Thank you for that series of slightly different questions, and I’ll try to answer them in the different parts in which they were put. I want to start by saying that, of course, I understand the significant and continuing public interest and concern into the events reported around Tawel Fan, and it’s been actually very difficult to meet the understandable demand for the process to be concluded as quickly as possible, which is entirely understandable, from the families affected and the wider concerned community within north Wales and beyond, but having a process that is properly robust, because part of my concern has always been, despite my personal desire to see this concluded quickly, that, if you don’t have a properly robust process, you potentially open up not just the health service, but individual families, to a wholly unsatisfactory position where the process itself collapses and you don’t actually deliver the sort of justice that I understand people want to see. And I do appreciate the fact that you indicated that the most important thing is to get to the truth, and, indeed, thousands of different documents have been reviewed, and, because of the rigour undertaken, there have been further fields and avenues of investigation undertaken that go beyond the number of people identified in the Ockenden report. And that’s important for you to understand, I think—there is real rigour that’s been undertaken in what is now a review with real, genuine independent oversight. So, the health board don’t control and have oversight of the HASCAS review, so there should be no misunderstanding that the health board are somehow going to re-interpret or alter the findings of this genuinely independent review.

I’ve not had sight of the letters that I understand have been reported, but, in terms of the challenge around harm caused and understanding what comes after that, there’ll be a number of different processes to go through, in which the Government won’t have a role to undertake. For example, the professional issues—that will be for the professional bodies to undertake. We expect them to do their job. I am concerned though about the length of time it takes for fitness-to-practice proceedings to be undertaken—that’s not a party political issue; it’s an issue of genuine concern across the Chamber—regardless of which professional body people are answerable to and responsible for.

On the point of prosecutions, I think it’s really important that Government politicians don’t get into the business where we are saying that we expect or require the police and the Crown Prosecution Service to prosecute. There is such a level of public interest that I expect the police to be properly aware that when the investigation reports they will need to review it and they will need to respond and indicate. And, at the time the report is available, I see no reason for me not to ask the police to confirm their position, but I think going beyond that would not be appropriate for me to do. Those are independent decisions to be made by both the police and the Crown Prosecution Service about matters that they think they could, should, and have a duty to investigate and then conclusions they actually reach. But I’m happy at the end of this process to ask the police for their view on whether they expect to take any further action.

On the broader cultural issues that you identify, I think this is an area where people should look again at the process of special measures with the oversight provided by regulators. This isn’t a Government politician deciding, ‘This is what I want the conclusion to be’. And I’ve always, as I know that Mark Drakeford has before me, tried to be really clear that this won’t be undertaken for the convenience of a Government politician in this particular role. It must be about independent advice from regulators about progress that has and has not been made through special measures, and about whether the organisation comes up, whether sufficient progress has been made in each of the areas. And mental health services are, I think, the most significant area of concern that caused the health board to be put into special measures. The new director has made a real difference, I think, but there is an understanding that there is a real and significant challenge in reconfiguring and improving that service. What should give me and other Members confidence is not just the process undertaken with independent regulators, but they recognise that real progress has been made to date. But it is about the further progress that is still needed. And I would not pretend to you or any concerned citizen that everything is perfect and that progress is smooth and easy. But we will have a properly transparent review from those regulators when they undertake their regular review of special measures, and, again, I will receive that and that will be publicly available, as have previous reports.