I'd like to thank Jenny Rathbone for her comments. She's certainly right—and this is why we're putting the emphasis on apprenticeships at level 3and above—that the evidence is quite clear that higher level apprenticeships deliver higher value skills and improve the life chances of the people doing them, which is why we've taken the decision to prioritise skills at this level. That's clearly not without its difficulties and its critics, but the emerging evidence is suggesting that we are right to do that.

Balanced against that is some of the comments you made at the end, Jenny Rathbone, about the need to support people in foundational industries who traditionally have had lower skills. We need to create a pipeline of skills so that people can progress up the ladder. The examples you gave are well made because they show that, even in areas like food production and care, there is still higher value added activity. The development of precision agriculture, for example, does require more technical know-how. 

This is something that we're keeping under review. The first cohort of degree apprenticeships are focusing on digital and engineering, which would certainly be open to some of the approaches that you've discussed. That is something that we'll be keeping an eye on as the evidence emerges. And that's a key point of our approach in Wales—this is evidence led. We're taking the evidence from the regional skills partnerships, from labour market information, and from employers in keeping our offer under review, which is not something that's happening to the same extent in England.

The points on disability and reserving places for protected groups are well made. We recently launched our disability action plan, as I mentioned, which we've done in consultation with disability bodies, which sets out an ambitious agenda to broaden training opportunities for disabled people. But this is an area across the board that we're not doing well enough in, and I certainly would be interested in any ideas you have for things that we should be doing that we're not currently doing or consulting upon. But you were right to challenge us on that. The same stands for the gender issue. We are acutely aware of the gender imbalance. We have, as I said, as part of our equality toolkit, produced modules on gender and on bias, and you're right to identify the issue. We have taken some steps; I'm sure there is more that we can do, and we would certainly be interested in any suggestions Members have.