Yes, Janet, I'm very well aware of Michael Gove's various pronouncements. I very recently met with the then Minister for housing, who's now the Minister for culture, media and sport, I believe—it's quite difficult to keep up—to talk about this. I have asked for a meeting with Michael Gove as well, but I haven't had one since his reincarnation. 

The programme here is virtually identical in every aspect that you just outlined. We have worked with the 11 major developers in Wales. They have all agreed to sign up to the pact. The legal documentation is with them at the moment. Clearly, they're looking to see what happens in England with the legal documentation there. Our documentation is different because the legal framework in Wales is different, but, nevertheless, the import is the same. Here in Wales, though, we're going slightly faster than that. We have two of the big developers already starting to remediate. We're very, very well on with our programme of surveys. We've only a few buildings left to go. The ones that are left to go that haven't been completed for the full intrusive survey are all because we needed a complex set of agreements from various freeholders and so on, which I won't go into, but there are complex management issues in some of the buildings. The others are where a whole main road has had to be closed in order to access the building to do it, and we've had to work with the local council to figure out a traffic management scheme to be able to do that. Other than that, they're all done. The reports are all pending. We'll be able to start the remediation works as soon as we can.

We're also working on a programme for what are called orphan buildings. There isn't, as far as I'm aware, a programme like this in England. We have 16 to 23 orphan buildings—it does slightly depend on what you call it. An orphan building is one where there is no responsible developer, insurer or managing agent who can be held responsible, and we'll be able to take forward a programme for actually doing the remediation for them.

But, I think this is the most important point here: I have always thought that the Government should step up to responsibility in this regard. We don't want to leave it to individual leaseholders to have to take legal action against the developers, which is what the English building Act does. I understand why they did that, but we don't think that's right. So, the contract here will be with us, and, if it isn't fulfilled, it will be down to us to take action against the developers. That's how it should be, in my view. I will also be exploring whether or not we can, for example, prevent builders from taking up planning consents that are existing and continuing on. That's a second phase of the work. But, I'm quite pleased that developers here have come along this journey with us.

And then the last thing I'll say on this point, and it's worth bearing this in mind, is some of the buildings, some of the loudest people in the campaign—and who can blame them for having a campaign; it's a horrible thing to live with—some of the loudest people are in buildings where there is extensive litigation under way in which we cannot interfere. So, we are hamstrung ourselves by some of the processes ongoing. But my heart continues to be absolutely with the people living with this. And the last thing I'd say to you, Janet, is if you know anyone who really is in dire straits with this, please recommend to them the buy-out scheme, because we haven't had as much interest in that as we'd have liked, and I'm hoping to get as much publicity to it as possible.