Thank you. I'll start with that final question because unpaid carers will be dealt with in group 6. I've answered lots of questions on that, and I'm really happy to restate the position to try to deal with some of the understandable concern that some people will have. So, we have had to work through—and we've done this deliberately with national carers organisations—how we define unpaid carers in such a way that we can get those people invited. And one of the examples I've given is that I regularly take my mother her shopping, so I deliver it to her house, but I wouldn't say that that act means that I would get through into priority group 6. I will be in priority group 6, but that's because I have an underlying chronic kidney condition. So, that's the reason why I'll get an invite for priority group 6. So, we've been working through with carers organisations to try to agree an approach that makes sense. 

Now, what England have done is they're looking to identify people through general practice lists. That was an approach we considered but, ultimately, I've decided not to do that because that would essentially mean that looking at GPs lists—the extra requirements we'd then have for GPs, and you can anticipate the extra number of calls that GPs would get. I don't think that would be a sensible and efficient way to take unpaid carers through. So, I'm expecting imminently to be able to confirm some guidance for unpaid carers and for health boards to deliver that, and it is literally a matter of a number of days, and I expect that guidance will be published, and that should then give the clarity in public for everyone who is asking for it, but I'm making it really clear: unpaid carers are in group 6, and it's how we make sure that they're invited for their appointment rather than if, and that's a really important point to make. 

On your point about fairness about spare end-of-day vaccine, well, I know you said that if you could be offered an end-of-day vaccine, why can't a police officer? That's because I suspect you're just a day or two older than 50, so you're within priority groups up to one to nine, Angela, whereas police officers, many of them won't be. What we have done, though, is been really clear in the guidance we've given out internally, and I think Gill Richardson, the senior responsible officer for the vaccine programme has said so in public as well, and sent a note out more broadly to say we're now in a position where groups 5 to 9 are a big chunk of the population, and we would expect health boards to be able to manage that group and, certainly, at this point in going through groups 5 to 9, to have spare groups of people at the end of the day that can be called on, because, actually, for people over the age of 50, lots of those people will be mobile and able to attend at very short notice.

If it isn't possible to do that then, yes, we do think it's appropriate to offer other people that end-of-day vaccine to make sure that doses aren't wasted. I don't think we're going to find high numbers, but if for the sake of dealing with six potential vaccines, whether that's a firefighter or a police officer or somebody else, then the Welsh Government certainly isn't saying, 'You cannot have that vaccine—it must be thrown away'. That clearly doesn't make sense, and that isn't the position we're adopting. And, as I say, we've sent a note out to clarify that within the system as well. So, the challenge of the message that you refer to I don't think reflects our stated position, and it should not represent practice. And I hope that helps to resolve that issue, not just in Dyfed Powys but more generally; I've heard the same sort of urban myth and concern being spoken about elsewhere as well.

On the second doses, I'm happy to confirm that we do expect that late doses can still be provided. So, we all understand that there are different reasons in life why a second dose appointment may be missed; someone may be ill, there may be a good reason why they can't attend on the stated time. That second dose can be rearranged, and my understanding is that it doesn't mean that there is no value in the person having to start again from dose 1 and going through dose 2. Actually, there's good data on the inter-dose interval being longer being a good thing in terms of the level of protection and the longevity of it. So, if someone gets their second dose in week 13 instead of week 11 or 12, that in itself shouldn't be a problem for their protection long term. Equally, if you miss your second appointment and need to rearrange it, it doesn't mean you are somehow being told to go back, do not pass 'Go' and collect £200—it isn't that sort of approach that we're taking.

And then on the consistency, a number of appointments have actually been rearranged to bring doses forward, particularly for those people receiving the Pfizer jab. I expect there will be a consistent approach in that everyone will be directly told when their appointment is. Some people have been given an indication for their second date at the point of the first vaccination. More and more, though, we're expecting to advise people, after they've had their first dose, when that second dose will be. I think the most important thing is to make sure that people aren't left behind. I agree with you: this has been a phenomenal effort in Wales. It's a pleasure to be leading other UK nations, but every one of the four UK nations can take some real pride in the way that our collective NHSes have delivered the programme.