Can I thank Llyr for his welcome for the direction of travel? I'm sure we both have been reading and studying the same research and evidence about the power of self-evaluation in driving improvement and the power of a self-improving school system. If we look at international best practice in high-performing countries, trust in the profession but also a strong system of self-evaluation and school-to-school working are crucial in driving an education system forward.

Unfortunately perhaps in some of the ways in which we have had accountability measures in the past, it has worked against that principle of schools sharing good practice. If I'm in a quartile, I need somebody else to be doing worse than me, so why would I share with you my approaches that are working well for me? So, actually, in the past, we have had a system of accountability that perhaps unintentionally has worked against this principle of schools working closely together and raising standards collectively, which, as I said, we know from international evidence, is a strong driver for changing an education system.

With regard to timescales and to the important point that Llyr made about testing, we'll be testing this in the new year, in 2019. You're absolutely right: we need to understand that if the Government pulls this lever, what that means on a day-to-day basis in our schools, and we don't want to create a new set of unintended consequences by the changes that we are making. So, it will be tested. Initially, at the moment, we're sharing some of the thinking with our primary school sector on how it will work in the primary school sector. What's important to note, Llyr, is that this self-evaluation tool is being developed in conjunction with the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, so that we have that international rigour and oversight, with Estyn, who will have the job of validating a school's self-evaluation regime, and with the profession itself so that we know that we're coming up with a system that is workable in a school. Because the worst thing that we could do is design a system that, actually, is not practicable for a school to use and to help them drive improvement. So, the profession is involved in the development of it.

But I also think it's important—. I take your point that individual schools and local authorities make different types of funding decisions, but I do think that we need to have a shared understanding across the system about what we mean by self-evaluation and we're looking at the same factors in each of our schools. Again, the things that we would be expecting to see delivered as part of the framework would be its effectiveness as a learning organisation, how it's demonstrating how it can move things forward, the effectiveness of its school improvement processes, crucially on the impact on the pupils. Why are we doing this? What's the point of doing any of this if your improvement isn't going to lead to better outcomes and a more positive impact on your school pupils? Progress and achievement around the curriculum itself clearly, but also looking at the issue of well-being.

We've had many debates in this Chamber recently about the need for a whole-school approach. We have to have a more sophisticated way about how we hold schools to account for the issue of well-being. At its worst, well-being is about, 'Have the children turned up?' and if they have, 'Well, there we are, we're addressing well-being.' We know, from the work that the committee has done, that we have to be much more sophisticated at looking at how we address well-being. We need a whole-school approach. We also know that schools do what they will be evaluated on, so this has to be an important part of the self-evaluation framework as we go forward.

You're right: one of the challenges, Llyr, is creating time for all of this to happen. In the first instance, you correctly identified that we are providing resources for pioneer schools to be able to undertake this work. We will be looking to resource new professional development learning opportunities that facilitate people going to and from different schools. So, this will need to be resourced and, in the longer term, that's why we commissioned Mick Waters to do the report that you yourself mentioned earlier on in questions to the leader of the house, because that talks about how we can begin to think about how we can make these things a possibility in the constraints of a very busy working life for a teacher. And I will be looking to respond fully to that report once we've had the opportunity to digest everything that's within it, but I was very heartened that you found it a very interesting and stimulating read, and that provides a blueprint for how some of these issues can be addressed in the longer term in a more sustainable way, rather than constantly having to put pots of money together to make these things happen.