Yes, and it seems to me—you've just talked about having a systematic approach, and it does seem to me that it is a systematic process, isn't it? So, it shouldn't be difficult. I know we're talking about in the health service things shouldn't be difficult and they are, and one of the gripes—I had a meeting with the community health team—was the problems of the new IT systems and so on—let's not go there at the moment. But, really, this is just about referring children and having a smooth transition from the service being provided to them as a child and then just shifting it over to the adult services. It shouldn't be difficult. It's really difficult to get my head around why that is such a problem and why that needs to be so difficult.
Can I add one other dimension in, which I think is going to be quite interesting? We talk about transitions being an issue—and we know it's not just in mental health, but it's elsewhere—then you start to think, 'What if we could reduce transitions?', so you reduce the number of transitions and you manage them better. We are doing a piece of work with Government on the potential to explore what a 0-25-type service would be. We know that in different places they have approached that—in Australia and places in the UK. There are probably some pros and cons, but should we be moving to a 0-25. That is moving the transition at the age of 25, but at least it's not at the eighteenth birthday. What's the argument around what adolescent, young people and young adults services are, for example? That piece of research and understanding—
You could probably have a gradual transition, then, couldn't you?
Quite potentially. I've got some people who have joined my own health board who've worked in that 0-25-type service, and we're catching up—'Tell me what was good about it? Tell me what was not so good about it? What did the young people themselves think about that?'. Because if we can manage down the numbers of transitions, there really should be no excuse not to get transitions right, then.