Thank you to the committee for its work. I welcome the report, and it echoes much of what I’ve heard. Unlike the committee, I cannot speak on behalf of the rest of Wales, but I can speak on behalf of my own constituency on the frustrations experienced in trying to implement some of these plans, and also the lessons to be learnt.

I want to focus on some of the lessons from one experience in Dwyfor Meirionnydd. Consider the village of Tanygrisiau in the Ffestiniog area. Tanygrisiau suffers the worst level of fuel poverty in the UK, and it’s among the lowest income levels—and they are off gas, too. My predecessor, Dafydd Elis-Thomas, had been battling to find a solution to the heating problems in Tanygrisiau since his election back in 1974. Around two years ago, Arbed am Byth came to Tanygrisiau, but from what I’ve heard, the scheme cannot be described as being successful there.

The contract was given to a Scottish company, who were supposed to partner with a local organisation, Y Dref Werdd, which knows the area well and has been battling to resolve fuel poverty in the area for years. But there was no discussion at all between this company and Y Dref Werdd, although Y Dref Werdd were the grass-roots partner. We must learn that lesson, therefore, and ensure that there is local input in developing this work.

The financial contract went to a company from Scotland, but it was volunteers from Y Dref Werdd who had to market and advertise these plans, and they did so voluntarily. The company had no understanding of the area, never mind the topography of the area. They had thought that they could introduce gas pipes for some of the homes in order to deliver against their targets, but there’s a reason why that infrastructure isn’t in place—because there’s strong stone under the ground. If they’d had discussions with people on the ground then they would have known about that, and would have adapted their plans.

Ultimately there were 41 PV panels, and that’s a step forward, of course. But no direction was given as to how to make the best of these panels, and it’s entirely insufficient to resolve the fuel poverty in that area. With Nest, they identified the most frightening problems in the homes, and they resolved them, but the other works were not done. For example, if there was a need for a new boiler, then that boiler was installed, but nothing was done to insulate the home, exactly as Jenny Rathbone explained at the beginning of this debate. 

If I could just mention one thing that the report has missed, and that is there are similar programmes being implemented from Westminster, such as the ECO programme. There are cases where Welsh Government and UK Government schemes can run alongside each other, but they can also conflict. To the ordinary person on the ground, it makes no sense that these programmes compete with each other; they don't understand why these programmes can't work together. So, I would also suggest that any new plans from Government should look at what else is being put in place, and if it is possible to dovetail the work in order to make the most of it. 

Recommendation 6 that the next programme needs to be more ambitious, to all intents and purposes, is entirely right and should be accepted. And as Sioned Williams said, nowhere near enough funding that is needed has been invested to date. It does suggest that the Government doesn't fully appreciate the scale of the challenge facing them. Our housing stock in Gwynedd is among the oldest in Europe, with many listed buildings and many within the national park. So, what will the Government do to ensure that these buildings can take advantage of any new programme for the future?

I hope, with those few words, that these lessons can be learned as the Government moves forward to develop its new plans.