Plaid Cymru supports this motion today, as we do accept that there are pragmatic reasons as well as sound budgetary reasons for this legislation. The categorisation of housing associations as public corporations means that they will be treated like public bodies in terms of their accounts, and that, of course, has major implications as borrowing of the housing associations will be counted against the financial ceiling of the Welsh Government. And, in turn, that could have a detrimental impact on the ability of the sector to build houses at the very time when there is a great shortage of social housing, creating a real crisis in many parts of Wales. But—and there is a 'but', and a relatively important 'but' this afternoon—I do have some concerns that deregulation, and this is what we’re talking about, deregulation, could lead to some unanticipated outcomes and outcomes that could militate against some of the core principles of housing associations as they currently stand. It’s important to bear in mind that housing associations are not a private sector vehicle for generating profits, but a structure to provide services for our most vulnerable people.

We have heard today from both the committees—well, we’ve heard from one of the committees and we’ll hear from the other later on—who have had an opportunity to scrutinise the general principles before us today. But my question is that I wonder whether that scrutiny has been too narrow and limited in its scope, bearing in mind that they covered constitutional and financial issues mainly. Now, I believe that we need to take a broader view in order to assuage some of the concerns that I have. I would like to see the Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee having an opportunity to scrutinise this issue—not the Bill itself, but to scrutinise what these changes in the light of deregulation could mean for the future of the social housing sector in Wales.

There are some questions that we need to seek solutions or answers to. Would deregulation mean a change of strategic priorities for housing associations? Would it mean a greater emphasis on generating profits, and would that mean, for example, that rural areas would lose out? Because we all know that it is cheaper to build large estates in urban areas than it is to build clusters of homes in rural areas, but that sort of development is much needed in our rural areas. Are we going to see less building in rural areas, consequently leading to depopulation and the decline of the Welsh language?

We’ve spoken here about another concern already, which is the loss of accountability and democracy. We talked about the tenant’s voice, but the voice of councillors can be clearly heard in management boards at the moment. Now, with the reduction in the percentage, then those voices, the voices of councillors and tenants, may be diluted and, in turn, lead to less accountability, and that brings us back to this idea that management boards could change strategic direction, contrary to what we’re trying to achieve in this area.

We must bear in mind that the housing stock has been transferred from the hands of local authorities to housing associations in many areas of Wales. One could argue that that move has led to a decline in accountability already. There is concern that the next step that this Bill will lead to could lead to the loss of even greater accountability and to that change of strategic direction that I’ve mentioned, which could militate against the whole purpose of housing associations.

So, I do feel that we must move very carefully from this point, securing amendments that will secure the democratic voice, but also safeguard the core purpose of housing associations: for me, building the right kind of homes for the people who need them—yes, that—but also building them in those places where they are required, not where the market drives those developments. So, we need to be very aware of the risks of deregulation and consider what steps need to be taken to resolve some of the concerns that I’ve raised today. I would suggest that the Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee could make a contribution to that discussion. Thank you.