Yes, and I think that's exactly why we have raised concerns at each stage, and I think that's true to say of our concerns for the future, because if it's happening now, how can we put checks and balances in place via this Bill to make sure it doesn't happen in future? So, we will be listening carefully to the Government's response on these amendments, but we are currently minded to also support the amendments tabled by Nick Ramsay and David Melding, to help strengthen the protections available for tenants when social landlords go through major changes. And I've been listening to the debate already today, and I think, actually, have become stronger in my view that we need to put these amendments forward, because these are fundamental reasons, actually, as to how changes happen. If there are financial crises, or if an organisation does have to go into receivership, there's more of a reason, actually, to consult, because it may have a detrimental effect on the tenants and how they may live their lives. So, I think that's something that we need to consider further at this stage and at further stages of the Bill. We've got to recognise also that social landlords have a unique and different relationship with their tenants to that of other landlords, and it's entirely appropriate that tenants are consulted and, crucially, listened to.

There is a risk that this Bill may effectively lead to social landlords becoming more like private enterprises—and the deregulation point has been made already—and it may lead to housing associations diversifying how they build their stock, and we really do need to keep a watching brief on that. This is why I think it's important that we have protections in this Bill. I appreciate that there is a piece of work ongoing about tenant regulations and their participation by an independent body, but I think the Government would do well to understand that, when I visited—and I'm sure other Assembly Members have visited—housing associations and talked to their tenants, they want more engagement and more power, and not less engagement and less power. If we can do anything within any of our capacity with regard to legislation to enhance that, then I don't see that as being a negative.