The next item on our agenda is the statement by the Cabinet Secretary for Communities and Children on fire safety in Wales, and the steps being taken following the Grenfell Tower fire. I call on the Cabinet Secretary to make a statement—Carl Sargeant.

Thank you, Llywydd. Everyone is, of course, horrified by the tragic fire at Grenfell Tower in west London last week. On behalf of the Welsh Government, and, I’m sure, those of the whole Assembly, I should like to convey my deepest sympathies to those who have been affected by it.

Everyone wants to understand what happened and how to prevent it from happening again. This is just as true in Wales as it is elsewhere, and I am determined to ensure we learn the lessons and act upon them. We will approach this thoroughly and comprehensively. However, some of those lessons are already reasonably clear. Buildings like Grenfell Tower are constructed so that a fire in a single flat can be contained and therefore extinguished before it spreads. This is a critical safety feature for residents of high-rise buildings. Its catastrophic failure at Grenfell Tower accounted for the tragic outcome. While we must await the findings of the fire investigation, it appears that the direct cause of that failure may have been the use of combustible cladding on the outside of the building. Once the fire spread to the cladding, there was little the London fire brigade could do to contain it.

We have therefore completed a first round of urgent discussions with all residential social landlords in Wales. Between them, they own 36 blocks of flats of seven or more storeys. Social landlords have told us none appear to be fitted with the type of cladding used at Grenfell Tower. Seven blocks in Wales have been retrofitted with sprinklers, and, of course, where any new or converted high-rise residential blocks are developed here, under the changes introduced as part of the Domestic Fire Safety Measure (Wales) 2011, they would be required to include sprinklers. The requirements were introduced for flats and houses on 1 January 2016.

Installing sprinklers in new housing and as part of refurbishment programmes, which some Welsh councils and housing associations have already done, will go a long way to minimising the risk of death and injury from fire. I hope this gives some immediate assurance to residents of those premises. That, though, is not the end of the matter, and there is certainly no cause for complacency. A fire or any other disaster on this scale does not have just one cause. There was probably a whole chain of failures that led to the events of last week. These may have included the design and refurbishment of the building, the immediate cause of the fire, the raising of the alarm and the accessibility of the premises for firefighters.

All of that needs to be analysed and understood if we are to prevent similar tragedies in future, whether in high-rise social housing or other premises indeed. We are therefore setting up an expert group, including representatives from the social housing and fire sectors, which will be chaired by my chief fire and rescue adviser. It will examine all of the lessons coming out from the Grenfell Tower tragedy and their application to Wales. It will also consider how prepared we are to deal with such an incident if that occurs. Our civil contingency capability has been amply demonstrated, most recently in the Champions League final. But responding to a disaster on the scale of Grenfell Tower would be a different matter altogether. So, again, we need to make certain our capability to do that, and that lessons from the emerging events in London are learnt.

At the same time, I and my officials are in regular contact with counterparts in England and Scotland to ensure that we pool intelligence and share learning. This process is at a very early stage and it will be some time before the full truth about what happened in Grenfell Tower is known. However, I and my colleagues are completely committed to acting on the findings, while doing all that we can do in the meantime to keep the people of Wales safe from fire. Llywydd, I will make a further statement to the Assembly as work progresses.

Llywydd, can I join with the Cabinet Secretary in expressing our deepest sympathy for all those bereaved and to say that the victims are in our thoughts and prayers at the moment? The Grenfell Tower fire was truly appalling and must lead to a comprehensive review of fire safety regulations. Can I thank the Cabinet Secretary for making such a prompt statement? I definitely think that was the appropriate way to proceed. I’d just like to raise some issues that I think need to be examined and no doubt the Cabinet Secretary will do that either this afternoon or as a result of the various inquiries that are now taking place.

