Ms Derville Rowland:

We are very happy to take suggestions on what we propose to include in the code of conduct review. As I said, we are already undertaking one element of it that we believe is very important, which is a review of the credit servicing firms and their compliance with the provisions of the code. They are prohibited from putting into place an instruction that is in breach of regulatory requirements. That means if an underlying loan owner tells them to breach the code or gives them an instruction to do so, they cannot and we can hold them to account for their conduct in that. If an underlying loan owner reaches out and starts engaging with customers, then because of the framework, they too can be held to account and brought into regulation. We are also looking at getting insights from, as I have said, the insolvency service and the Money Advice & Budgeting Service, MABS. We will consider anything the Deputy wishes to suggest to us and, as we want to get on with work, I ask that he would make any such suggestions sooner rather than later. If we were to propose any changes as a result of this, I want to be clear in pointing out that we would have to then undertake a consultation, as per our normal framework. Therefore, there would be a later opportunity to consult on any proposals. However, we would certainly take on board any suggestions at this time.

The Deputy referred to clause 39, which is a reference to mandating the actual provision of different options. Am I right, is that----