It's a pleasure to follow our excellent Chairman. I say 'our' excellent Chairman—I've now left the Climate Change, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee, but I did enjoy my time on it, and I thought this was a particularly important report, and a fitting one with which to end my time on the committee.

Housing is a key area for carbon reduction, and if we're to meet our ambitious targets to reduce emissions by 80 per cent by 2050, they're going to be at the heart of any strategy. But ambitious as those targets—well, they certainly were when they were made—the latest scientific evidence suggests we may have to go further and more quickly. The speed with which global warming is now happening is profoundly disconcerting.

I share Mike's annoyance, really, with this system of responding to reports and saying 'accept in principle'. Now, I thought that the Permanent Secretary had already made a commitment that the Welsh Government would not be making this sort of response; it would be doing just what Mike Hedges said: accept, reject, or accept partially. I do wonder, Deputy Presiding Officer, if the Welsh Government were asked, 'What's your view about the 10 commandments?', they'd say, 'Accept in principle'. [Laughter.] Well, you know, this doesn't really get us very far. These are imperatives, that's why we have reports, and we do need clear policy responses. I very much agree with what the Chair of the committee said, that when we report after exhaustive evidence, very carefully considered, supported by an outstanding secretariat, and the attention, obviously, of the Members under the leadership of the Chair, I really do think that that constitutes the firmest evidence you're going to get on these matters. So, I think we do need more punch in terms of the response.

I was particularly disappointed by the Welsh Government's qualified acceptance of recommendation 1. We do urgently need a 10-year strategy, and you're saying you're going to await the report of the decarbonisation of homes advisory group and their report, but are you going to have a strategy then? At least tell us that, if you are waiting for that group to report. What we said is that you needed a strategy, and I think that that is a fairly direct recommendation to which we could have a 'yes' or 'no'.

If I move to recommendation 3—again accepted in principle—and that is really about quality assurance, I accept the Government realised that that is really important. But let's remember that the best systems won't deliver if they are installed badly, and we did find evidence that this has been happening. And also, if we're trying to get people particularly paying from their own means for retrofitting—and it can cost, I think, on average £15,000 a property—we've got to be able to reassure people that they're going to get a quality product. So, I note that it's the UK Government that has responsibility for the new quality mark for retrofitting products, but I do want to know what the Welsh Government is going to do to ensure the effective use of that charter mark in its own programmes. I think that is something you can answer now.

Recommendation 6 has been rejected and this emphasises the need, in the focus on retrofitting, on those who are in the able-to-pay and low-income home owners category. This is really such an important part of the market, because these are the people we really need to attract if we can get that bulk to move over and install retrofitting. They're going to be outside public programmes, usually, they're not in social housing, and they're going to have to bear the cost of the retrofitting. We may be able to aid them in certain ways with attractive mortgage products or loans or whatever, but it is really a very important area and I think the Welsh Government has to give a lead.

On recommendation 7, I think, again, a point made by our Chair: we need to ensure there's a talented, skilled workforce there. But I found that response to our report particularly complacent, because unless we know we're going to have a strategy and the scale at which we will be retrofitting, we can't possibly hope to train the number of people we will want to be qualified for this important construction work.

Finally, on recommendation 13, which is rejected, I think it's lucid to say that you don't think direct tax incentives are appropriate for the able-to-pay and low-income house owner sector, but then I think we need to have a better indicator of what alternatives you're going to use. You can't just say, 'There's international evidence that grant mechanisms and communications strategies are better.' What are you going to do? That's what we want to know. Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer.