Thank you very much for the question. Clearly, in an endeavour such as this, I'd like to be of any kind of assistance in providing technical knowledge and support to make sure that the process is as rigorous as possible. I've said I think the idea of a human rights impact assessment is a great endeavour to be embarking on, but I would have, I suppose, fundamental worries about the process as it is currently set out. It may be that it's just a question of fleshing it out in more detail.
One of the fundamental points that is raised by what you just said is that it's going to be the officials of the relevant departments who are going to be undertaking the assessment, albeit with contributions from civil society actors of the two countries. This is somewhat at odds, I would say, with good practice internationally in this kind of impact assessment process, whereby we would be hoping for the appointment of independent experts who would be undertaking the report and then would be reporting back to the relevant ministries, which would then be reporting to Parliament or whatever on the trade agreement.
So that would be the technical advice I would give to the process to make it the kind of rigorous one that's being adopted, as I say, in human rights impact assessment methodologies more generally, and in processes with regard to multinational corporations or parliamentary activities, such as those of the European Parliament, and with regard to the EU social impact assessments. We do see independent actors who are independently commissioned to undertake these assessments.
The other thing I would also say is that I was worried about the scope of the current proposal and worried that undertaking a report on all the provisions of the trade agreement each year would seem to me in a way to be setting oneself up to fail in terms of the rigour of the process. Those would be my immediate comments, but I am of course very available to help on any kind of ongoing basis.