Diolch yn fawr iawn, Lywydd.

I move the amendments tabled in my name. It is a timely and appropriate debate, perhaps not for the reasons the party opposite think. It’s timely because, once again, the party’s new leader has confirmed that his party’s long-term goal is to privatise the NHS—[Interruption]. He has, once again, placed on record his view that he has not changed his mind that the very existence of the NHS stifles competition. So, this debate must be seen in that context. Unfortunately, senior UKIP figures keep on making gaffes when it comes to health. We know that Nigel Farage doesn’t think smoking has any links with cancer. Roger Helmer has called for the NHS to fund gay cure therapy. Last week, the health spokeswoman here spoke against the taxation of cigarettes on the grounds that we haven’t reduced the number of smokers by much. A quick check of those facts: 20 years ago, almost 30 per cent of 15-year-old girls and almost 25 per cent of boys were smokers. Now, teenage smoking is at an all-time low, with just 8 per cent of boys and 9 per cent of girls smoking. Adult smoking has reduced from around 30 per cent to 19 per cent over the same period, but what do the experts know, and what do the statistics show, eh?

Leaving aside those points, strangely enough, we support the sentiments of the motion, but we do think it needs considerable amendments to more accurately reflect the challenges and the sorts of solutions that we need within the NHS. Amendment 1 reflects the fact that, in the modern NHS, the majority of patients cared for are, in actual fact, repeat users of the service who require ongoing contact and care with primary health to manage their chronic conditions. This really isn’t about the one-time user whose first and only contact is with a GP.

Amendment 2 notes the importance of good social care in contributing towards these goals—something we’ve talked about here this afternoon already—noting the financial pressures that have been imposed on social care, probably as a result of a right-wing agenda not understanding the role of social care and believing that austerity is a consequence-free political choice.

Amendment 3: this one’s targeted at the Welsh Government. It notes that GPs will always remain at the centre of good primary service. We note the decline in numbers, although the Government likes to show a different set of figures at times. The facts are clear: we had 2,026 GPs in 2013, and 1,997 GPs in 2015, which are the latest available statistics. Other health professionals are a vitally important part of primary care, but they shouldn’t be used to replace GPs. They should, of course, be used to complement them. We note, from the Royal College of General Practitioners’ calculations, that we need perhaps 400 additional GPs in Wales. It’s a figure we certainly see no reason to doubt, and I draw your attention, of course, to Plaid Cymru’s long-standing position: that we need to move over a period of years towards the employment, training and recruitment of 1,000 extra doctors in Wales.

In amendment 4, we return to the contradiction in UKIP’s health policies, by noting that many GPs, surprisingly, are not in fact British, and that if the climate of hostility towards migrant workers that UKIP has helped to inflame continues, they may choose to leave the NHS. I do wonder whether they are serious about—[Interruption.] I’m sorry; would you like to intervene?