I think the main reason for that is that there are three series of reforms of qualifications that have happened. There were some in 2015, other subjects in 2016, and other subjects in 2017. Those three cycles of reform have all suffered from the short timetable that was between approving a qualification and publishers being able to start the work. Perhaps an interesting comparison would be a subject being taught for the first time in 2015—where that subject has reached now in terms of resources. I would hope that each one of those subjects have more available now in terms of resources, and therefore we are adding each year—not textbooks but digital resources. There are more past papers available, of course. We are working on sample work at the request of teachers. So, every subject is moving on over a period of time of five to six years while that specification is being studied. But those same difficulties have, unfortunately, affected 2015 subjects and 2017 subjects, and that's why we're discussing the same thing in 2018.
So, it's the scale of the challenge and the volume of the work?
Yes.
I think Gareth, in the evidence that he has provided to the committee previously, has said about the timeline, the schedule, for reforms. Now, that's a schedule that we inherited and was largely dominated by the schedule for reforms in England. Now that we've reached a point of divergence in GCSEs and A-levels, between England and Wales, it gives us much more agency in the future to establish a timeline that doesn't place the pressures on the system. So, Gareth has quite rightly pointed out that there are three waves of reforms, but the pressures that build up in the first wave are consequential onto the next wave and the wave after that. So, the whole system has been pressured both from a regulatory perspective of the approval process, the awarding body preparing its submissions to use, and then system readiness thereafter.