Questions now from the party leaders. The leader of the Welsh Conservatives, Andrew R.T. Davies. 

Thank you, Presiding Officer. First Minister, last week, my colleague Janet Finch-Saunders, along with other MSs, hosted a meeting about the cladding situation here in Wales, and the Welsh Cladiators, who have been pioneering the lobbying work and the projection of the plight of many home owners here in Wales who are caught up in this, really should be commended by all Members in this Chamber. One of the asks among many was why isn't the Welsh Government coming forward and adopting the legislation that has been put down in England, to take sections 116 and 125, to give rights to leaseholders so that they themselves can exercise those rights in holding the developers to account. I've heard Mike Hedges, one of your backbenchers, speak in favour of this in the Chamber when speaking to the leader of the house. There's cross-party support for this. We had a debate prior to Christmas. Will the Government reconsider its view, in light of the ongoing crisis that many home owners here in Wales face? 

Well, Llywydd, first of all, I join with the leader of the opposition in congratulating those people who continue to campaign on this issue to make sure that the Welsh Government is always aware of developments that they are in touch with and that their views are conveyed to us. And I know that last week's meeting was an opportunity for that to happen, and the Minister will be following that up in her forthcoming meeting with the strategic safety stakeholder group, where these matters can be further debated, and the Minister keeps all those arguments about sections 118 to section 125 under review.

The position, though, is that those regulations—those sections—were specifically written for the building safety regime in England. It is not as simple as simply picking them up and dropping them into the very different Welsh context. And there are some disadvantages for leaseholders who find themselves within that regime, because here in Wales our intention is that leaseholders should not be required to pay for the remedial action that is required to their buildings, whereas those sections expose leaseholders to bills up to £10,000, and we don't intend to do that in Wales. So, while we will continue to keep the position under close review, we're not convinced that a simple drag-and-drop of those sections into the Welsh context would deliver what the campaigners say it would deliver, and we're not convinced that it could not actually act to their detriment. 

First Minister, a part of Welsh law that would accommodate those sections, in the rights of leaseholders and home owners, surely is something that must be welcomed, to give rights to those leaseholders and home owners in their actions against the house builders, in this case multinational house builders who have deep pockets indeed? And now, six years after Grenfell, many leaseholders and home owners still find themselves in this vortex that is opening up and with no end. If the Welsh Government are not prepared to enact sections 116 to 125, then the other route that the Minister has taken on board is negotiating with the house builders and the compact agreement that we were told last autumn has been agreed between certain developers, and then the obligations that those developers will bring forward. Can you confirm today how many developers have agreed that compact agreement with the Welsh Government, and, importantly, how many of those developers have brought forward their remedial works for consideration by the Welsh Government? Because it's my understanding that, in paragraph 6 of that compact, they had one month from agreeing the compact to come forward with their proposals. I would hope that you would be able to tell me how many developers have submitted those plans. 

I can certainly tell the Member that 11 developers have signed up to the compact. We continue to work with the sector to put the force of law beneath the compact as well. I don't have in front of me the answer to the number of developers who have taken the next step to which the Member referred, but I'm very happy to write to him and make sure that he has that information.

It is vital that the developers step up to the plate and do the work that is expected and commanded of them to make sure that the leaseholders and the householders aren't put in a disadvantaged position through no fault of their own. In Westminster, Michael Gove has been very forthright in saying that if the developers do not come forward with the proposals and start the remediation work and sign up to the Government agreement, they will be barred from operating in England. That is a very powerful stick to bring those developers to the table. Will you take such action here in Wales to make sure that the developers do respond and don't have this continual round-table discussion that leaves the leaseholders and home owners on the sidelines, unable to move forward with their lives?

I fully agree. It's been the position of the Welsh Government throughout that those who are responsible for the faults in the construction of those buildings should take responsibility for remediation. I want to try and be as fair as I can to that sector by saying that the considerable bulk of developers who are responsible in Wales have come forward and given that commitment, and therefore we should work with them to make sure that they deliver exactly what they have committed to do.

