Can I thank the Minister for her statement and reiterate her thanks as well to Chris Jofeh and the independent group of stakeholders who've been working on the report?

I share the nervousness—when Government says that they accept something in principle, then you think, 'Oh crikey, there we are, it's a nod', and then they sort of walk away and come back to it a few years down the line. So, I am heartened by your insistence that—. And I understand that there's a practical reason for that as well, because you do issue caveats in terms of costs and the availability of technical solutions.

One thing I would urge the Government on, and it's a bugbear of mind, really: we really need to recast and reframe the discussion around—you know, can we afford to implement these changes, or can we afford not to? Because paying for the devastation of climate change is going to be much, much more significant than investing in measures such as retrofitting. So, I think we need to use different terminology sometimes, because retrofitting for me is an invest-to-save scheme and we should be talking about how we make those investments happen so that we can save, not only financially down the line, but, of course, in terms of all the other outcomes that we know we will face following climate change.

There are no clear actions from this statement, other than a recognition that we need more work to be done and an advisory group, or a couple of advisory groups being set up. So, that's again a bit of frustration, but again I understand why you feel that that's how you have to go about doing it. You say in your statement,

'We cannot wait until we have all the answers', and that's absolutely true. The energy vendor stuff in Germany—it's a pathway to decarbonisation, but they've no idea how they're going to fulfil the last 20 or 30 per cent. But they do know that they have confidence in their scientists and engineers to come up with answers and there's absolutely no reason to start on a journey just because we can't see the end. So, I think we really need to have the confidence to move forward in that respect.

You asked for some cross-party support—well, clearly I would give you that, because there was a commitment in our manifesto, in terms of retrofitting, to introduce the biggest retrofitting scheme Wales has ever seen, and that was very much a long-term commitment. Clearly, I'd need to see what the actual proposals are, but I can only imagine that Plaid Cymru would have issues because maybe it's not going far enough or moving quickly enough. So, I'm more than happy to stand shoulder to shoulder with you on that journey.

The other issue for me, of course, is the houses that haven't yet been built. It's not just retrofitting, as I know you recognise: we're still building houses that are energy inefficient, which are locking in that inefficiency and that are creating an even steeper trajectory or an even longer backlog of homes that need to be retrofitted in future.

I've harked on about the Part L regulations plenty of times now, because everybody knows that I'm going to refer to the consultation of 40 per cent or 25 per cent strengthening of energy efficiency, and the Government went for, what is it, 8 or 9 per cent in the last Assembly, which was disheartening; it was inadequate and lacking in ambition. And I hope that that will be addressed very, very soon, because clearly we can't carry on as we are. But there are planning applications in the system now that will clearly create that issue for future generations. So, will you, therefore, put on the record that environmental considerations and the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 can actually offer a legal basis for planning committees to refuse applications that are unlikely to be even attempted, maybe, in a couple of years. I'd like to hear that from you, if possible.

Finally, we're also aware, of course, of previous cavity wall insulation schemes that have been missold, and that clearly would undermine confidence, I think, in a retrofitting programme in future. So, can you explain, maybe, how lessons have been learned from and how that would be reflected, maybe, in your approach to future retrofitting schemes, and how you will ensure that those schemes are undertaken in a way that is suitable and of a high quality?