Thank you, Minister, for this statement. I think we've all spoken at length about this shocking crisis facing the householders who are now beset with the problems of this cladding. So, I would like to join with you in echoing that the developers and those responsible for these building defects, they've got to step up to resolve this crisis. And if any of them are watching here today, the onus and some responsibility has to fall with you, or with them, and you must accept your responsibilities. It is morally wrong that leaseholders continue to face financial hardship and are suffering from fear, stress and anxiety.

It is also extremely concerning that the Welsh Government does not know the extent of the difficulties in these buildings, but I'm aware, too, of the overwhelming task that you have ahead of you in identifying such. That such ambiguity persists over four years on from the Grenfell Tower catastrophe is really very worrying and it raises questions as to the speed with which, Minister, you are able to look to improve the safety of approximately 148 high-rise buildings.

You have explained that there have been 100 responses to the building safety passport fund and that the first surveys will commence early in the new year. So, my question is: how soon can we expect any results and actioning of any recommendations, as in surveys? What back-up plan do you have in place for instances where a building is not covered by an expression of interest? I do agree with the need for a leasehold support scheme and, again, we'll have further details of this in the new year. Could you possibly explain today how much funding you intend to allocate to the scheme?

I also welcome the fact that the response to the building safety White Paper has now been published. Previously, I made clear that there are many changes in the consultation that I welcome, but I still have some concerns on a number of points. In relation to risk categories, you'll be aware I wrote to you, noting that I was concerned as to the reasonableness of having a house that is converted into two flats in the same category as a five-storey, purpose-built block of flats. So, as part of your commitment to consider the appropriateness of a three-category model, would you consider splitting category 2 in two—so, making it more broader?

I also agree with all categories requiring annual fire-risk assessments. However, again, I raise these concerns about access to suitably qualified persons. Your team has previously advised me that there are no estimates as yet as to how many suitably qualified individuals there are in Wales to assess around 37,000 properties annually. Has there been any progress on establishing if there is a shortage, and how are you looking to address this?

I am interested in the gateways, but remain concerned about the possibility that the third would see the principal contractor, with the principal designer, produce a final declaration confirming that the building complies with building regs. And, as part of your further consideration of this matter, will you commit to amending the proposals so as to ensure that physical checks are undertaken by local authorities, and that the risk posed by what we now know to be some rogue builders—and let's say it, because that's what they are—is reduced?

Finally, you will be aware that the existing regulatory oversight in Wales is split between the three fire and rescue authorities and the 22 local ones. I have spoken perhaps of us having a single national regulator, and was pleased to read that a national approach to the regulator did receive more support than local and regional delivery mechanisms. Going forward, will you undertake further work to create a single national regulator? Thank you. Diolch, Llywydd.