Thanks, Adam. I absolutely do share the concern; we absolutely do want our young people to be able to stay in the communities that they grew up in and they wish to contribute to. You'll have heard me say many times in this Chamber that I also live in a village where my children will never live in the village unless something is done about it. Not that I think we should make Government policy based on personal circumstances of Ministers, but just to display that I have a lot of empathy with where you're coming from.

However, we've got to be sure that there are not unintended consequences for some of that. So, we've been looking with interest at the example of capping numbers, for example, in other areas, and they have had some very serious downsides, especially if you go into a recession. So, we have had local people stuck in negative equity and other things as a result of such caps. I'm very actively looking at it, just to be clear, but we just want to be sure that there aren't any unintended consequences. Mike Hedges has just referred to the fact that houses in multiple occupation are very common in university cities; we know that. We have tried, for example, to put density policies in place in those cities, and then prevent other houses from turning. What happens then is that those houses are advertised at twice their normal rate for sale on the market, they aren't able to be sold and then there is a reapplication to the authority to change them into a HMO. So, we need to make sure we haven't got any loopholes and all kinds of workarounds and all the rest of it—or if you buy it through a company or your dad buys it for you—any amount of things that we would need to work through to make sure that the policy would actually work. But I have a lot of sympathy with finding ways to do this. 

One of the other things I'm really actively looking at is whether we can scale up our community land trust arrangements, where local people can come together and own housing in that community in a co-operative way. And what that does is it prevents the onward sale of one of the houses to another person outside of the cap and so on. It effectively gives you a golden share so that you can prevent that happening, and it prevents the circumstance in which somebody genuinely buys the house and then meets and marries somebody from somewhere else and goes off and what you do about the fact that the house is suddenly unoccupied.

So, there is a whole series of unintended consequences we do need to work through, but we are doing that, and we've asked the data unit to come up with a lot more data at a more granular scale, so we can have a real look at what we're actually talking about. And in the meeting that Siân Gwenllian and a number of others also attended, for example, we started to look at the land transaction tax data, which I have got here. What that doesn't tell you is whether that house is already a second home, or whether it was built as holiday accommodation. It doesn't tell you anything. It just tells you what the transaction was. So, it's about whether we can get into a situation where we're getting that data, and we can actually make some informed decisions on the back of it without some of the unintended consequences that some of the policies have seen elsewhere in the world.