Can I say I agree with the core of the consultants’ report, particularly in respect of raising residents’ awareness about the nature and extent of contractual arrangements, identifying and addressing poor practice and initiatives to regulate and, if possible, reduce energy costs? So, on that bit that doesn’t seem terribly controversial and would benefit the whole sector, I wonder when you will be bringing forward proposals to ensure that that part of the consultants’ report is activated as soon as possible.

We then come to the other part of the matter, and that’s the commission fees. I think he’s right to start with that statement, but the sustainability of this sector is the first thing, because if we have considerable exit, and suddenly, then that's going to cause huge problems. So, we do need to be more fully aware of the economics of this particular sector. It is, indeed, disappointing that this was not sufficiently forthcoming in the consultant’s work and I think we would all encourage site owners, if they've been reluctant so far to submit the financial information, that they now engage, because we probably will need to take action in this area, and we need to fully understand the evidence base to make the most coherent public policy possible.

And I think you're right: the aim is to strike a balance between the sustainability of the sector and residents’ interests, and there, you know, there is a concept of a reasonable return, which we have to face. In general, I don't like commission rates. I think it should be the rent or the cost of the site pitch. That's really where you can most logically focus the costs of providing that service and also that, potentially, is more stable, because, at the minute, if it is embedded in the business model, then there’s an element of chance of when you're going to get the commission—obviously, that’s reliant on people selling. So, I hope there's a more rational structure waiting to be discovered fairly soon. I'd like to know what time frame you're going to set for the consultation, because I think people do want action fairly soon, but, obviously, building up the evidence base, that's probably going to take some time. I think, perhaps, some preparation that certain site owners will exit—I hope it's not a large number, but I think that needs to be now part of the public policy development in this area. Finally, you said, ‘abolish or reduce’. Of course, this commission has already been reduced a long time ago now—1983, I think—when it came down from 15 per cent to 10 per cent. So, if you were to reduce it to something like 8 per cent, I think you could have everyone thinking that’s a poor policy. It does seem to me that your choice is abolish or leave it as it is. I just wonder if you are going to rule out tampering with the rate and rather just confirm that you want to take this question fully on, because it's high time, really, that we give clarity in this sector. Thank you.