I welcome the tone, especially towards the end, about the need to work together and increase the pace and scale of social home building. But also, across the piece, I think we need to look at our targets and set a really serious ambition for the 2020s. We need to do that now so that we can get all the necessary approaches in place so that we can see an increase at scale, then, in house building. I do welcome the review as well. I think it asked some serious questions and has provided some valuable insights. Some other areas that the Minister has touched upon, especially decarbonisation and Chris Jofeh's review, I think that properly will get separate treatment. Can I also thank the Minister for the advance notice and indeed the initial discussion I've been able to have with Chris Jofeh on the likely direction of the review? I think that's very, very helpful and good open government. 

Can I move, then, broadly to the areas where I think there will be real agreement? I want to start, just because of my activities yesterday, on off-site manufacturing. I was really pleased to see this being stressed in terms of what we can do with modern methods of construction. Indeed, in the Conservative housing strategy published earlier this year we did look at this quite specifically, reflecting the attention that is out there, and I'm pleased to see that the Welsh Government is emphasising this in particular from the review's work. Indeed, Minister, I think following in your footsteps, actually, yesterday, I visited the Wernick Group's modular housing factory in Margam, followed by a visit to site in Bridgend where the housing association Valleys to Coast has used such manufacturing methods to build affordable homes. I went in and was amazed at the speed of delivery and just how great those three-bedroomed homes, the ones I saw, looked. They use this much more in many parts of Europe, and at the minute, it barely is 2 per cent or 3 per cent of our housing development, so I think we do need to look at this. And indeed, in the Conservative policy, we pledge to increase this type of off-site manufacturing to up to 20 per cent of house building by 2030. So, I hope that you too will be expressing that sort of ambition.

Secondly, on public land, again, I welcome your acceptance of the recommendations in the report, especially the mapping of vacant land, along with its status with regard to development potential. I was wondering whether, with regard to public sector land, we could go even further and offer discounts to developments that deliver strong social value, which, of course, affordable housing does. According to evidence submitted by the Home Builders Federation to the Lords Economic Affairs Committee, between a quarter and a third of all potential residential land is currently controlled by the public sector. By prioritising social value for discount, for instance, public land can be put to the service of long-term public good and this type of scheme could be extended to housing for vital professions like nurses, housing for older people and general affordable housing developments and co-operative housing schemes and the like. There's a lot we can do by the way we release land and use it as an incentive and a real resource. If I look at rent, I do welcome this five-year cycle. It's something that the sector has been calling for. And as the Chartered Institute of Housing, in their response to this statement today, said, we need the right balance that provides affordable rent levels whilst allowing housing organisations to continue planned development.

So, I look forward to receiving the actual details of what your five-year rent policy will look like, but I do think that, again, that's the right strategic approach that will allow us to develop long-term solutions. Finally, on council homes and the removal of the borrowing cap—again, I think this is a very welcome development. We need it at the moment, it will help us to increase the number of homes we are building, but I do think we need to emphasise that councils can also work with housing associations and others to use these flexibilities, so they don't necessarily have to build and manage the homes themselves, though where they want to do that and they're demonstrating real value and, obviously, more flexible and smaller schemes than, perhaps, what we saw in the 1950s and 1960s—. But it's definitely part of the mix that we can have.

And, finally, I would like to put on record, as the Minister has, my thanks to the panel and Lynn Pamment. As you rightly pointed out, these people have done really good work for the public good and have given up much of their time in doing that and sacrificed, obviously, what they could have been doing in their professional careers. But we really do welcome their contribution.