Diolch. Suzy, thank you very much. I'm happy to be tested on this and put some remarks on record as well, and thanks for your engagement in trying to take some of this forward in my own amendment here as well. 

Can I just acknowledge the welcome that you gave to the way we've already learnt and flexed some aspects of the administrative scheme very openly—said what we're doing, why we're doing it? We have brought, as I said, the framework forward already. I repeat it again, as the Chair is sitting right next to me—really happy to come in front of the committee in the spring and be tested on that administrative scheme, what more we are learning, and to do that on a regular basis, quite frankly.

But, look, we set out clearly in the regulatory impact assessment for the Bill our intention to review the extent to which the legislation will have achieved its objectives a few years down the line, and we will, of course, be doing that in line with good practice, and I'll give you some detail now. But I do think it's important that we leave sufficient time for the offer and the new system to have become really fully embedded before we conduct that thorough root and branch review. And it is important that parents and providers in the sector also have that time to adjust so that we're able to get a real picture of the way things are working across Wales. Now, it's this balance that my amendment, amendment 2 is attempting to strike. So, it may help Members—all Members—if I set out the timetable for review as I see it.

So, subject to the passing of this legislation, we anticipate these powers being commenced during 2019 to enable the necessary work to build and test the national application and eligibility checking system, with a view to rolling out the new system fully in 2020. We want to ensure that the new application and eligibility checking system is up and running for the full three years to enable that full, comprehensive review, which covers the period then between 2020 and 2023. After the end of that testing period, it is only reasonable that we allow reasonable time for the findings to be properly considered, properly analysed and for a review report to be written in the light of that. So, for a programme of this size, this complexity, this could take some time. So, we've allowed up to—up to—a further year, giving us the five-year period that is in our amendment. Now, if we can do it sooner, we will, but this time frame allows for the best possible thorough review of the system. It's for this reason that I don't support the other amendments here.

Members also will be mindful of the fact that we've committed to independent evaluation of our programme of early implementation. I'll turn to the wider full review as well. The report on the first year of early implementation was published last month. A report on the second year will be available next October. So, it's not a case of there being no evaluation and waiting for that full evaluation.

As for the detail that Janet would like to see specified on the face of the Bill about what the review will cover, I've already conceded, as has been mentioned, on some issues, including the transportation issue. I met with the Assembly Members, and we'll now be looking at that as part of the evaluation of the second year of early implementation. And on charges, I've also said that we'll keep this under review, and I set out our plans in relation as well to workforce planning. Now, I'd be very cautious about trying, however, to arrive at a definitive list of aims for the review of the full offer right now, because this is still evolving—there will be other things that people will want to see in there—before we've completed particularly the early implementation and seen the findings on the points that Members have already queried.

Now, I can also confirm that this review, the major review, will not be undertaken in-house and that we will appoint an external independent evaluation company. I'm keen to give them the broadest remit possible and not to fetter them, and as a consequence I won't be, I can't be, supporting their amendments 2B or 2E.

Now, amendment 35 is the sunset provision, attempting to insert that provision into the Bill. As I said at Stage 2, I'm not convinced of the need for such a provision in the Bill. I have concerns that a sunset provision would send the wrong signal to providers, to local authorities and to parents out there about our commitment as a Government to this offer, so I won't be supporting this amendment. But, I commend the Government's amendment 2 and urge Members to support this amendment, which puts in place that full and thorough review after a suitable and appropriate period.