Diolch, Llywydd. I'd like to formally move amendments 40, 19 and 20.

This comes to the nub, to the heart, of the citizen voice body. If you talk to the citizen, they want a voice body, they want a representative body that's local to them, understands their local issues, understands their local health board, somebody they can access easily—and, of course, it's not just health boards now, it'll be the local residential home, private or public, it'll be domiciliary care, it'll be across all sorts of settings. There is a fear by significant parts of Wales that we get chopped out of the equation, and that everything is centred here in the south-east. North Wales, in particular, has a very strong sense of that disconnect; west Wales has a very strong sense of that disconnect, and we don't want that to happen. So, this is why we've tabled these amendments, to try to ensure on the face of the Bill that it's not just a promise, but it's actually in writing, that this voice body will represent people on an as-near-to-them-as-possible basis.

Now, I am not, as you all know, an entirely unreasonable person, and I have discussed this matter with the Minister at great length and listened to him in various stages, talking about this. So, I have moderated from saying that I want an absolute replica of the CHCs—one for Pembrokeshire, one for Carmarthenshire, one for Ceredigion—and I'm prepared to go down the regional model, which is why amendment 40, which deals with that structure of regional body is very, very important. It is similar to amendment 59, tabled by the Minister, and amendment 75, tabled by Rhun ap Iorwerth. But we think, having talked to the Minister, and having talked to various people, that if we could build it on a regional basis, perhaps reflecting our regional partnership boards—which are there, which are enshrined, and we've been told that so much of our direction of travel over the next five or 10 years is going to hang on those regional partnership boards—it seemed very obvious to make them the footprint for a regional voice body.

I'm very sad that, despite our conversations, the Minister has remained intransigent about this point. He wants flexibility, and I understand that desire. But I would warn you, Minister, that your quest for flexibility here, as has been the case throughout the Bill, runs a very real risk of leaving too much off the books—too much down to subsequent decisions, subsequent guidelines, subsequent promises and subsequent intent. And above all, what we don't want to see is some body that is centralised in a place where, if the citizen wants to access them, they have to phone into this place, and maybe somebody will come out—maybe somebody will come from Cardiff to Pembrokeshire, maybe somebody will come from Cardiff to Arfon to listen to somebody, hear their problems and try and sort them out. That's not what we want. So, we are very keen to see our amendment, which enshrines the locality, actually put onto the face of the Bill. And if our amendment were to fall, then I would support the Plaid one. Although, my only comment is that the structures that you are suggesting it could be based on could be changed in the new format, if they change local government, if there's, you know—. So, that's why we went for the regional partnership boards, because we think that, whatever happens, they'll probably be the rocks that never, ever move.

And, Minister, I thought about this long and hard, because I thought, 'Well, if our amendment falls and then Plaid Cymru's falls, the next best thing perhaps would be to adopt your amendment, which promises face-to-face consultation wherever possible, however possible', but the more I thought about it, the more I thought, 'No, that's just not right.' This is a body to represent the citizen's voice, wherever they are, not wherever you or the body are—big difference.