The report, to which I responded earlier this month—and, as David Melding said, was one of the first things I did when I took over this portfolio—is a very welcome addition to the body of knowledge that is developing as we take the steps to make sure that we can ensure that people are safe when they live in a high-rise building, right down to actually what a high-rise building is and what the height that constitutes the particular issue is. I've had quite a few discussions in the short time I've been in portfolio, and I know that my predecessor, Rebecca Evans, had a number of discussions before about whether it is in fact the height or the make-up or whatever of the building that matters, and the escape routes and the class of occupants and all those sorts of things. As Dame Judith Hackitt indicated in her report, 'Building a Safer Future', an effective and coherent system is the key to that assurance. Dame Judith's report was commissioned by the UK Government but we absolutely recognise the picture it paints. What we're doing now is to consider whether and how the recommendations are right in a Welsh context. It's essential, therefore, that our decisions and any legislative changes we bring forward in due course and the system they underpin add up to something real and coherent, something that makes a real difference to people's lives and to their well-being, as every Member who's contributed has said. That means improving design in construction processes, clarifying responsibilities, ensuring compliance both during a build and post occupation, and the ongoing safety of high-rise buildings in Wales, and it also means a strong enforcement regime wherever necessary. 

I will just address very briefly the issue about the front doors—only to say there is an ongoing issue with that. I'm very aware of it. I've already had some discussions on that, and the expert group is also aware of it. There are some issues around insurance and so on that are also complex that I know the committee picked up. So, we are very much aware of that. I don't have an answer to it at the moment, but we're very aware of it and it's part of what we're looking at. 

I did meet the ministerial expert group last week for the first time. That group brings together a range of expertise, including developers, building control bodies, architects, social landlords, fire safety professionals, the Health and Safety Executive and various sector representatives. They've heard from both UK and Scottish Government representatives, the Building Research Establishment and technical experts, and as a consequence of the group's expert input we are on track to produce what we call a road map, which will give shape and coherence to our approaches to the problems that Dame Judith's report described. So, they've had their penultimate meeting, which is the one that I attended just to meet them, and then they'll have their last meeting very shortly. So, we'll have the road map very shortly after that—certainly by the end of the summer term, but I'm hoping by what the Government calls 'spring'; let's hope that's May—as soon as possible. They're very committed people. They put a lot of personal time in over the Christmas recess to produce the interim stuff that they were dealing with at their penultimate meeting. So, I'm confident that we will have that at pace.

I also wanted to give more of a feel for where we are now. We're working alongside partners in local government and the third sector to identify the number and particulars of all tall residential buildings in Wales. That proved a much more difficult task than you'd expect, particularly in the private sector, but we do now have much stronger and more reliable data. We've shared the information via the Welsh Local Government Association to ensure that we're in a more robust position in terms of the information that is held and built on. Just anecdotally, Deputy Presiding Officer, I'm told that, in the end, we had to just send people out to have a look to see where tall things were because there was actually no register. So, that's a piece of information we now have. 

But that information, of course, only takes you so far. Three tall buildings in the social sector and 12 in the private sector were found to be clad in aluminium composite material, or ACM, the particular cladding that caused the difficulty in the rapid spread of fire at Grenfell Tower. The Welsh Government has worked closely and effectively with building owners and developers to ensure that responsible decisions have been taken. As it stands, work has either been completed on, or is in train to remove and replace the cladding on all but two of those buildings. In the case of the outstanding two, large-scale tests have been recommended on the exact nature of the cladding and its performance and the developer has committed to complying with any subsequent recommendations and is keeping us appraised of process. So, we're very pleased that that is ongoing at some pace. 

In the discussions with my predecessor, Rebecca Evans, developers and owners signalled that they would do the right thing by the residents. We made abundantly clear that the Welsh Government did not want to see the cost of that work passed on to residents. I'm pleased to see that residents are not being asked to bear the cost of removing and replacing ACM. That's obviously the right decision, which we welcome, and will doubtless come as a relief to people who bought or live in those particular buildings. 

In terms of new or future buildings, we've consulted on banning combustible materials altogether. My officials are currently analysing the responses and undertaking the necessary impact assessment work on the consultation that's come back. Whilst a ban is intended to add further protection, obviously I understand that builders and insurers are already taking practical steps to ensure new buildings are not developed using combustible cladding, but there obviously is a massive retrofit issue as well.

There are, of course, as many people have said, complicated issues that go far beyond the ACM cladding issue. Officials continue to work closely with counterparts in local government and the fire and rescue services to take on a casework approach to buildings about which other concerns have been identified. Bringing together key players is one area from which we continue to learn, and, like the committee's report, that experience will understand and develop sound systems to enhance their safety.

In responding to the ELGC committee report I've been keen to accept recommendations wherever possible and to ensure that these are factored into the work of the expert group. Dame Judith was very clear about the need for a coherent, rather than a cherry-picking, approach to implementing a whole-system change, and we are very keen to do that, because we know that, at the moment, there are a set of regulations and obviously the problem is that there are gaps, and then some things fall into those gaps, so that whole-system, coherent approach is essential so that those gaps are eradicated. The expert group completely get that. They've confirmed that the current system is, in their view, fragmented, complex and ineffective. We will be overhauling it. We must do that if we are to keep people safe from the sorts of fires that we saw at Grenfell, or indeed any kind of fire.

In terms of the time, I think it's best—. We have to get this legislation right, so we don't want to do something at pace that we then miss one of the gaps. So, we want to get the right combination of taking enough time to ensure that we have covered off a coherent, system approach and the pace necessary. So, I want to be able to say that we can do it within this Assembly term—we certainly would love to—but I think it's very important to get the system right, so to make sure that we have covered off all other gaps that exist in the current legislation and we've explored all the possibilities. So, I'm not going to commit to that other than to say I share the ambition, but whether or not we'll be able to do that, I don't know. But it is very important, and I make no apology, that we get the practical application right and then enshrine that in the legislation. We want to have all the appropriate consultations with key players, of course, including the views and voices of residents. We want to be clear, as I said, about the nature of the buildings in scope. Height alone is not necessarily the only issue. There are other risks posed to different groups. So, it's clear, isn't it, that a nursing home, for example, at only two storeys will have particular difficulties and might need particular fire protections that an ordinary residential domestic building might not need and so on. So, there are obviously more complex issues than simply height, although height continues to play an issue.

So, as I said, I expect to receive that in the early spring. We'll be giving thorough consideration to their recommendations, and I am clear that there will be no delay between their report and our response that isn't necessary to just make sure that we've got, to use the colloquialism, our ducks in a row.

I'm very happy to accept David Melding's recommendation that I keep Members fully informed via the committee and, Deputy Presiding Officer, via the floor of the Senedd. My officials will develop a programme plan and timeline as we consult and implement short, medium and long-term proposals to demonstrate our commitment.

I'm very clear about the importance of this work in ensuring we get it right. My portfolio includes housing, planning and responsibility for fire policy, so I'm committed to using the breadth of the portfolio to oversee and implement the wide-ranging agenda, bringing together the various components to ensure that the system in Wales is clear and effective and enhances safety in the right way. In that regard, I reiterate my welcome for the ELGC committee report and its part in informing the key decisions and actions we take, and, as I said, I will of course continue to update Assembly Members on the progress that we make. Diolch yn fawr.