I understand from Community Housing Cymru that half of their members’ tower blocks that were built in the 1960s have been fitted with sprinklers. This means, therefore, that half have not. But I note, from the information I’ve had from Cardiff, that sometimes sprinklers are in bin chutes and not elsewhere. So, I think we need to look at this. There may be sprinklers in buildings but we need to be assured that they are where they need to be, also, within those buildings.

Can I move to cladding and insulation? We do need to be reassured that any cladding in place is fire resistant. We’re obviously moving to cladding as many buildings as possible to meet new energy requirements, but I’m sure many people have been shocked that it may be a fault in the cladding material or how it is installed that has been a material cause in this tragedy. I’m sure that will come as a shock and a surprise to many people. So, we need an audit immediately, I think, of these materials and how they have been installed.

I know that we’ve been told by the likes of Cardiff council and CHC that high-quality insulation materials have generally been used, such as Rockwool, but again there’s an issue of installation and we need to know that there aren’t the presence of inadequate materials somewhere in our housing stock.

Can I turn to planning? I was reassured to hear that the Cabinet Secretary is going to look at how local authorities develop and plan. Their emergency plans clearly need to be robust. I think we’ve all followed the news and heard the criticisms of the quality of the initial response. Some of the failings, I think, are because the scale of the tragedy was not fully planned for. One can understand, I suppose, in some ways, that one doesn’t want to make these preparations, but, of course, it is part of the duty of the civic authorities to be prepared for appalling possibilities like this occurring. And I think how to involve residents and volunteers in the way the community and the authorities respond is very important.

I now turn briefly to building controls. Again, I hope that the expert group that has been set up—and I welcome this, as I think that, again, is an appropriate thing to do—will be able to look at building controls and standards. These are minimum standards and they need to be reviewed and updated regularly. It’s most important to know, in relation to both the materials and how they are installed, how building regulations operate effectively. Building regulations is a system that is based on compliance and not on inspection—a point that was referred to earlier. I think, again, we need to be assured that this is adequate, because leaving it to the responsibility of those undertaking the works or building for the first time does create a weakness in the system if there is not, at least on a selective basis, some prospect of inspection so that we can be assured that compliance is seen as a system that can operate in general terms.

I welcome the further statement that he’s going to make and can I urge that that statement is an oral one? Thank you.

I thank the Member for his questions and the conversations that we’ve had offline of Plenary. First of all, the issue of sprinklers and the installation and appropriateness of them. As the Member will be aware, we introduced a Measure for new builds and retrofit builds. Some of the high-rise blocks have been already installed. That will be part of the investigation by the team and the chief fire officer, to see what the extent of that provision is, particularly in the high-rise block at this moment. I think, what I’m hoping to be able to do is a two-part programme of assessment. So, where we take the major risk of high-rise blocks of flats like the tower block in London, we’re going to have a very quick investigation into those and then move on to other potential risk buildings as well, of the lower level.

In terms of cladding, early indications, as I said earlier, would indicate that no buildings have been installed with cladding similar to the one that was used at the Grenfell Tower flats. However, in line with concerns and to give additional certainty, these will all be inspected and I’ve also instructed my team—I think there are only 18 samples required—that 18 samples be removed and tested by the agencies appropriately to give us assurance of that. Both inspection and quality is an important process in terms of ensuring confidence for residents.

I don’t believe that the systems in place are in the same condition as that of those in some English authorities. I do believe that we are ahead of the curve, but we are not complacent. I think we’ve got a lower stock level and, therefore, we’re able to manage that in a different way. But the registered social landlords and local authorities are very keen to ensure that they are feeding back detail on that.

In terms of building regulations, this is split between Lesley Griffiths and myself. Lesley Griffiths manages building regulations, but we are working very closely together in terms of making sure that building regulations and safety certificates are appropriate, and we will look at that as part of the review. The chief fire officer will report on that. I will, as I said in the statement, make a further detailed statement once we have some more information from the UK Government.

