I do not want to start a row but the motion would have been better if it did not have a slightly self-serving tone. Why does a motion on such a heart rending scandal have a section that "support[s] the Government commitment"? We do not need a motion that says how wonderful the Government is. It is an appropriation of this report to include "acknowledges the high standard of care currently being provided to persons with haemophilia". I do not know that we have high standards of care for all people with haemophilia. That is an opinion and a judgment and it is out of place in a discussion like this. I do not have a problem with a motion that recognises what is in the report, or that identifies some of the deficiencies. I regret that the House will have to vote on a motion that contains many things one would agree with but some of which are contentious and unprovable. How does one prove a high standard of care is currently being provided to people with haemophilia? Phrases like "supports the Government commitment to ensuring the availability of an adequate and ongoing supply of clotting factor concentrates—"