I'd like to start by welcoming this statement, in a very odd way, actually, because I note that all the recommendations have been accepted in principle and, usually, this really makes me quite annoyed, because I think you should say 'yes' or 'no' if at all possible. But I do think, given the long-term perspective that we need to take, and the thoroughness we need to approach such a groundbreaking report with, that I am able, I think, to accept that this, for the time being, is appropriate whilst we now really look at the task that’s ahead of us and the need, indeed, to build a cross-party consensus.

We know the overall efficiency of the housing stock remains low in the UK, certainly compared to many similar countries. The frustrating reality though is that the technology already exists to create homes that are low carbon, climate resistant, better for health and the natural environment, and have great design features. Indeed, we talked about many of these issues earlier today. We also know, obviously, that retrofitting is much harder, but we do need to remember that that's a key part of what we need to do because most people in 2050, or 2040, whenever we set the targets eventually, will be in homes that are already in existence today—many of them are a 100 years old or more.

If I can just refer to a couple of the specific points. In relation to recommendation 1 of the report: as I said, I think we do need to work together on a long-term decarbonisation programme. I'm always in favour of things that shouldn't really be a matter of partisanship, that we have these opportunities to work together. So, I don't know what you have in mind, but, I mean, I hope it's something that does draw us together so that we can genuinely input our ideas. And I have to say, I was very grateful that you did allow me to speak to Chris and to have sight of the report before it was published; that's not usual in Government, and I'm grateful for it.

I don't know if 30 years is too long; I think all these things are speeding up and we may have to react to much more public demand to go quicker. But it is something, at least, that we can now build on, and this report, I do think, is a very extensive and good piece of work.

On recommendation 2, particularly on social homes and those who are living in fuel poverty, and having a target of 10 years: again, I do think that this is very ambitious and we do need deeper inquiry into how we're going to achieve this. But it should be high priority; it's absolutely right to identify that sector. One, we have most control over it, and then those in fuel poverty who won't always be in social homes are obviously a particularly vulnerable group, so I think that is a point well made.

I think, on recommendation 5, we need to get ahead and do this straight away, and that's improve our data collection and just look at the depth of the current statistical base we have and what we can be doing to improve our future decision making.

I'd like to finish by reiterating, really, the thanks of the Minister to Chris Jofeh, who, I think, has conducted, as I said, a piece of work that matches the challenge of the times. And whilst your response is, 'Right, let's now work together and see how we advance these recommendations as soon as possible', and shape them a bit, I guess—and that's why you've accepted them in principle—but, you know, this shouldn't be a delaying tactic. You've really got to show how this is going to happen quickly and, you know, as you say, we can't bind the hands of a successor, but it's really important that we set an agenda here because I do not think a future Assembly is likely to overturn it. In fact, they may look back on us and say, 'Why didn't we take action more quickly?' But, as I said, I think it's an imperative for us all to work together on this, so I welcome the nature of the Minister's approach.