Leader of the house, can I thank you for your statement this afternoon? I have a number of questions, and I hope you'll be able to answer them specifically. If not, I may have an opportunity to ask you again tomorrow during questions.

You seem to suggest that Openreach have been more than successful in delivering on the terms of the original Superfast Cymru contract, but five months after the drop-dead date, can I ask why you are still unable to provide a definitive list of those premises that haven't received an upgrade? I'm struggling to find why it's so difficult to answer that question. Can you also confirm that Openreach have definitely met the obligations of their original contract, which states that a minimum of 90 per cent of all premises in the contract intervention area are capable of having access to broadband services at a minimum of 30 Mbps, and 95 per cent are able to receive 24 Mbps? Now, you have said in your statement that BT has delivered a significantly larger volume of premises than either party anticipated at the outset of the original project. So, I would struggle to understand why you can't answer that question.

Can I also ask how many premises the second phase will cover? A number of figures have been floated, and my understanding is that the open market review identified 88,000 premises that were considered white premises, and that an assessment of the so-called standard premises had not been included in that figure. So, I'd appreciate any clarification on that. And can I ask how many stranded premises did Openreach manage to complete during the two-month extension, and how many remain? Will these remaining stranded assets be transferred into the next project? You initially envisaged that the Welsh Government would be able to reinvest a predicted £37 million from gain share as a result of take-up of the Superfast Cymru project. You now refer to £31.5 million through the Wales infrastructure investment plan. Can I just ask—I'm not sure what the answer is—is this new money, or is it part of the previously announced £37 million? Can I ask what consideration also has the Government made to require new-build developments over a certain scale to have access to affordable Superfast broadband services without the need for public subsidy?

With regard to the mobile action plan, I think what you call steady progress is actually non-existent progress. I'm sorry to say this, leader of the house, but I really don't think that you've made progress on this. You announced the mobile action plan in January 2017—16 months ago—so what concrete measures can you point to in improving mobile coverage in Wales during that time? So, over the last 16 months, I would say you've done zero in terms of action in reforming existing planning laws, which are delaying and adding costs to enhancing coverage, particularly in rural areas, making Wales the most difficult part in the UK for mobile operators to build infrastructure. And once again, in your statement, you asked for mobile operators to provide yet more evidence. Well, the industry has repeatedly outlined the barriers and solutions that will be required, so why are we experiencing continuing delays? The Scottish Government and the UK Government in England—they've asked for that evidence a long time ago. They've received it from the operators, they've analysed it, they've accepted it, and they've acted on it. So, I am disappointed in this regard. We're falling behind the rest of the UK. And indeed, in England, reform of the planning system has already been enacted. So, do you therefore agree with me that removing the need to process applications from the planning system, via the permitted development rights regime—a principle that is fully accepted everywhere else in the UK—is essential as a matter of urgency? The industry has been clear that reducing the costs of infrastructure deployment is absolutely critical, and I would therefore question why further evidence is required. You have it, so just get on with it so Wales doesn't fall further behind.