Because on regional partnership boards we have an architecture that we’re developing and working with. They’re part of the remit of bringing together our larger public services with partners to deliver across the health and social—well, the social care and well-being Act. In terms of the governance around clusters, there are opportunities to consider that as we go through this, because we haven’t got a fixed view on how to resolve some of the governance challenges.

This is an opportunity to take up the debate started within the Green Paper in 2015. There are clear links between the reform of CHCs and delivering service reform across health and social care, and these proposals aim to rely on the assistance of regulation and inspection. They’re being developed together to maximise benefits for the wider public. That’s why the White Paper sets out proposals for a new national and independent body to replace CHCs. And actually there’s a point there, I think: in lots of the debate today there’s been a suggestion this body will no longer be independent and, again, that is simply not what the Government proposes in the White Paper consultation. And the new body will engage at a national, regional and local level across health and social care. The proposals are high level because I have to strike a balance in terms of this being a consultation on White Paper proposals rather than being detailed legislation.

The consultation has, of course, generated lots of debate—over 700 consultation responses already received ahead of the closure of the consultation on 29 September. And, again, I do take issue with the comments that were made that this is somehow a sham and that this is being rushed through. This is a genuine consultation. I did not have a fixed view on what a new national body should look like, sound like, or how it should be organised, but I do think we need to continue the debate started in 2015. As with any consultation, next steps will take stock of the constructive ideas generated through the consultation and, importantly, we’ll work in partnership with stakeholders to do so.

I don’t recognise the accusations that have been made that we’ve somehow excluded CHCs or that they weren’t told what would happen within the White Paper, or that although they were given an assurance they would take no part in it. That simply isn’t true. But I am pleased to see that CHCs themselves have given consideration to the White Paper and they set that out in their own paper, ‘A new people’s voice body for health and social care: Our proposals’. I understand that’s been shared with all Members. And, importantly, CHCs do not ask for an extended consultation period. They also recognise that the inspection of premises should change. They have a call to ensure they have the opportunity to visit places where care takes place, but they do not want to undertake an inspection function. They themselves recognise that should be undertaken by an independent expert body, and they certainly don’t make the call for deliberate duplication that we heard from one Member in the Chamber today. I’m pleased to say that I think their proposals are generally constructive. They don’t all align with what’s set out in the White Paper; that’s the point about having a consultation. So, there’s much common ground between us and I look forward to working through with them those proposals in the future. They themselves recognise the opportunity presented by the White Paper to reform and deliver positive change.