Thank you for arranging this debate today, and I'd like to thank all the team supporting the committee as well, because I think this was a really important piece of work. And, to put on the record, I think what I found most valuable was talking to people at the various locations that we visited—homeless people who could give us their everyday life experience of living on the streets. There's nothing more valuable to me than hearing how people are struggling to survive, and how we as politicians can change that, if we have the will to do so. I think their eloquence in taking part in this particular inquiry was phenomenal, and I'd like to thank them wholeheartedly for that.

There were differing views on whether or not rough-sleepers were given priority need, as has been exemplified, with some councils stating they would classify those sleeping rough in priority need and other organisations, such as Shelter, stating that, in practice, this wasn't always the case. Related to this is obviously the Pereira test, which is problematic as the meaning of 'vulnerable' isn't being interpreted in the same way or applied consistently.

For the record as well, I was deeply disappointed to see that Janet Finch-Saunders did not support this recommendation. I personally would have believed that the Conservatives would have supported the concept that those living on the streets should be a priority to be given a roof over their heads. We tried to accommodate Members in the report, and I can quote paragraph 64, saying, 

'we believe that a phased approach to abolition provides the most pragmatic way forward. For example, by introducing new categories of priority need, such as rough sleepers'.

So, if she cares as much as she says she does, then I would have thought that a phased approach would have sufficed in that regard. We're not suggesting that it could be done overnight. We know that there would be financial implications, but I think that's as much as we would deserve to do for those people who are currently being defined as not a priority—mostly young men—when they should be just as important as other homeless people.

You would expect me to talk about recommendation 10—devolution of welfare administration—and I was pleased that we got cross-party support, to an extent, on this. We've been crystal clear on this: it's all well and good for politicians to criticise welfare changes as one of the root causes of poverty in society, but when there is no willingness to even attempt to gain control over some of those welfare powers, then it undermines the credibility of the argument entirely. Do we want to complain about welfare changes or do we want to influence and change them? Let's not have empty words about solidarity across the UK in terms of our welfare system either—Scotland and Northern Ireland already have powers over the administration of welfare. The desire to see a unified, UK-wide welfare system is an argument that has already passed. It's a semantic view that does nothing to help people in Wales, living on the streets or in any other difficulty. So, I hope that we can progress this argument and that we can look at this further as a committee. The committee seems to be working positively; I just wish the Welsh Government were listening to that voice as intently as we'd hoped they would.

In relation to housing first, I think it's really, really good that we've set our stall in saying how important housing first is. But, I've had a Twitter conversation this week with Peter Black, a former Assembly Member, who runs the homelessness working group on Swansea council, and he's been asking Abertawe Bro Morgannwg University Local Health Board for months to go in to speak to him to talk about housing first and how they can work together on this. And only because, I believe, we had this Twitter conversation, suddenly ABMU said they would come to the meeting to discuss housing first. It shouldn’t have to take two politicians having a live debate on social media for ABMU to suddenly realise that housing first is part of their problem, or not a problem, but part of the solution to homelessness here in Wales. I think that housing first is a wonderful concept, but we have to get buy-in, not only from the housing sector, but from health, social services and education, so that we can make housing first work. I would urge the Minister to make sure that if this is going to be the future of housing and homelessness prevention here in Wales, we have to be serious, therefore, in getting people around the table.

Just to finish quickly in relation to some of the comments. The Big Issue has noted in evidence that a large proportion of its vendors were European economic area citizens with no recourse to public funds, and this is something that, again, is not currently devolved, but the consequences of this policy and the hostile environment efforts from the UK Government are something that we all should be concerned about.

We need to be solving some of the current issues surrounding the preparedness of social and private rented sector landlords to offer places to homeless and rough-sleepers. Evidence in the report showed that many social landlords did not feel equipped to help rough-sleepers or those with some of the problems that often arise as a result of being on the streets. I could probably talk all day on this issue, but I won't—my time is up—but I think it's really important that we put forward these recommendations and that we make sure that homelessness can come to an end here in Wales, and I think that this committee report has gone a long way to putting this on the political map.