Thank you very much, and thank you for the debate. I do agree with the first speaker, Janet Finch-Saunders, that we do need to be accountable to the people of Wales. For me, improving the quality of public services for future generations is a clear way of being accountable to the people of Wales, and shows our commitment to that.

There is no deal with Labour. What’s happened is that Labour has seen the wisdom of our own proposals on regionalisation. But, where we differ is that we feel that regionalisation alone doesn’t get to the heart of the problem. It is not radical enough. It doesn’t eliminate those artificial walls between health and social services, and there is no emphasis, as we have, on integration.

My colleague Neil McEvoy mentioned the need for a framework to look at the pay of senior officials. Clearly, the gap is too great between those at the top of these organisations and those on the front line—the carers, the teaching assistants, the cooks in our schools, and so on—and we must right that wrong.

Mike Hedges mentioned the importance of quality services and the need to control salaries. He had some interesting ideas for the Swansea area, and I’m sure that those will be considered as we move forward.

Simon explained that the purpose of this afternoon’s debate was to try and get more details on Labour’s proposals. I’m not sure if we’ve succeeded in that, exactly. He also voiced concern about weakening local government over a number of years. I share those concerns, particularly from the point of view of financing and the huge cuts that still face local government. Certainly, empowering councils with greater powers and three-year budgets would do a great deal to right that wrong.

Mark Isherwood mentioned the Williams commission. The problem that we see is the pace of the response to the Williams commission. We saw the chair of the commission himself, Paul Williams, voicing his frustration about that issue last week.

Rhun ap Iorwerth mentioned aspects of bringing social care—the poor relation that has seen under-investment—and health closer together and integrating that relationship. Certainly, there is some misunderstanding as to that interrelationship. Although there are some local examples of excellent collaboration, and I could name Ysbyty Alltwen near Porthmadog as an excellent example of how services can be integrated on the ground, that doesn’t happen in all areas of Wales. We do need to move towards that.

I note that UKIP agrees with us on STV. I also note that you withdrew some comments, having been corrected by the Member for Caerphilly. I also note your view that the brains of adolescents are not mature enough to vote. I see that as being interesting. Most of the young people of 16 that I know are mature, responsible, sensible, rational individuals. It’s a shame that we can’t say that about everyone in this Chamber. [Laughter.]

If I turn to the comments of the Cabinet Secretary finally, I was pleased to hear those. I’m pleased that the discussions are continuing, and that there is still an opportunity to have an influence as we progress. I share the desire for ambitious local authorities. I also note that the rurality of certain local authorities is being given some attention, and that there are differing needs arising as a result of that, and that we therefore need to see the formula reflecting those differences.

I welcome the fact that you too support lowering the voting age to 16, and note your comments on automatic registration in schools. I think that would be a positive step forward. Certainly, enabling people to vote electronically and to use far more modern methods in order to allow people to cast their vote is certainly something that we should move towards. But, I do note that you are not going to vote in favour of STV, and that is a shame this afternoon because I do think that that truly would create an empowered local government and that people would feel that it was relevant to them and that their votes truly counted.

I’m pleased, therefore, that these ideas of combined authorities—that more discussions can take place on that issue, and that it is still on the table. Therefore, we look forward to further discussions in the future on that issue. Thank you all very much.