Okay. Can I ask two questions very briefly? [Laughter.] Why do we want to have a city region and another region for services? Surely, the city region is the footprint. I think that you might want to sub-divide within the footprint, but having it across—. Swansea and Neath Port Talbot will be called Janus, because we look east for some things and west for the others. It just does not make a lot of sense and it doesn’t work for building up relationships, where we work with Bridgend for some things, Carmarthenshire for others.

Can I say that, of course, in terms of health, which is a part of the public service, although not under your remit, the ARCH programme, for example, has started to get the area to the west of Swansea working with Swansea? The final question I’ve got is that we’ve seen in health a situation where we’ve had primary and secondary health put together: has that actually worked in getting them to work closer? I think that the answer most people will come up with is, ‘No, it hasn’t.’ I think that what it has done is move money from primary care into secondary care, and I don’t think that’s what people particularly wanted. You’ve only got to listen to primary care practitioners, who’ll tell you exactly how badly done by they are and that all the money goes into hospitals.

So, can I finish by saying: will the Minister look again at having the two-area model and look towards the city region as the basic footprint for public services?