Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for your statement here today. I've got a couple of questions for you. Firstly, will you join with me in congratulating the extrication team from the South Wales Fire and Rescue Service? Not only are they now five times UK national champions, but, for the third year in succession, they recently won the world rescue organisation challenge in Cape Town, firmly putting South Wales Fire and Rescue Service on the map.

With regard to the consultation document, I notice your comments about governance arrangements. I'm not convinced that Cabinet members are better placed to offer scrutiny than backbenchers, who may hold senior scrutiny roles. For example, there's no requirement for councillors sitting on police and crime panels or local health boards to be executive members, and I'm concerned that this could lead to a hollowing out, with a small executive doing more and more and scope for backbench councillors being reduced. I'd be interested in your response to this.

Thirdly, I note the comments around reducing the size of authorities. However, I know authorities are required by statute to have a variety of standing committees, and a larger fire authority, of course, means that these are more manageable. What consideration have you placed on how this would work in practice?

Finally, in terms of the funding model, I do see the benefits of moving to a precept model, and, when I've met with the south Wales service, I've always been impressed by all that they do. I'd welcome more information around ministerial intervention, though, about what could happen when authorities don't actually agree on the level of the precept. So, for example, if it was just one authority that disagreed and the others agreed on the level of the precept, what would happen in that case? Because I'm concerned that that could lead to some potential problems.