I always welcome a contribution from the Member for Swansea East to the debate on reconfiguration of local services, and the consistency he shows in his contributions is sometimes to be welcomed.

Can I say—? Can I say that I agree with the points that he's made? And can I say also that, in many ways, we have inherited systems and structures from the past and that it is our duty and responsibility to ensure that they are fit for the future? And it is our responsibility, therefore, to look at those processes and structures to ensure that, periodically, we do have the opportunity to give the sort of considered thinking that these matters demand of us. In terms of the suggestions he's made over reports to scrutiny committees of local authorities, I very much would welcome that. Do you know, one of the debates and discussions we have around the powers held in local government and elsewhere forgets that the power of a local authority isn't simply the powers that are provided to it by statute, but the power it has as an elected body to represent the interests of the people it serves? As such, it can demand those reports, it can demand that people appear to give evidence, it can create the structures of scrutiny, and it doesn't need statute to do that, and it certainly doesn't need a Minister's blessing in order to do that. That is a matter for local government and I would encourage all local authorities across the whole of the country to ensure that they take forward their scrutiny function with that creative approach, if you like, which isn't delineated simply by what they're able to do or compelled to do by law. So, I'd certainly welcome that. 

In terms of the points that he makes—and I will try to make good time, Deputy Presiding Officer—I have considered the issue of boundaries, and it was a point raised, of course, by the Plaid Cymru spokesperson as well. At the moment, I do not believe that the case has been made for a significant change to any of the boundaries or the numbers of the current fire and rescue authorities. But what I am not doing is closing the door to such change, were that case to be made. Now, it is clearly possible to point to communities either side of any border and to say that those communities should work together in order to deliver services. That's the easiest thing in the world to do, and I accept that, clearly, in the example quoted, those authorities would, I would anticipate, work together to deliver the services they require. What we're talking about here is a different matter; it's about governance, and I'm yet to be convinced that there is a case for change along the lines that have been described by the Member, but my mind is not closed to that, and if he's able to present the arguments for the change he suggests, then I'm very happy to give that due consideration in the future.

In terms—. This is my final point, Deputy Presiding Officer. In terms of the point he makes on the additional I think it's two or three members that would sit on reformed boards in order to provide accountability, scrutiny and challenge, we are looking to ensure that we have the right mix of locally elected, locally accountable members who are able to provide challenge to the management of the authorities, but also to ensure that we have the skills mix within the new boards of fire and rescue authorities to ensure that we have the people there who are able to provide challenge to that board as well. That is the role of a non-executive director in many businesses up and down the country. It is a role that I would want to see performed within these new boards, but, again, this is the beginning of a consultation, not the end of a consultation, so I'd be very happy to join the debate if Members wish to contribute further over the coming months.