We now turn to spokespeople's questions. Conservative spokesperson, David Melding. 

Deputy Presiding Officer, I rise with some trepidation, given the slightly dramatic exchanges earlier, but if I can pursue my duties here of scrutiny. Does the Minister still believe that the target of building 20,000 affordable homes over the Assembly term will be met? By my calculation, you've got 6,500 to go in 13 months or so. And where is the current shortfall? Is it more with social homes, or those under the Help to Buy and similar schemes?

So, yes, we do expect the 20,000 target to be met. In fact, we've already exceeded the bit of it that was Help to Buy and so on. However, I've answered on a number of occasions across this Chamber issues around what we mean by 'affordable.' And the 20,000 homes was very much set in the definition of affordable that we had at that time, and in the light of the exchange we just had across the floor, in the light of the cap still being very firmly in place on the housing revenue accounts in local authorities, preventing them from borrowing and reinvesting in social housing. Since then, since that target was set, that's changed, and so we've moved our focus very firmly on to building at pace and scale for social housing because that's the biggest gap. We still need private sector housing to come forward, but we have a bigger catch-up on social housing than we do on private sector housing, and, just this morning, my colleague Lee Waters and I had a feisty, but very constructive meeting with the Home Builders Federation to discuss how the two sectors could come together and make the best of the land supply here in Wales. 

Of course, Minister, if we increase supply in the market sector, particularly by bringing more competition and small and medium-sized enterprises in, then we would hope to see the price of houses steady, and make them, in that way, according to classic economics, more affordable. But, I think you're right in terms of, there's a lot of confusion about affordable housing—the category—because it mixes private and public. And I just wonder whether we would be better off moving to a definition now that focuses on social housing, housing for rent. And I think it's time, as all parties in this Chamber prepare their manifestos for next year's election, to be looking at realistic but ambitious targets for social housing in the 2020s. And it's my view that we need to be building in the region of 4,000 social homes a year, or 20,000 over the term of an Assembly, in the 2020s. Do you agree?

I do very much agree. We need to look again at the definition of 'affordable', in the light of all of the powers now available to us, and in the light of the need. You're absolutely spot on on the figures, in terms of the social housing that we need, and that's just a catch-up to where we should be. And the conversation I had with Siân Gwenllian around how we define housing need, actually what we're talking about in the figures you've just quoted is just getting people out of temporary accommodation into permanent, secure accommodation. There may well be other categories of need that we currently don't meet at all, but that we would like to meet once we've got the people who really aren't in adequate housing into that kind of housing. So that's why it's a difficult balance to make.

The definition of 'affordable' though is worth exploring, because I don't want to—. Whilst I absolutely agree about houses for social rent, there are other models. There are co-operative and community models of home ownership, which are worth exploring, and which can also be made to be affordable. My own view is that the definition of 'affordable' needs to go beyond the point of sale. So, we have a definition of 'affordable' that includes Help to Buy, for example, and those homes are made more affordable by Government subsidy, so that's fine, but they aren't affordable on into their lifetime, because once they're sold the second time they go into the private sector. So I think there are some nuances that we need to look at, but, definitely, the thing needs a review.

If I may change to another subject—a very important concern—and that's whether you intend to meet with the residents at Celestia, the housing development on our own doorstep. I met with a group on Friday, and I know they'd be pleased to welcome you. The complexities of this case I do think make it something of a test case. The whole credibility of this style of development will be questioned if there is not some resolution to these complicated problems—many of them way beyond anything that could be anticipated by the residents. But I would like to know whether you are prepared, and whether you have any plans, to meet with them.

I would very much like to meet with them. I'm being advised not to do so until the outcome of their appeal, which I now understand isn't going to be until September of this year. I'm exploring with my officials whether we could set out parameters for the meeting, which would enable me to meet with them earlier. There are some things, because I'm the planning Minister, I'm just not allowed to comment on, but I feel sure we could get those parameters. My colleague Vaughan Gething has also asked if I could look at that. So I'm very happy to ask for more official advice on that.

And we're also monitoring very carefully the developments at the UK level. There have been some announcements—or semi-announcements—around things like the Leasehold Advisory Service, Lease, and so on, which we're monitoring very carefully, because we want to make sure that, whatever is announced at UK level, is fit for purpose here in Wales. And David Melding, I know, knows better than anybody in the Chamber the nuances, or the ragged edges, of devolution around land law and property law and housing, and so we are walking a little bit on egg shells—to mix my metaphors terribly—in trying to decide quite what it is we can do. But we are looking at voluntary schemes, for example, for managing agents, and voluntary schemes for estate agents, that we can do some sort of accreditation for, to make sure that people do understand as much as possible at the point of sale, and then afterwards have some kind of ongoing guarantee from the people with whom they're in privity of contract—so the builders, and so on. So I will absolutely ask again for that advice. At the moment, as I said, I'm being advised not to meet them until after the date of the appeal, which I understand is now September 2020.

Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Delyth Jewell.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Minister, I'd like to ask you a few questions about what action your Government is taking to help local authorities prepare to deal with the coronavirus outbreak. Firstly, I'd like to ask about home carers and the people that they care for. Does the Government have confidence that local authorities will have the capacity to ensure continued care for people who need it, if the carers themselves become ill—be they unpaid relatives or care workers in residential homes? Now, I'm aware that plans have been mooted to bring retired health workers back into the workforce within the NHS. Is this being considered for the care sector as well? And finally, can you confirm that additional resources will be made available to councils to cover any additional costs that will be accrued?

We had a special Cabinet meeting just this morning to discuss preparedness for the coronavirus outbreak, attended by all Cabinet colleagues. We've been working for some time with the local resilience fora and local authorities to make sure that we have the best possible plan. Obviously we're planning for the reasonable worst outcome, whilst hoping for the best possible outcome, but you have got to do both of those. So, we have of course discussed things like the ramifications of sickness in the various workforces, sickness in the local authorities, mutual assistance, all of the things that—. I've very pleased to say that the local resilience fora are well advanced on plans for a pandemic, not for this specific virus, but for pandemic planning. That's been going on for many, many years. And so we have got well-advanced plans for that. We don't want people to panic unnecessarily, so they should be reassured that those plans exist. They also include incorporation of large numbers of third sector bodies with whom we routinely work on public service issues—the Red Cross, voluntary councils and so on. So, we're very much planning for that reasonable worst case scenario, whilst very much hoping for the best possible outcome.

Thank you for those answers, Minister. That is reassuring, to hear that you've been discussing this literally this morning, and that the plans are in place. Obviously, where it's appropriate, it would be good to have sight of those, but I appreciate that there'll be some things that can't be shared at the same time.

You mentioned sickness in the workforce. Current advice issued by Public Health Wales is that those suspecting they have coronavirus should self-quarantine until a negative test is received. An issue that was raised in the Chamber yesterday was that of zero-hours contracts, but I think that the issue also applies to those who are self-employed or on low wages, where if those people lose shifts, they will also lose wages. We know that many people in the social care sector are on low wages, and are not benefiting from lots of employment protections as we would like to see them benefiting from.

It's particularly important that we prevent the virus spreading into residential care homes, I'm sure that you'll agree with that point, and so people working in these homes would need to have reassurance that if they don't come into work, they would be protected in that way. So, are you in a position to be able to guarantee that those workers who are often employed by local councils would not be facing any economic loss if they follow official health advice and don't go into work if they are suspected and have to self-quarantine? I don't mean just in the short term—sorry, I mean in the short term, not just hypothetical, longer term paying back if they were to develop the symptoms later.

I totally understand the point you're making. There are various categories of workers. So, certainly people employed by the local authority will be covered straight away. The Prime Minister, you will know, made some announcements about the first three days sick—some workers don't get paid for the first three days sick. That's not the case in most public services in Wales, I'm pleased to say.

But we did have a long conversation in the Cabinet this morning about some of the economic issues that arose, which my colleagues Ken Skates and Lee Waters will be looking at. But if I could just make the analogy—a poor one, I know—to the flooding that's just gone on. We have, of course, been anxious to put in place schemes for self-employed and businesspeople affected by the flooding. So, we will be ensuring that those types of schemes also exist for people who are in those circumstances, and, probably by way of assisting the businesses, hoping to help the people in the gig economy, as it's very difficult to get individual help in that way, so helping with cashflow and so on to keep that going. But we will be very much reliant, if the thing goes on a very long time, on the UK Government stepping up to the plate and making sure that it pays for issues in England in such a way that we get the consequential moneys that we so very much need in Wales to be able to protect our workforce. 

Thank you for that. I again appreciate that in some of this there's uncertainty because of what role the UK Government will be playing. Obviously, I'm sure you'll agree that the sooner we have clarity on this the better for everyone.

So, finally, I'd like to turn to the issue of enforcement. By my understanding, in Wales it's the local authorities' health officers who are responsible for issuing directives for individual to self-isolate if they believe it's necessary. And the question is: who is responsible for enforcing such a directive? There's clarity in England that the police have that authority, following the Health Protection (Coronavirus) Regulations 2020 that were passed on 10 February. Again, it's my understanding that those regulations don't extend to Wales, but the Welsh Government does have the powers to bring forth its own equivalent regulations. Could you tell me whether it's the Government's intention to do so, and if so, when?

We're currently considering the legislation that's been mooted by the UK Government, which is specific to the coronavirus, which I slightly regret because I think it should be a pandemic piece of legislation rather than specific. And once we've got clarity on exactly what that will contain, we'll be able to come forward with what we need to fill in the gaps for Wales, if I can put it that way, and until we have some clarity, we haven't taken that decision.

At the moment, though, we have good partnership working with all of our local authorities through the partnership council for Wales and through our police board. My colleague Jane Hutt is about to chair one of the meetings with police colleagues, so we're pretty sure we'll be able to sort it out locally anyway, but we will want to look at what the regulations will need to look like once we see what the UK Government is proposing in its overarching Bill.

Question 3 [OAQ55169] has been withdrawn. Question 4, Helen Mary Jones.