I welcome the Minister's statement. I am pleased that this Government has committed to continue to invest in affordable housing, providing £2 billion of funding in this term of office, and its commitment to build more and to build better.

You've probably heard me—I think everybody else heard me—talking about the importance of building more council houses, and, yes, I agree with what the Minister just said: we want to build quality. Some of us have read about, though we're probably too young to remember, Parker Morris, but that was council houses being built to a quality that people could get.

I've also visited a development where the houses built for the registered social landlord were larger and to a higher quality than those being sold into the private sector. There is nothing wrong with that happening. I think that we ought to say, 'The public sector is a poorer quality should not be the mantra. The public sector should be at least as good, but preferably better.'

I am, however, sceptical but convincible about modern methods of construction as a way of quickly increasing affordable housing supply.

As the Minister is aware, the new methods of construction in the 1960s did not turn out well: steel houses in Swansea; high alumina cement in Olchfa school; Ronan Point; non-traditional houses in Swansea being demolished in Blaen-y-Maes and Clase and replaced by traditionally built houses by a registered social landlord; and also the tenements, which were more common in Scotland, but we had a few in Wales, and we had one in Swansea. You won't find that anymore either, because that's been knocked down.

An awful lot of these very modern, innovative developments of the 1960s are no more. So, why is the Minister convinced that there will be no problems with this generation of non-traditional housing build? Because traditional housing build has got one great advantage: they stay up for a very long time.