I thank the Member for his comments. In particular, I acknowledge the work of, as I said, a range of people in the Chamber, including Dai Lloyd. In the interim, when he left us for a brief period of time, we actually passed the legislation that we’re now debating and discussing today.

To start, I think there were three particular points and questions that you made for me to answer. The first was about other Parliaments and other parts of the UK. I actually attended the board meeting of NHS Blood and Transplant before the election, in Cardiff. It was interesting, as you could see very real interest in the system that we have here in Wales and the impact that it is having. So, there is very real interest right across the NHS family in the United Kingdom about the amount of difference that this legislation will be making. I can’t speak for other Parliaments as to whether they plan to follow our legislation, but I do know there’s a very real interest in it. Personally, I’d be surprised if, in 10 years’ time, we don’t see similar pieces of legislation in other parts of the United Kingdom, because, if it makes the difference we want it to, and we think it has done already in the first six months, then you would have thought that people across parties, in other parts of the UK, would equally want to see extra dozens of lives saved every year, because the challenge of having enough donors available to match people waiting on the organ donor waiting list is not just a problem here in Wales.

In terms of those people who have opted out but might otherwise have been donors, I’m not actually aware that we do collect that particular information—I will check, though. Part of the reason is, of course, that there are precise circumstances under which people can be donors for organ transplantation, and I’m not aware that we can assume that someone could be a donor if it were not for the fact that they had opted out. But, I will check that and the particular point you also raised about the number of people where donation does not proceed because of objections from the family. I made the point earlier in interviews today about this that, even for people who have positively opted in and are on the register, it is still possible that transplantation won’t proceed because of the conversation with the family around the time of donation. Now, that’s something that some people are very frustrated by, but we do have to think about the impact on people who are here, not just the person who wishes for donation to take place.

The final point that I want to address is: you mentioned those people who are sceptical and those people who were not positive about the change being made—a range of people from different communities and a number of faiths had concerns about the change to a deemed-consent system One of the things I’m really pleased about is the work that we did specifically with a range of different groups, including religious and faith communities, to look at what the changes meant, and, actually, we’ve seen a different sort of attitude. People are more relaxed. They are happier that some of the concerns they had about how the system might work have not been borne out, and I think that’s part of the reason why we’ve not seen quite as many people positively opting out, to register that they don’t want to take part in the donation system. But, it is something where, after six months, after a year, and further on, we need to review the impact and understand whether we’re making the difference we want to or whether we could still do more.