Thank you, Simon, for your questions. Can I absolutely assure you that I in no way at no point had any conversations with Sir Ian Diamond or the panel about changing its remit? You really, really should know better than to believe everything that is sometimes stated. So, I can assure you. So, by all means, FOI as much as you like. There was no instruction to Sir Ian Diamond to change the remit of the report.

But I do recognise this issue about getting a better balance between how we have traditionally funded HE in the round, and the emphasis has very much been on funding the individual student. That has led to some very real challenges for the HE sector and the institutions themselves. What this report does do, and what my agreement with the First Minister seeks to do, is to ensure that, in moving resources, we will be able to achieve that balance and be able to get to a position where HEFCW, or as a result of maybe a response to the Hazelkorn review—something that maybe comes after—is able to put resources back into HE institutions. I think that that, actually, is one of the ways in which we need to make the Welsh HE offer as good as it could be to potential students, because I think there has been, if I’m honest, a challenge for Welsh HE institutions to keep apace with some of the developments across the border. Therefore, some of the things that may be attractive to students have been developed in England, and we haven’t had the resources to do that here in Wales. So, that’s one of the building blocks that we need to do—a better balance in how we fund HE in the round, and I think that Sir Ian has given us a very good blueprint on how we can take that forward.

With regard—. Look, I didn’t write the Labour Party manifesto—[Interruption.] I didn’t write the Labour Party manifesto, but I am aware what that manifesto did say—that any new regime for funding students in Wales would be more generous than that in England, and this system today delivers on the Labour Party manifesto in the same way it delivers on my manifesto, when I said very clearly that we had to move to a system of maintenance grants for upfront living costs. So, I think that, actually, this proposal today keeps faith with what the Labour Party said in the election and what my party, the Welsh Liberal Democrats, said in the election.

The Member does raise some very serious points about FE. Just like the HE sector, there have been significant pressures on the FE sector. Now, much of the evidence that was given to Diamond highlighted the need for a more joined-up approach and enhanced progression routes between FE and HE. It was agreed, therefore, that it would helpful if the review panel were able to consider more closely these matters as part of its remit. It was assisted in doing that by a sub-panel, and that considered how best to enhance the opportunities for students pursuing work-based or occupation-related higher education course, because I do think the needs of the modern economy demand that from our system. The FE-related recommendations focus, as I said, on vocational and technical education, because the sub-panel felt that that was where the area of greatest need was, and we’ll be looking forward to how we can implement the recommendations that have been made with regard to that.

With regard to the living wage, the approach taken by Sir Ian is one of, ‘What is an adequate amount of money that is needed for people to sustain themselves?’ He’s made that link to the living wage, but the point is well made that there are other people who are pursuing training and skills development that would not be subject to that. What is really important is that those upfront living costs do not become a barrier, especially for our poorer students, in pursuing higher education. That’s the underlying principle that I will look to take forward in looking how we can implement the recommendations here. But, the points about FE are well made and this Government is cognisant of them.