Thank you all very much for some excellent contributions. I won't be able to do them all justice because they were so detailed and so extensive. It shows the complexity of the challenges we have in this area of tackling isolation and loneliness, but also the fact that we need to do this in an intelligent and a comprehensive and joined-up way.

What brought this home to me—as I suspect for many of us—were some of the instances we see in our own constituencies. Several years ago, at an election, knocking on the door, I met an elderly gentleman who—you could absolutely feel, tangibly, the sadness. This was somebody that I'd known from some years ago who, when his wife had passed away, had effectively locked the door. He was feeding himself, was looking after himself, but had no connection with any agencies, no support systems, was looking after himself, but was deeply, deeply sad and lonely. And it's haunted me ever since. But the flipside of that is many of the examples we've heard of today—of neighbourliness, of communities coming together, of things like the Men's Sheds movement, of simpler things that we can all do ourselves—I have to say—as well. My mum and dad used to regularly go across the road on a Sunday and take Sunday dinner to an elderly neighbour, not because they felt, in any way, pity or whatever, but because it's the sort of thing you do in good communities that thrive. Perhaps we all need it. I'll turn to some of the Government strategies and some of the things we can do from here, but it's also to do with ourselves as well and what we do individually.

I would like to thank the committee, under the chairmanship of Dai Lloyd, for this important report into the inquiry into loneliness and isolation. I think it's helpful because it adds further evidence to what has already been building up our pool of knowledge about the clearly-debilitating effects of loneliness and isolation. The point has been made by several contributors today that loneliness and isolation can affect anyone at any age for a wide variety of reasons. Understandably, this inquiry focused its initial efforts mainly on the challenges faced by older people, but it can affect all ages.

We've heard loneliness and isolation described as a public health emergency. Evidence shows—and this evidence, by the way, goes back to studies that were done in the 1920s and 1930s—that good relationships, those networks, that connectivity, whatever word we want to throw at it, keeps us happier and healthier, and those who feel lonely are more likely to see their physical health decline earlier and to die younger. We can all appreciate how important it is to feel a sense of belonging in our communities, amongst our friends, amongst our neighbours, and to feel a sense of worth, that our lives mean things to other people.

So, my written response to the committee's excellent report sets out my detailed reply to the six recommendations. I know that everybody's had a chance to read them, because they've been touched on so much today. We've accepted each recommendation either fully or, in two cases, partially. Let me just turn to those two cases where we've accepted the recommendations, but with some provisos. One of them is the timescale, as has been mentioned. We partially accepted this. The reason for this is quite clear. If we can, we will keep this under review, and, if we can bring it forward earlier than the spring of 2019, we will. But even the committee itself recognises that there's some more research and evidence gathering in certain key areas to be done. We want to do that properly, and in some areas we want to consult properly and formally as well. If that means we have to take a little bit longer, we will, but we'll keep that under review.

The second thing to say is quite clearly—and in the response to the committee, I said this—that doesn't mean we can't act now. We get on with doing the things. We are doing things now and we should escalate them. We should accelerate them. So, we get on with acting right now. It doesn't have to wait for a strategy in 2019. We can already take forward actions, and I'll turn to some of those in a moment.

The second aspect that we accepted, but partially, was the funding stability for the third sector. A few Members mentioned this. In an ideal world, you'd simply say, with great largesse, 'Here's the funding. Here's the stability you need for three years. Go ahead'. There are implications of that, and some of the implications of that are, well, twofold—two big examples. One is flexibility, because the third sector also will ask us for flexibility for funding for innovation, for new initiatives—the sort of things, perhaps, that Lee, you were talking about; some new drive that's needed, and it needs some pump-priming money. But the other aspect that we need to be very conscious of here is that, in trying to give that security of funding, which we will look at and we will cast our thoughts to, there, we don't want to take away anything that might be needed for emergency funding either. Because sometimes there are genuine situations where you want to use the constrained funding available to deploy in an emergency situation.

So, we need to get the proportionality right and think this through, but we will look at it, we will bring forward further work on whether funding can be provided through dedicated streams, such as, by the way, the intermediate care fund. I think that many Members are becoming increasingly aware of the innovative use of this, including, by the way, of course, the Cardiff independent living centre. I'd recommend that Members go and see that—go and see what's happening there. That is funded through ICF. Now, we will look at this and see whether, with ICF and other such streams of funding, we can give more certainty, but we need some flexibility for emergency and other funding as well.

We were pleased to accept all of the recommendations here within the report. Let me say a little bit, then, more about those investments that have been made in programmes, the initiatives being taken forward that we can already do without waiting for 2019. So, across Wales, the public services boards have assessed the impact of loneliness and isolation as part of their wider analysis of well-being. This is what we voted for within this Assembly previously—before I was here—that this approach was the right approach. The plans that underpin these now are being consulted on, and I'm keen to see myself how public services boards will put the actions in place to maximise well-being at the very heart of our communities. All the different things we've been talking about—whether it is transport, whether it's access to toilets, whether it's community connectivity, whether it's libraries, this, that and the other—that's what this is about. We cannot directly fund from central Government every little initiative and every little group in every community. We can't do it. But what we can say is, 'Here's the framework that we expect to be delivered. Here are the outcomes that we want. Now, get on with it and find the way to do it', whether that's in rural mid Wales or whether that's in the deepest south Wales valley, and so on. 

Now, public sector organisations are innovating to provide services tailored to meet individuals' needs. So, for example, the integrated care fund, a total of £60 million, supports joint working across housing, health and social care. It's designed to reduce hospital and residential care admissions and provide social care for people in ways that they want. Projects include new-build accommodation, equipment and adaptations that promote independence, that reduce isolation and that improve quality of life. And on the subject of housing, the Supporting—. I'm conscious—. I said I would never get to all of my points. I suspect that I'm in the last 30 seconds.