That was a nice slide away from my question, actually, Cabinet Secretary, because I asked about the 12 per cent spend as a percentage, and you immediately replied by saying that the services for mental health are the biggest line. But that’s exactly my point. We have cardiac lines, we have diabetes lines within the health budget, but we’ve put everything into mental health. So, yes, you can say 12 per cent for mental health is great, but the problem is mental health is covering a huge variety of different conditions, with different comorbidities. Now, I’ve been reviewing the Pricewaterhouse Coopers report into mental health ring-fencing arrangements, and they are firmly of the view that a ring-fence based, and I’m quoting this:

‘A ring-fence based on historic patterns of expenditure has little continued relevance in the current operating environment.’

So, do you agree with that conclusion, and, if so, how will you move away from the ring-fence model?