Thank you very much for your invitation to join you today and for the opportunity to make a brief opening statement.
Let me begin by thanking Parliament, which has supported our work throughout. We have benefited from the secondment of excellent parliamentary staff to our secretariat. The Parliament also hosted our talks on a number of occasions, most notably our public session at which we heard from civic leaders. I have personally valued the counsel of the Presiding Officer throughout the process.
On appointment to my role, my first act was to visit the Parliament to listen to the debate on the referendum, so it is fitting that another visit is one of my last acts.
I wanted to take the opportunity to make a short opening statement to make four very brief points.
First, we achieved cross-party agreement. It was tough and intense at times and I feared that we might not get there, but we did, and all five parties signed up. That in itself is important and I pay tribute to the nominees for that. The agreement is their agreement; I just helped them to get there.
Secondly, we had a fortunate starting position. Almost all the parties entered the talks having already undertaken their own analysis and discussion. They had already reached important conclusions on how the powers of the Parliament should be strengthened. Without that work, I have no doubt that it would have been much more difficult, if not impossible, to reach a conclusion in the limited timescale that we had.
Thirdly, we had some great support. I was backed by an exceptional secretariat, drawn from the Scottish Government, the Scottish Parliament and the United Kingdom Government. The secretariat was supported by both Governments, who provided analysis and advice all the way through the process to ensure that the agreement could be delivered and would work. I am pleased to be joined today by Jenny Bates, who led the secretariat throughout the process.
Finally, I will say a few words about my role. My job was straightforward: to convene and chair cross-party talks. I had no voice in the debate and I have offered no view on the outcome. I entered the process politically unaligned and without a clear view on the constitutional debate, and I would like to leave it that way. It is not for me to provide a commentary on or an interpretation of the agreement or an analysis of its impact, and I do not believe that it would be right for me to do so even today. The weight of the appointment has never been lost on me. It followed what I consider to be one of the most extraordinary political events of my lifetime: the referendum. I never for a moment expected the agreement to satisfy everyone, as that would be impossible. Some people strongly believe that the agreement does not go far enough and some believe that it goes too far, and I respect and understand both those positions. My object was to chair a process that was well run and fair and that resulted in a package of new powers to strengthen the Parliament. I believe that we have achieved that.
I would be delighted to take questions.