I, too, would like to offer my condolences to those who lost their lives in this tragic circumstance. I’d also like to praise the Welsh volunteers who were in the media today and who have gone and helped those at Grenfell, and I would like to encourage that to happen. Where we can see that there is human tragedy across borders, then we should try and help others, as far as I’m concerned. But it is also a message to us all that we need to be proactive in these issues, and we shouldn’t be reactive when it comes to issues like safety. It’s important that we are at the front of the political agenda in this regard.

Many of my comments or questions are in relation to your consultation on ‘Building Regulations Update—Approved Documents A, B & C’ from last year. Part B relates to fire safety in particular. In that consultation, it was noted that the consultation proposed, and I quote, the same changes as the Department of Communities and Local Government have made in England. The English impact assessment identified significant benefits, one of those being reduced costs to development and manufacturers, together with energy efficiency and carbon savings. Now, can you tell me that you’re absolutely satisfied that these savings do not compromise safety in England and would not compromise safety here in Wales? We know, sometimes, that costs seem to override other things, and, in this instance, as we know from this occasion, it should not come before safety.

The sections relating to lighting notes there are some issues, because certain types of lighting are more susceptible to causing fire, yet are more energy efficient, and I quote:

‘This presents a growing conflict between the provisions for fire safety and those for energy efficiency.’

Can the Cabinet Secretary clarify the regulations and any plans relating to lighting installation safety in particular? In this particular consultation, as well, you responded as a Government saying that it was awaiting outcomes from a European Commission project into the regulation of smoke and toxic gas before making any revisions regulating this. Has your position now changed on that particular issue?

As has been mentioned earlier, Wales has led the way in terms of sprinkler provision to some extent, and I know that Ann Jones deserves praise for that. We know, as David Melding has said, that housing authorities are installing sprinkler systems in many areas, and Community Housing Cymru has sent us that briefing. But this still hasn’t happened in many of them and we need to make sure that this does happen. So, do you have any plans to strengthen regulations regarding the installation of sprinklers, and have you had any discussions regarding making more funding available for that to take place in older buildings?

In the communities committee, you came and we scrutinised you last September, and I asked you specifically about safety regulations regarding appliance and device fires, as there has been a rise in fires relating to these issues. It was also noted that Electrical Safety First has been lobbying you on this for some time. You implied to the committee that you didn’t see legislation as being required as certain aspects were covered previously as part of the wider housing Bill. As a precautionary measure—as I started this statement by saying—to try and be proactive, will you now commit to looking into how electrical safety and the risks associated with appliance and device fires potentially need changing, or if there’s anything you can do in terms of improved regulation?

I note that there is going to be an inquiry in London, of course, and I would be interested to find out, when the parameters of that inquiry come into play, how you will be feeding into that inquiry on a Wales basis. I note too that Scotland has set up its own review. I’m wondering why you’ve opted for an expert group over carrying out a root-and-branch review in Wales. I understand that they will be trying to do that in a different way, but can you just satisfy me as to why you haven’t decided to do a review in and of itself, and how this expert group will take into regard the issues with regard to this consultation? Because I, personally, don’t know where many of the issues that were raised in the building regulations update consultation have gone, and I don’t think we can now rest on our laurels. We have to make sure that this becomes a political priority, perhaps in tragic circumstances, yes, but then it can stop anything like this ever happening again, and make sure as well that tenants feel listened to. Because I think, from watching the news, that seemed to be one of the biggest concerns—tenants did raise concerns. We have to make sure that we have avenues in place for tenants to feel that they can make those complaints without feeling that they will be reprimanded in any way, because they’re only raising those concerns for the safety of themselves and for the safety of their neighbours.

Of course, and I thank the Member for her constructive questions. In terms of the detailed questions on the building regulations specifically, they do lie with Lesley Griffiths. What I will do is ask the Minister to write to you, but put a copy of those responses in the library for Members too.

