Thank you very much, deputy Deputy Llywydd. I move the amendments, as you noted. We have tabled three amendments to today’s motion, which reflect some elements of the discussion on housing that merit greater scrutiny. The arguments over house prices and the need to assist first-time buyers are often aired. It’s a combination of low wages and uncertain employment, and, therefore, very often, solutions for London aren’t relevant to Wales.

Our first amendment reflects the reality that a number of people in the private rented sector are likely to remain in that sector for a number of years. Therefore, we should aim at improving housing standards in this sector and making them more affordable. It’s clear that letting agency fees are an obstacle for low-income families to move house within the private rented sector. If you are facing paying a fee of hundreds of pounds in order to move, then you are more likely to remain where you are, in inadequate, unsuitable, poor housing. We, as a party, have tabled amendments to previous legislation to abolish these letting agency fees, but things are moving very slowly, and we call on the Welsh Government to abolish these letting fees.

Our second amendment directs us to look at what happens to new homes when they are built. The trend of building new houses everywhere in order to have affordable housing isn’t working, obviously. What is the point of building 20,000 new homes if the vast majority are purchased by buy-to-let investors? We have to look at alternative solutions. Historically, buy-to-let investors have faced fewer barriers than young families who are first-time buyers. That is why we have ‘generation rent’.

We welcome some recent changes to taxation law and further regulation in the sector, but we must go further. Our amendment calls upon the Welsh Government to study ways in which the planning system can be further used to prioritise the building of homes for those who are first-time buyers and families, and to prevent new developments from being dominated excessively by buy-to-let and second-home ownership.

So, to our final amendment. We note that local infrastructure is required to support the building of new homes. It is pointless to build houses that ostensibly look affordable, but without the public transport, active travel and other public series being available locally. Our amendment regrets the fact that austerity has often meant that investment in public services and community facilities hasn’t been possible. In fact, all of these services are contracting and are under threat everywhere. Some proposals for housing development can be ostensibly affordable, but may be unsustainable as a result of economic austerity and hardship.

There has also been a question mark recently over the quality of new homes that are being built, with a report in Westminster last year outlining many problems with the quality of even brand-new houses. So, to conclude, we cannot resolve our housing problems by building everywhere in a climate of cuts and austerity, while the basic challenges of low salaries, uncertain employment and social injustice prevail. Thank you.