Llywydd, to return to the leader of the opposition's first question, whereas sections 116 to 125 require leaseholders to instigate legal action against a developer who they consider is not remediating fire safety defects, in Wales it will be the Welsh Government who will take that action on behalf of the leaseholders so that they don't end up having to foot the bill for doing so. Where developers clearly fail to play their part, then absolutely we will take action against them, and I would not expect any developer who fails directly to deliver on those responsibilities to go on working here in Wales.

Plaid Cymru leader, Adam Price.

Diolch, Llywydd. The UK Government has just raised rail fares by 5.9 per cent—the highest increase for a decade. Coming, as it does, in the middle of a cost-of-living crisis, it's hard to disagree with Labour's shadow Secretary of State for Transport, Louise Haigh, who said:

'This savage fare hike will be a sick joke for millions reliant on crumbling services. People up and down this country are paying the price for thirteen years of Tory failure.'

Why did you agree to increase rail fares in Wales by the same amount?

The normal practice, as the Member will know, will be for rail fares to be increased in line with inflation; that would have meant a 12.3 per cent increase in rail fares here in Wales. With a great deal of discussion and action by the Minister, working alongside Transport for Wales, we have been able to cap that increase at less than half of inflation. I wish we didn't have to increase rail fares by 5.9 per cent, because it does, of course, have an impact on the passenger, but the farebox, the money the passengers pay, is an integral part of the way in which we pay for a rail service, and if passengers are not to pay, then taxpayers do have to pay. In the end, the best bargain we could come to in Wales, within the resources that we have available to us, was to increase the contribution that the taxpayer will have to pay in order to peg the increase in rail fares at less than half what it would've been had the normal practice been followed.

You simply followed the 5.9 per cent decision that was made in Westminster. What's the point of this place if we're simply a cut-and-paste Parliament that passively implements Tory austerity? You could've done what the Scottish Government did, which is to reduce peak fares and pay for it through a progressive use of your income tax powers. At the same time as you're increasing rail fares, you're slashing subsidy for the bus industry. You're effectively pushing large parts of the bus industry over the edge of a cliff at the end of June. Let's think about what that means in terms of your overall goal of getting people out of cars into public transport. It makes it harder, doesn't it? Will you at least commit today, First Minister, that if there is extra money for Wales at the UK Government budget, public transport in general and saving bus services in particular will be one of the top priorities in terms of any additional money?

Were there to be any money in the spring statement, at the very top of this Government's list will be pay demands in the public services and to make sure that we can do the very best for those people who work within them. But public transport is a very important priority for this Government, and we completely understand the importance of bus services in all parts of Wales. I was able to meet yesterday with the Permanent Secretary, with the Minister and the Deputy Minister for Climate Change and others, to talk about the actions that we will be able to take alongside the industry beyond the current three-month extension of emergency funding to the end of June this year. I'm confident that we will be able to go on finding further money. We invest £100 million in supporting the bus service in any case. The additional money is emergency funding; it cannot go on for ever. We have to be able to find a way of agreeing with the industry a sustainable solution in the context that passenger numbers using buses have not recovered to where they were before the pandemic. But I am confident, from the discussions that we've had yesterday, that we will find further funding beyond the £12 million that we've committed to sustain emergency funding to the first quarter of this year, and that we will do it alongside the industry to come to a sustainable final position.

There are reports of plans to increase the level of water currently exported from Wales. Welsh water companies are already the biggest exporters in the UK by a long way, and that water is currently traded at a price significantly lower than the price paid by Welsh Water customers, which is amongst the highest in the UK. Has the Welsh Government been involved in discussions relating to these plans, and does it agree with us that three tests need to be met in relation to any proposal to expand the export of water from Wales: that they do not compromise the security of water supply within Wales now or in the future; that there are no adverse effects on our environment and our communities; and that any proposal must generate economic benefits for the people of Wales that reflect the true value of this very precious resource?

The Minister met with the water company concerned yesterday. There is no specific proposal on the table at the moment. Were such a proposal to come forward, then it will have to satisfy the environment Act requirement here in Wales. Decisions will need to be submitted to Welsh Ministers for their involvement and, of course, in doing so, we will make sure that the interests of Welsh residents and Welsh taxpayers are properly safeguarded.