Thank you very much for the opportunity to discuss the important issue of building safety in Wales. As many Members have already mentioned, building safety forms part of the co-operation agreement. Today, Llywydd, the Tories want to focus on sections 116 to 125, and I'm very pleased, Llywydd, that they managed to correct their original error when they tabled the debate. We are, in fact, debating the correct sections today. So, just to be clear, sections 116 to 125 of the Building Safety Act 2022 offer leaseholders in England some protections in having to pay for or limit contributions to the remediation works being undertaken on their buildings. The sections also provide a course of action where leaseholders can take legal proceedings at their own cost against developers who are not prepared to step up to their responsibilities. 

The Tory narrative that, for Wales, we should look to England, is just tired. For something as important as the safety of our buildings, it is absolutely essential that we look at the appropriateness and the necessity of sections 116 to 125 in Wales. In making comparisons to the protections available to leaseholders in Wales, we must first understand the scale of the issue. To illustrate this, Llywydd, in England 12,500 residential buildings of 18m and over in height have been identified, compared to around 300 in Wales. The scale of developers operating in this space is also huge in comparison to Wales, with 49 developers currently negotiating formal legal documentation in England compared to 11 in Wales. On this basis, I can understand the complexity and difficulties being faced by our colleagues in England in bringing those responsible to the table. Janet was asking me who has come to the table and who hasn't; I can just recommend that she does actually read the written statements that we put out regularly in this regard.

The situation here in Wales is different. Here in Wales, we have always taken the position that leaseholders and residents in medium and high-rise buildings should not have to pay for fire safety works that are not of their making, and I am as committed to this today as I have always been. This is not just cladding in Wales; this is all of the issues that pertain to fire safety. It's a very important distinction. This is not a limitation on what payments leaseholders should pay. It is a simple premise that leaseholders should not and will not pay for fire safety works that are the responsibility of the developer. 

I'm really proud of our approach in Wales to go further to address fire safety issues, taking the needs of the whole building into account, irrespective of whether cladding is present. The work to support leaseholders in significant financial difficulties through our leaseholder support scheme recognises the needs of individual households, and in particular, Joel, I recommend that you have a look at that scheme. We are currently reviewing the eligibility criteria for the scheme, and leaseholders who find themselves in the financial difficulties you outline will be eligible to have their leasehold bought out by the Government.

I'm also proud of the approach that we've taken to working with developers. To date, this has resulted in 11 developers signing up to the Welsh Government's development pact. We are working with one more, as well. The developer's pact is a public commitment that developers will rectify fire safety issues in buildings of 11m and over—not 18m, 11m and over in height—that they have developed over the last 30 years. This provides assurance for leaseholders they will not have to pay for fire safety works they are not responsible for—