In terms of fire and fire application, what happened in Grenfell Tower fire was tragic. It’s still unknown about the cause of ignition there, but what we do know is that fires in Wales have been reduced by over 50 per cent since devolution of the fire service. So, fires are becoming less frequent here, despite the tragic events that did take place there. We need to learn lessons from that, and whether that was through appliance or otherwise, we still have to wait to find out what actually caused the fire and what the catalyst was for the fire to move so quickly within the building structure.

I’m very keen to ensure that residents have a view on the quality of their housing stock and their relationship with RSLs and local authorities, and I will ensure that continues. I think we’ve got, again, a very different relationship—what happens in Wales and what happens in England.

With regard to the inspection regime that I’ve asked my chief fire officer and team to look at, this is a very specific piece of work on the high-rise blocks of flats of seven storeys or more. Currently, there are 31 of them and, therefore, that will be a very quick piece of work. I spoke to the housing Minister in Westminster on Saturday afternoon, and I spoke to the Scottish Minister yesterday morning, and we are working on a collective piece of work about how we can share this intelligence. I don’t think it makes any sense for us to do three pieces of separate work. The piece of work I’ve instigated is about our very particular stock and, therefore, that will feed into the overall principle of what we work to together, but I will keep the Member informed.

Thanks to the Minister for his statement today. Yes, this was a major tragedy. I would also like to offer my condolences. As you say, the main thing is that we do learn lessons from it and ensure nothing like that happens in Wales in the future. I think your action in swiftly setting up the expert group is welcome. There are various points that have been made. Bethan made the very valid point that there’s evidence that the tenants group in London actually did warn about a fire previously, so I wondered whether there was any way of, perhaps, regularising procedures whereby tenants groups interact with their landlords, housing associations or local authorities. I wondered what you thought about that.

There are seeming discrepancies about the provision of sprinklers in older blocks. Seemingly, Swansea and Flintshire do have sprinklers already, but Cardiff doesn’t. So, I’m not sure why there is a discrepancy, but perhaps that needs to be addressed.

Another aspect was student accommodation, because there are large student halls of residence that have been constructed recently in Cardiff, and probably in Swansea and Newport as well. I don’t know whether any of them would be brought into the category of high-rise blocks or whether the provisions they’ve got in those buildings need to be looked at.

I don’t know if Jenny Rathbone is speaking in this one, so I’ll just return to the point she made earlier, which was a very specific point about the powers of local government being restored in relation to building inspections. I know that may be slightly beyond your remit, but if you have any thoughts on that, they would be welcome. Thank you.

Thank you. The Member will be aware that we already fund tenants participation groups to feed back into Government and also to local authorities and RSLs, in the way that operates. Already, RSLs do work very closely with their groups, independently of the tenants participation groups, in addition to that.

The nature of the sprinkler programme—some buildings are affected for future use by the sprinkler Measure, which we introduced in the Assembly in 2011. The issue with the buildings the Member talked about will be retrofitting, which doesn’t come under the Measure. However, this is something I’ve asked the fire inspector to look at in particular.

I listened carefully to Jenny’s points around the independent inspectors, and your contribution also. I don’t have any evidence to suggest that the independent inspectors are acting inappropriately in their inspection regime. If the Member has any evidence of that, I would be very interested in the detail of that, but I have noted the comments and I will ask my team to look at that specifically.

Can I thank the Minister for his statement today and place on record my condolences too for those who lost their lives last week? I’m very grateful to Bron Afon Community Housing for meeting with me very promptly last week to discuss the repercussions of this terrible tragedy for Torfaen. As you’ll be aware, Cabinet Secretary, we have three high-rise blocks in Torfaen, and, thankfully, they’ve all been retrofitted with sprinklers. However, there is still anxiety in the community, and I understand from Bron Afon that the sprinklers are currently tested six monthly, so I would be interested to know whether there is any view in Government as to whether six monthly is the right interval to test those sprinklers, or whether there is likely to be any further guidance forthcoming.

