Thank you for the statement. I think I have four questions that I’d be grateful if the Cabinet Secretary could respond to. Survival rates have risen in Wales, as elsewhere. New technology and better treatment have ensured that and, of course, we welcome that, and there has been a clear focus on rolling out these new treatments and on improving survival rates. But the services that are offered post stroke I think need improvement, and I think that point is conceded in the new delivery plan. What is needed is for all stroke survivors, not just some, to be receiving the six-month review, for example, and to receive the appropriate rehabilitation services. This means, inevitably, a need for physios, occupational therapists and ensuring that institutional barriers don’t prevent delays in these being provided. But there’s a lack of data on how many survivors are actually receiving the reviews. So, my usual data question: when will more data be made available on the six-month reviews? There are also other health problems that can be caused by stroke, and therefore patients would benefit from monitoring closer, post stoke, in case these problems develop. For example, stroke can trigger the onset of dementia. Also, around 20 per cent of stroke patients have depression following a stroke. So, the second question: has the Cabinet Secretary considered what ways can be developed to monitor this, in order to develop intervention?

I’ll turn to the third sector and draw attention to the tremendous work done by the Stroke Association. Funding cuts—in my constituency, certainly—mean that cuts in staff have become necessary. That means cuts and impacts on services, and in the ability of the Stroke Association to help patients through the recovery process. For example, 1,500 people in my constituency have survived a stroke—above the average. Nearly 1,500 have been diagnosed with atrial fibrillation—again, above the average. That’s now; that’s the challenge we’re facing. In future: over 11,000 have been diagnosed with high blood pressure, so we have many people in high-risk categories, when we have a Stroke Association who want to contribute with the provision of social contact and stimulation, the promotion of physical and mental health and well-being, the reduction in dependency on long-term social services provision and so on—it’s a long list. Can I ask, as my third question, what assurance the Cabinet Secretary can give that Government, working with health boards, will give leadership in ensuring that the third sector services can be maintained and enhanced in future, as an integral part of the care system?

And finally, survival rates across the UK are dependent upon income. They follow the usual pattern of health inequalities, with people in poorer areas, frankly, less likely to survive a stroke. And whilst, obviously, healthier lifestyles—we can all be agreed on that—would help to prevent some strokes, will the Cabinet Secretary look at whether the rehabilitation services available in poorer communities are as good as elsewhere, and make sure that service provision here doesn’t follow the inverse care law?