May I begin by commending the Minister for a careful and thoughtful approach to developing public policy in this area? It is a complicated area, as you've suggested. We clearly need a strong business model for park home owners. At their best, park homes and park home owners create a pleasant environment in which to live. Investment in facilities such as roads, grounds, common areas, needs an income flow that is reliable.

Generally, I think the Welsh Government's study of this area has been rigorous and even-handed, though there are still evidence gaps, as you indicated, Minister. I feel that the Welsh Government is proposing a way forward that could, at least in the Chamber, gain a consensus, because we do need to strike a balance, it seems, between commission fees at the moment and pitch fees, and this needs to be based on transparency, fairness, accountability, business viability and flexibility, and there have been some encouraging signs of progress here, in terms of the co-operation you've had with the sector and their more candid approach to revealing costs, because that is very important. I would say also that some form of flexibility in the future, where people may want to commit to a commission fee or a set fee when they sell, and then not face, perhaps, an increase in the pitch fee to reflect the general service costs that many people, say, in rented accommodation will be quite familiar with—. And I think we do have to remember that up to 80 per cent of the resale value achieved on park homes is because they're in a park home site, and if those mobile homes were not there, then they would lose a very substantial part of their current value. So, these issues are complicated.

So, we will support the Welsh Government's proposals, subject to their regular review. This is likely, in my view, to shift to higher pitch fees, and that will need careful monitoring to ensure that they're fair, and, as I have said, they need to be accountable and transparent, and also consult with the mobile home owners—very, very important. So, I have this question anyway: you say that you will issue refreshed information about park home living, and I just wonder whether it would be possible to go further and issue formal guidance so that it would have greater strength in regulating the key actors in this area, from the park home owners but also the local authorities that have enforcement responsibilities. But, in general, I do want to acknowledge that a lot of hard work has gone into this, and I do think you've come forward with a viable solution—certainly one that can now be fully tested—and the way you seek to introduce it by a 1 per cent reduction over five years, I think, again, is prudent. So, in general, I would give a welcome to your statement this afternoon.