Similarly, the fire exercises in the high-rise blocks are also undertaken six monthly, and I would be interested in your views on the timeliness of that. There is, as I’m sure you’re aware, a lot of anxiety now out there, and I’ve been contacted by many constituents who are very worried following the events last week, and many of them live in lower rise buildings in Torfaen—none of which have sprinklers and all of which have had external cladding fitted. So, I would be interested in your comments, particularly on how quickly you will be able to move to reassure the public, through inspection and other measures, about the safety of those lower rise buildings. But it also strikes me that housing providers—and in Torfaen all the housing stock has been transferred—have an absolutely crucial role to play now in ensuring that there is reassurance given to the public and that communication is very clear. Bron Afon have issued a very brief ‘frequently asked questions’, but it certainly doesn’t answer all the questions I’ve given them, and I would personally like to see more detailed information given, not just to tenants, but also to leaseholders and other residents affected. So, I would be interested to know what guidance you are giving to housing providers on how that communication should take place, because I don’t think it should just be a sheet of paper. It needs to be face to face, there needs to be use of social media, and the whole variety of modes used. Thank you.

I thank the Member for her questions and the conversations we’ve had, also, around this. On the issue of six-monthly testing of both alarms and sprinkler services, we have to be a little bit cautious that what we don’t do is push the testing system into a frenzy. What happened in London was tragic, and we have to learn about what the events were that led to that process. It is clear that there are some fundamental failures within some of the spend there, in terms of whether that be cladding or whether that be operational issues within the building itself. It is my job, and that of RSLs and local authorities, to give people living in tower blocks or in other accommodation in Wales confidence that they are as safe as they can be within the systems that we operate, and I believe the six-month testing rule is appropriate where things are in place to ensure the safety continues.

In terms of the lower blocks and accommodation, the reason why we’ve gone for the seventh floor and above is because the aerial platforms of fire authorities can’t reach anything beyond that, whereas all the buildings that the Member talked about are accessible for the fire service, and I hope that gives confidence to your residents and constituents. On the issue of the lagging that we used and the issues around the WHQS, it’s not just about an environmental issue; this is about making sure the internals and externals of the envelope of the building are upgraded. So, it’s not just about energy conservation, but actually it makes a better living solution for the people in those properties, and we are not aware of the same material being used as it was in London anywhere in those processes in Wales. So, I do hope we can give your constituents and all constituents across Wales confidence that the conditions we have in place, with the regulations that are in place, are a safe environment for them to live in.

The first thing I’d like to do is offer my condolences to all those who have been affected by this, but also my thanks, alongside everybody else, to those who helped in the rescue of those individuals and the support thereafter. I don’t want to repeat some of the comments that have been said, but I do think that there is one very obvious statement that has to be made here today, and that is that not one single person in the UK has ever died in a building where a fire sprinkler has been fitted. And I will leave further comments on that to my colleague Ann Jones, who I hope will take part in this debate later on.

What I want to bring your attention to are some of the issues that haven’t been mentioned here in the Chamber this morning: the issue about stairways in high-rise blocks or houses of multiple occupation, and whether you consider, when we are moving forward in looking at when planning is being granted, that they must have some multiple stairways, so that they can provide different routes in and out, as has been evidenced as being probably a positive move forward by the experts who attended this most dreadful scene. I would also ask that the standard of the materials that are being used is seriously examined, because we have some dispute about that at the moment. It is clear, whatever that dispute is, possibly, that the standard of the materials that were used may well have complied with the existing guidance, but it seems possible that the existing guidance wasn’t stringent enough.

The other thing I would ask you to consider, Cabinet Secretary: we all know that letting agents play a major role in people seeking accommodation, whether that’s students or others, within the city. I would like to suggest that letting agents also secure some fire safety certificates from those landlords of HMOs so that those people then moving into those accommodations can feel at least confident that those checks have been made.

