It clearly identified a need to raise current residents’ awareness of contractual obligations and to ensure that future residents are clear on the matters before entering into contracts. It also recommended that we consider how poor practice could be identified and addressed. I accept both of these recommendations in principle, and will be inviting colleagues and key stakeholders to work with us on implementing them, including developing materials setting out the very best practice and promoting greater transparency for residents and site owners. In addition, the report highlighted concerns around energy costs and suggested further consideration be given to initiatives to reduce them. Work has already taken place to prevent site owners from charging more than their cost price for energy, and I’m happy to look at how we might encourage site owners to seek out the most cost effective energy deals on the market. Llywydd, it is however the report’s recommendation in relation to commission currently payable to the site owner at the time of sale that causes me most concern and on which I will be focusing today.

Before I do so, it’s worth reflecting on what more has been done to protect park home residents here in Wales than in other parts of the UK. All park home sites in Wales have had to apply for a new licence, and site managers have had to pass a fit-and-proper-person test. Neither England nor Scotland has gone this far. We have consistently sought to help park home residents—for example, site owners can no longer veto sales, and residents must be consulted on changes to site rules. In addition, qualifying residents associations must be recognised in a balanced way, and this will continue to be the case.

Turning back to the commission rate, the consultants’ report rightly highlights the fact that this is a complex issue with the potential for significant consequences. The consultants faced a number of challenges in compiling their report. In spite of the fact that over half the total number of park operators engaged in the research, only a quarter of the operators provided detailed financial information. This is disappointing and means it is difficult to understand fully the economics of the industry at present and the precise implications of making any change to the commission rate. By the same token, Llywydd, neither am I convinced, in the absence of a complete and reliable picture of the industry’s economics, that a case has been made to maintain the status quo. Indeed, I’ve received very strong representations suggesting that there may be good reason to reduce or even abolish the commission rate. Clearly, I must base my final decision on the best possible evidence. I would like, therefore, to invite the park home owners to let me have the evidence that they believe would justify leaving things as they are. Given the paucity of the information submitted to the consultants, it would be particularly useful to have financial evidence drawn from site owners’ business accounts and other relevant sources that they may have.

The options I will consider will include reducing or even abolishing the commission rate, which, at the current time, I am minded to do, but I will not commit further at this stage as I do not want to pre-empt the outcome of the forthcoming public consultation exercise. The report suggests that many park home sites are operating either at a loss or at only a small surplus. This reinforces the need for meaningful financial information because, as well as being fair to residents, in particular, in being able to access homes for themselves, we need to ensure that we do not inadvertently impact on the long-term viability of the park home sector in Wales either, which generally comprises sites smaller than their English counterparts. My portfolio priorities are well-being and economic prosperity. It goes without question therefore that I am anxious to ensure that we strike a balance between the sustainability of the sector and the interests of residents. This will require detailed assessment of the business case for change, but I’m confident we can conduct this exercise with the full engagement of site owners and park home residents.

Llywydd, I will now seek to engage with all those concerned, through representative bodies for both residents and site owners and through further public engagement and consultation. I want to give everyone, on all sides of the debate, a fair and equal chance to have their say, put forward their evidence, and contribute to the debate. I do not believe that the evidence I’ve seen to date points to the desirability of leaving things as they are. I sincerely hope all interested parties will take advantage of the opportunity we will now provide to submit further information and scrutinise the evidence available in greater detail. I intend to commence engagement immediately and will be engaging with the bodies representing both sides, both residents and site owners. The consultation responses will be published as soon as is practicable.

Llywydd, I hope this engagement will provide greater clarity about the issues and enable me to take a balanced view on the next steps regarding the commission rate. In the meantime, my officials will press ahead with developing best practice guidance and addressing the other recommendations of the report. Thank you.