Thanks to the Minister for your statement today. I appreciate, from what you’ve said and from what the other contributors have said, that this has been something of a long-running issue. As you mentioned, opinions have tended to be polarised, particularly on the one particular issue of the commission rates. So, it has been a difficult job for you. I can see that that would be the case.

Now, you’ve stressed the need for balance—the need to strike a balance between differing interests—in your statement, and I think that’s of paramount importance, so I agree with you that that was what you needed to do. There is a need to protect the interests of the whole park home community. After all, we don’t want well-run parks to close down. You mentioned that many of the people who live in park homes tend to be older people. Well, there is already a shortage of suitable accommodation for older people in society in general, so we don’t really want to exacerbate that problem with contributing to well-run park home sites actually closing down. So, we do need to be very mindful of that danger.

I was made aware of some of the issues around park homes about a year ago when I was invited to visit one near Culverhouse Cross on the western fringe of Cardiff. So, I went on a bit of a tour of the park. I had fairly free access to various residents—they weren’t by any means hand-picked for me to speak to—and, in general, the residents seemed to enjoy living in that community, and they seemed to very much value the village-like feeling that they had from living there. So, we do need, again, to be aware that there are many well-run park homes where people are enjoying that particular kind of lifestyle. Now, I appreciate that that isn’t the full picture. There are probably homes that are not run as well, and you alluded to differing experiences that people have. I’m aware that there are poorly managed homes too, so we need to address that.

Now, the financial elements are interesting, because you’ve stated that you were given a lot of access by the site owners—they very much co-operated in allowing your independent financial analysts to look at the accounts. So, you did have those accounts available, and that was helpful in leading you to make a more informed judgment. So, I’m interested, actually, in your reasoning for lowering the commission on the sales. Now, I appreciate that you’re saying it’s going to be done over five years, so that is better than something sudden, but all the same, it is lowering the rates, and I wondered at the logic of it, given some of the other factors that you’ve said in your statement. You’ve pointed out that the average in the 1960s was around 20 per cent commission and that’s gone down to 10 per cent already. You’ve also mentioned a crucial factor: that the value of the homes is to a large extent made up of the pitch itself. So, by that logic, it’s sometimes puzzling to wonder why you might want to reduce the commission, because you’ve said that there’s the issue of the pitch fees, so if the site owners are now reasonably free to raise the pitch fees, the danger is that the residents could be facing increases in pitch fees, so that is then going to have to be managed as a separate problem. And if pitch fees aren’t raised, because they do have to go to these tribunals if they go above the consumer price index, then the danger, which is actually in your statement, is that many homes will actually not be viable and will close down. And also, when people lose their pitches, they could actually lose more equity in their home because they're having to leave their pitch. So, I wonder at your overall analysis of all these factors in deciding to reduce the commission. So, I would wish you to put a little bit more light on that.

I agree with you that residents' associations are always a good thing if they don't have them, so encouraging that is good. And your ideas about having more guidance are good, because I thought—now, this is something where you did educate me today—that these were relatively visible fees. I thought that this was not similar to things we've discussed recently here, like hidden freehold charges and access road charges. I thought that people, when they entered into these financial agreements, understood that it was 10 per cent commission, but from what you've said, there may be a lack of knowledge and people may be entering, again, like with these other issues, into financial agreements when they're not fully aware of what they're signing up to. So, I totally agree with the need to perhaps educate these people, and if you can put any more light onto that, I'd be grateful. Thank you.