I thank the Member for her comments. I think today, certainly, is not a day for the politics of sprinklers. We in Wales made a conscious decision to introduce sprinklers into legislation, and it hopefully will have a positive effect in terms of the relationship that the Member makes reference to. What we’ve got to remember is that these buildings—particularly around Grenfell Tower and some of the older, larger multi-storey buildings—are pre-1976 build, and the building regulations are pre-1974. We’ve moved a long way in that process now, into modern-day proposals. But what we’ve got to ensure is, when there are alterations made to those buildings, that they comply with modern standards, and therefore the quality of the workmanship on those buildings is paramount to ensure that we get that right. As I said earlier, I will be asking the chief fire officer to give me a full report on the buildings currently in situ, then we’ll move on to the next phase in terms of what happens with other buildings of less risk, albeit still carrying a risk. I think it’s going to have to be a two-stage approach in terms of that, alongside the building regulations and fire safety certificates. My understanding is that the current fire certificates are only considered for the internals of a building. So, the cladding element of a building would not be counted in that. Maybe that’s something that we should consider as we move forward as well.

Cabinet Secretary, thank you for your statement today, and the speed with which you brought it forward. Our thoughts and prayers are, of course, with the victims and their families of the terrible fire that consumed the Grenfell Tower in west London last week. The images were truly horrific and will live with many people for the rest of their lives. We need to ensure that nothing similar happens anywhere in the UK again.

I’m pleased that you’ve had discussions with social landlords. You said earlier that cladding of the type used on the Grenfell Tower and the cladding that increasingly seems to have been responsible for spreading the fire so quickly has not been fitted to buildings in Wales. I think you’re right on that. However, we need to be absolutely clear that the cladding that has been used is as safe as it possibly can be. Are you confident, from your discussions—and I appreciate this is early days—that the other types of cladding that have been used are appropriate? And can I concur with David Melding’s call for an audit of the materials that have been used? Because many materials might not have been as bad or as flammable as those used in the Grenfell Tower, but materials will have their flammability level. So, we need to be sure that, in any situation of fire and heat, those materials will be as safe as possible and not spread a fire in the same way that happened last week.

Secondly, it wasn’t just the materials themselves that were to blame. Again, it looks increasingly the case that it was the way that they were fitted to the building: on a framework, and with a gap between the material and the facade of the original building. In that situation, the gap that’s created can result in a funnel effect—a chimney. It seems as though the fire actually spread up behind the cladding once it burnt through it, and then reached the upper levels of the building. So, it’s not just the cladding; it’s the way that it’s attached as well. So, can you ensure that any audit looks at the way that cladding on Welsh buildings has been fitted?

Can I finally call for a review? I think Bethan Jenkins—and other Members—called for a review of building regulations in Wales. I’m not saying that there’s anything wrong with the regs that we’ve got, but I think this is a fast-moving situation and any lessons that can be learned from the tragedy last week, and changes that can be implemented here to ensure that doesn’t happen again, will be welcome. As Lynne Neagle said, there is a need at the moment—and we do appreciate the fact that there are more sprinklers fitted in Welsh buildings than is the case with these types of buildings, certainly, in London and England—but there is a need to reassure people living in those flats, and with social landlords, that they are living in safety. Finally, we need to look at the guidance as well. I believe that, in the case last week, people were told to stay in their homes. That possibly wasn’t the right advice. I know that we do have sprinklers here, which makes the situation different, but can you look at the guidance so that people can have absolute confidence that they are doing the right thing if and when these sorts of tragedies occur?

Thank you. As I indicated earlier, I agree with the Member with regard to the make-up of the composite of the materials, and I’ve asked for samples to be taken from all of the buildings that hold lagging—multi-storey buildings—for inspection. They will be tested, irrespective of what we understand of the product already, although we do know that it’s not the same system that was used in London as in our services. Nevertheless, to give confidence to people in Wales, I think we should do that as the bare minimum.

In terms of the building regs, I would err on the side that we are stronger in some cases in terms of the development of our building regs. They have been reviewed recently, but I’m sure the Minister and myself will have further conversations about how we may need to strengthen them post the review of the fire service inspectorate.

