Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. As you said, this is the final group and I move the lead amendment—amendment 12.

This amendment will ensure that the abolition of the right to buy and associated rights may not come into effect until at least two years after the Bill receives Royal Assent. As currently drafted, abolition would come into effect after one year. Additionally, amendment 4 is a consequence of amendment 12.

I believe that there is considerable scope for the right to buy grace period to be extended for two years, as it was in Scotland. During our Stage 1 committee proceedings, it was pointed out that the 2011 Measure provided that, where the right to buy was suspended for the maximum duration of 10 years, local authorities were required to wait two years before submitting a further application. According to the Welsh Government's guidance for local authorities on applications to suspend the right to buy and related rights, this was to allow, and I quote, 'a reasonable amount of time' for tenants to consider whether to exercise the right to buy before the authority could apply for another suspension, creating a very clear precedent, in my view.

Given this, Mr Clarke of Welsh Tenants questioned why a shorter time period of 12 months was provided in the Bill for the purpose of enabling tenants to undertake the same considerations ahead of abolition. Additionally, concerns were raised about a potential spike in sales ahead of abolition, which some respondents linked to the 12-month notice period.

Llywydd, these are all significant reasons, in my view, why the grace period should be extended from one year to two. The abolition of the right to buy will have a huge impact on the lives of many aspirational home owners living in the social sector. I have received lots of correspondence on this issue, and I'm sure that other Members have had a similar experience.

Some committee members at Stage 2 raised the objection that this potential law we're considering this afternoon is already in the public domain, so people are already aware of it and its timescale. I have to say I do find this a fairly idealised view of how the public engage with the legislature, but, anyway, I simply don't accept the argument. We cannot implement a piece of fundamental legislation like this with a timescale that is based on the assumption that people will probably be aware of what we're discussing here in the Assembly. During Stage 1, and I reflect on my own constituents' cases, I heard from tenants who weren't even aware that suspension was going ahead in their area, and they were meant to have been consulted. So, I think we must realise this is going to land like a bombshell on the mats of some people when they get that information that the Minister's assured us, despite the lack of a duty to inform, they will get, and I'm pretty sure they will. I don't think the Government is playing fast and loose there, even if I don't think they've chosen the best method to inform tenants and landlords.

So, what we don't want, I think, following the Bill's implementation, is a situation where tenants are taking decisions too quickly. A two-year period will provide reassurance to tenants that they still have a significant amount of time left, should they wish to proceed with the purchase of their homes. That's a second and powerful argument to have a two-year period. Also, a two-year grace period should dampen any expected spike in sales. It is more likely that tenants will take their time and this will lead to a spread of applications, rather than an immediate surge. This was, indeed, the case in Scotland, where a two-year grace period was given to tenants following the abolition of the right to buy in Scotland, and there wasn't any immediate influx of purchases. If you look at their sales, they stayed in a fairly similar pattern.

So, I think there are very clear, practical reasons for extending the grace period from one to two years, and I urge the Assembly to support this amendment.