be. The key test is that those who are handling such information must have at the front of their mind that there is another option for those individuals, rather than saying, oh well, if you don't want to register, you don't register. Or we can say that there is a mechanism if there is an issue of safety or circumstances, that there is another option available for anonymous registration. I think that making sure that awareness is there that that is the case. There is also the proactive responsibility of local authorities as a corporate parent to identify individuals who are highly likely to be involved in supporting those individuals because of their circumstances. As part of that process, I say actively to those individuals, well, you should be registered to vote, but because of your circumstances, it shouldn't be disclosed by your name or your address. Therefore, there is a mechanism that we can put in place to sort that and to make it easier. Crucially, those involved in the electoral process have to have that option at the front of their minds in articulating that to young people. Thank you very much. Thank you for following on from that one of the discussions that we had last week related to the issue of attainers and the issue of donations. I will just quote you from the evidence given by Andy O'Neill, where he says, another issue that we need to think through relates to donations. Under the bill, a person who is 14 years and nine months is likely to be an attainer on the register. It may be improbable, but if the law on registers remains the same, we think that an attainer can be a donor or a lender to a political party or a candidate. The issue for candidates and political parties on regulated donors is that the permissibility of donations of more than £500 must be checked. If they cannot access the donor's details, that would create an issue. Is that an issue that the Scottish Government has had flagged up to it before now, or is it something that you have any consideration on how you might address? I think that what Mr O'Neill has said is absolutely the case. We would agree that the proposals in the bill mean that 14 and 15-year-olds will be entitled to be registered as attainers on the local government register and therefore will be permissible donors. There is then a practical issue, given the answers that I have just given to Mr Maxwell, that that information would not be readily available to political parties to check whether it would be available to political parties to check whether the individual was on the register. The way around that is that young people would be able to obtain a letter from the electoral registration officer to confirm that they were on the register, and they themselves could make that available to the political party to satisfy the political party's obligations in terms of the political parties elections act, which will specify the basis of the obligation on political parties to ensure that donations are compliant. So would it be your expectation that that would be spelled out in the guidance that accompanies the legislation in order to verify that? We certainly will make that option clear, whether it will be in the guidance and I'll consider the contents of that in due course. The Law Society and the Howard League have both given us some views on prisoner voting and compliance issues under ECHR. What's the Government's views on that? The issue is essentially constrained by the contents of the representation of the people at 1983, which is reserved legislation. Section 3 of the representation of the People's Act 1983 includes a ban on prisoner voting across the United Kingdom. We have no ability to vary that legislation, and that is reserved legislation. Therefore, the issue of prisoner voting is determined and defined by the contents of the representation of the people of 1983. I don't think that there are any other questions. I'm very grateful to you and your officials for coming along, giving us evidence today. It's very helpful. I'll just suspend for one minute until we get to the next item of business.