In terms of sprinklers, the Members is also right to raise this issue. The Member will be aware that I was heavily criticised for introducing more red tape into the system and for introducing more cost into the system, by builders and other interested parties. I didn’t regret it then and I do not regret it now—this is the very reason why we need to ensure that we have safe buildings for people, and sprinklers are the option. I hope that other parts of the country will take that on board too.

In terms of the guidance issued, we are confident that the guidance issued by RSLs and local authorities is appropriate where the building framework acts appropriately. What we saw in Grenfell Tower, where residents were told to stay in situ, was that that would have been fine subject to fire doors working properly, or fire doors being installed properly. There is an awful lot of detail to come from the investigation into Grenfell Tower, but our guidance and practices are being reviewed and we will consider that as we move forward.

Like other Members, I would add my condolences to all those affected by these tragic events. I also want to place on record my thanks to colleagues from the emergency services and in particular my former colleagues, both firefighters and control-room staff, many of whom will be returning to the scene of that tragedy for some days, and for some considerable time, which reawakens all of the issues that many of them have faced.

Minister, thanks to the First Minister, and to you—and you’ve alluded to it—together will colleagues in this Chamber, Wales did pass that legislation requiring mandatory fitting of sprinklers into all new home builds, and we became the first country to do so. Like you, having faced a barrage of opposition, I still feel that what we did was right, and I stand by what we did, and I stand shoulder to shoulder with you and the First Minister for that very brave decision that you took. I believe that will serve our communities well in the future, and if that’s what we are as politicians—that’s what we’re about; protecting our communities.

Now, there have been lots of calls about retrofitting with sprinklers, and there is some good research. Lynne Neagle mentioned that Bron Afon have retrofitted sprinklers in their high-rises, but there’s also another piece of research at Callow Mount in Sheffield, which does need to have an airing amongst people who are looking at retrofitting. As you said to my colleague Joyce Watson, today is not the day to talk about the introduction of sprinklers, but the day will come when we should be pushing for more sprinklers, for the legislation to be reactivated, and activated elsewhere. When that day does come, Minister, will you join with me in doing all we can to show that other parts of the UK, and indeed other countries in the world, can learn from the brave decisions that you as a Welsh Government took in passing sprinkler legislation?

I thank Ann Jones for her contribution again, and, I suppose, congratulations—only last week the Member received an award, an international award, based on the legislation that she pursued as an individual Member’s debate. As a former firefighter, I have never seen such a ferocious fire as I saw at the Grenfell Tower block fire. Something significantly went wrong in that space, and I pay tribute to the emergency services and volunteers and family members who tried to rescue individuals in that community. It must be a tragic event that will tower over those communities for many years to come.

I think the Member is right to raise the issue of the importance of the legislation, the brave move I think we did take in terms of the lobbying that we received on the back of introduction. But I, likewise, with the Member, think we were right to do that then, and we are right to continue with that programme into the future.

And finally, Jeremy Miles.

Can I also extend my condolences to those who lost their lives and lost their homes in the Grenfell Tower, which is an example of what happens when a society fails to protect the most powerless in the place where they should feel safest? Most of the questions I have have been answered. I have two outstanding questions. Firstly, what arrangements will be in place between the Welsh Government and the UK Government inquiry to ensure that Welsh Government has timely access to evidence given to that inquiry, so that lessons can be learnt in real time? Secondly, where culpable parties are identified as part of the chain of causation, what steps will the Welsh Government take to ascertain whether those parties have been involved in any Welsh public procurement?

I thank the Member for his question. I spoke to the UK Minister, as I said, on Saturday afternoon, and the Scottish Minister yesterday. We are in early discussions about what that review may look like and how the interfaces between the three Governments will look at that, and I will continue to inform the Assembly of the detail of that as that comes forward. As to the Member’s latter question, it is a little bit premature on the basis that we haven’t had the review yet, and I will caution on offering advice on that, but we will look at that very carefully, subject to any evidence coming forward.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary.