Questions now from party spokespeople. Conservative spokesperson, Janet Finch-Saunders.

Diolch, Llywydd. It is now five years and nine months that have passed since Grenfell. For 2,099 days, hundreds of Welsh residents have been living in fear regarding the integrity of their own properties and risk of fire. Between 2017-18 and 2021-22, there were 1,323 fires in purpose-built blocks of flats, and 514 fires in buildings that have been converted into flats.

Now, you must be aware of the Welsh Cladiators and their campaign for recognition of the immediacy of the need for help from this Welsh Government. Now, last week, we did hear, to be fair, that you will make a statement before the summer. However, Minister, this is of such serious consequences, the issues that these people are facing, that I would ask, in all sincerity, whether you would bring that forward.

We're also anxiously awaiting you bringing some legislation forward. We realise that this isn’t a Welsh Government fix only. A lot of this is purely down to the fact that some developers are just refusing to accept their own responsibility. So, I suppose, for me—. We had the meeting on 1 March; it was really well attended. Since then, I've received numerous concerns and really shocking examples of some of the issues facing those living in these properties. Every single day that remediation delays, it is just making the costs go up, in terms of insurance, management costs.

Somebody’s doing very nicely out of this, I have to admit, and that's at the expense of these victims. So, we are very keen to see these victims protected, and I've listened to you so many times on the complexities around the issue. What steps are you going to take for those developers who simply will not engage to face up to their responsibilities and sign the developers' pact that you have actually brought forward? Thank you.

So, Janet, we've rehearsed this a number of times, haven't we? The scale of the problem is very different in Wales, and we've approached it very differently. We identified 15 high-rise buildings with aluminium composite material cladding following Grenfell; three in the social sector and 12 in the private sector. The three social sector buildings were remediated immediately with £3 million support from the Welsh Government. The 12 private sector schemes were taken forward by the private sector. These have all either been completed or are being completed right now at developers' cost. That's through our intervention in the first place.

We're also aware, through our expression-of-interest process, of one further building above 11m in height that might have ACM cladding, and our consultants are currently undertaking additional tests to confirm whether this is the case as quickly as possible. If it is, of course, it will be put into the same process for remediation. So, we acted very swiftly on the cladding.

However, I've also been very clear that cladding isn't the only issue, and I know you're aware of that. So, unfortunately, a large number of these buildings have a large number of different problems, and each building has a different set of those problems. So, you can't do a one size fits all; each building has a different set of issues. Some of them have compartmentation problems, some of them have stuff-that-holds-the-cladding-on problems, some of them have firebreak problems. There's a whole myriad of different problems. So, as I've said a number of times before—I'm very happy to repeat it—we're in the process of having the inspections done. They're nearly completed; there are only a few left to go. The ones that are left to go are either because we've had a problem with the managing agent getting permission from the freeholder to do the invasive survey, or, in a couple of instances, we've had problems because we've had to shut a major traffic thoroughfare in order to get access to the building, and, obviously, that takes some time to put the traffic orders and so on in place. But, other than that, they're largely there.

I will be making an announcement about the so-called orphan buildings shortly. We have a plan to deal with those. I won't pre-announce that, but I'm hoping to be able to make that announcement very soon now, where we can start the remediation for those buildings, which, just to explain the phrase, are buildings where everyone who ought to do the work has either gone bankrupt or can't be found, or, for very complex reasons, there isn't someone that we can hold responsible for that.

In addition, we have 11 developers who've signed our pact, and we expect them to sign our legal documentation imminently. There are one or two who haven't signed the pact and come forward. I've been extremely clear with those that we will be taking draconic action against them. We will move the same way as England exactly to stop them taking beneficial use of a planning consent that they may have and to debar them from doing any work in the public sector, which will, effectively, mean they can't work unless they remediate the buildings they're responsible for.

The last piece of this, and this is—. My heart goes out to these people, but we have got a scheme that buys out the flat for somebody who is in a really difficult situation. A number of people have written to me saying that they're in that situation, so we've encouraged them to go through that process. We have a number of those going through now, and we really want to be sympathetic to people who want to move on with their lives. We've also been working really hard with insurance companies and with lenders to make sure that the ES1W—I always get that the wrong way round—forms don't mean that people can't sell. So, an enormous amount of work has gone on in this sector.

But it is different here in Wales, because of the different scale and the market is a different scale, so we don't have some of the levers that the UK Government has. Also, we've just taken a slightly different approach. So, I don't believe that the leaseholders themselves should have to take legal action, and I know they want me to implement the provisions that allow them to, but legal action is not some sort of panacea. Just because you're taking legal action doesn't mean you have a sudden and effective resolution, and there are buildings just local to here that are in a litigation situation, and it's quite clear that it isn't an effective solution.

Our documentation is set up slightly differently. When the developers sign the documentation with us, it's the Welsh Government that would take them to court. We will bear the legal risk and responsibility for that. I think that's right, because I don't think the leaseholders should bear the lottery, a little bit, of litigation, or the legal costs that go with it. So, I make no apology for having done it differently here in Wales. I absolutely appreciate the frustration of the people involved, but in the end I do think that our system will work for them. And the last piece is, of course, we've always done it for buildings over 11m, not 18m, here in Wales, and so more of them are caught in our system than would be the case if we followed the English view.

Thank you. I think that’s probably the largest amount of information we’ve heard so far going forward of what has been done so far and what more needs to be done.

One of the issues that arose at the meeting I held was the cost of these surveys. There was one lady—and she had no reason to mislead us in any way—who made it clear she had two of these properties, and she actually was waiting for £75,000 reimbursement from the Welsh Government, and had been waiting for it for quite some time; nearly a year, I think she meant. And I was really shocked, because it’s a lot of money to put out for a survey to have been promised she’d have it reimbursed by the Welsh Government. If you want me to bring these to you on an individual basis, I’m happy to.

But one thing that did strike me—that 17 applications for reimbursement of survey fees have been submitted to you since October. Offer letters have only been issued to five responsible persons or management agencies. So, again, those victims are out of pocket until they have those payments.

Another issue that’s been raised with me is that you have received from the UK Government £375 million. Can you tell the Chamber here today—? I mean, that’s—. How you’ve had it in—. But that’s the figure; you’ve even used that figure yourself.

Yes. [Inaudible.]

Yes, so tell us how you’re spending it, how much of that £375 million is left, and will you honour these surveys that these victims actually then—? They’re trying to sort this issue out themselves. Thank you.

Right. The £375 million is the amount of money the Welsh Government has put into the building safety pot. It is not a consequential and it is not direct from the UK Government; so, just to be really clear about that. If we were relying on consequentials from the UK Government, we would have nothing like that sum of money—nothing like it.

In terms of reimbursement, we are looking to reimburse surveys where the surveys have been done correctly—they've been correctly tendered for; they haven't been done by a relative or a friend; they have all of the right components in them that we can rely on that survey work and it's not wasted money. I make no apology for the delay, Janet. This is public money we're talking about; we have to go through the process of making sure that, in reimbursing that money, the survey that's been carried out is something we can rely on and make use of, and I'm afraid that does take a little time. But I'm very keen indeed that people who have done the right thing and acted are not disadvantaged by that.

We're also looking at other expenditure that's been incurred by the leaseholders to see if there's anything we can do to reimburse it. I can't promise that, because it has to comply with all of the standards for the spending of public money, and you'd expect me to comply with those standards, but, if we can find a way to reimburse people who are out of pocket, we will. I can't promise that we will be able to reimburse all of it, and this is a situation not-of-the-public purse-making either. So, it's very important that we do that.

If you want to write to me with individual examples, please do, and I can look into them for you. I obviously can't comment on individual examples on the floor of the Senedd, but, again, this is a process that must be gone through in order to comply with our own fiduciary duties. [Interruption.] Sorry. My watch is now getting involved in the act. [Laughter.] My watch does not understand the phrase 'fiduciary duty', I think that's quite clear. [Laughter.] So, Janet, it does take some time, and I know that's frustrating, but I'm sure we'll get there in the end.

Thank you. And then, another issue that arose was the moneys that you have spent on registered social housing, so £8.7 million, and £1.9 million provided to Cardiff Community Housing Association. I understand there are two blocks in the bay here where the ones having the remediation are registered social landlords, and that private owners of property just have to stand by and see these works ongoing. Surely, there should be an equilibrium applied here, that this money isn’t just going into registered social landlords. These individuals, on an individual basis, all tot up to quite a lot of money, but I just feel that they are not being taken as seriously by the Welsh Government as registered social landlords. Will you be seeking to claw back any money from those RSLs that have benefited from your intervention? And how do you as a Minister actually prove to me and this Chamber that you will fairly apply any process, any initiative, so that those individual private property owners feel that they're being taken equally seriously? Thank you.

So, Janet, quite clearly, there's a big difference between tenants in a social building and tenants in a privately owned building. There's a clear and obvious difference, not least that the people in a social building don't have any equity. It isn't an investment; it's not a private investment for them, it's merely a home and they rent it off a social landlord. Also, the complications of who exactly is responsible for that building don't exist where the social landlord is responsible. It's quite clear and obvious who is responsible for it, so it's just much more straightforward. Also, the Government has an overriding duty to social tenants. So, there is a clear and obvious difference between the two.

What we've been doing is trying to go as fast as possible whilst protecting the equity of the people in the building. I have a lot of sympathy with the people who have invested in those properties, but let's be clear, it is an investment, because the way that the housing market works in Britain is that property is often your home and also your biggest investment. That's the case for me and it's the case for large numbers of other families. So, I have a lot of sympathy with that. It's not a criticism, but it does make a very distinct difference between that and social housing tenants, who obviously don't have any equity in the property that they live in. They rely on their social landlord to keep them safe and adequately housed. So, it's a very different situation. And that is very clearly what is happening.

But, we are acting with pace to make sure that we can remediate all of the buildings that require it, working with the developers in order to make sure that the developers pay their full share of what they're responsible to do, but also going as fast as we can to make sure that the developers act, and act swiftly, and that we have work that's done to a high standard, which the Government is now overseeing to make sure that that high standard is there. And if the developers don't do what they're supposed to do this time, then the Welsh Government will be the contract holder and we will be the people who then take legal action against them and not the individual leaseholders, which will only lead to even more complex litigation and, I'm afraid, delays, as we've seen where litigation gets started.

The Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Delyth Jewell. 

Our natural world is precious and in order for us to understand how important it is that we protect it, we have to first understand how under threat it actually is. There's been alarm about reports that the BBC won't be broadcasting an episode of Sir David Attenborough's new series on British wildlife, reportedly over a fear of a backlash. Coincidentally, last week, 300 organisations from across Wales wrote to the First Minister, calling for the urgent introduction of the environmental legislation promised when this Senedd declared a nature emergency. We know that so much of our natural beauty in Wales is on the brink of being lost. Now, Minister, I would argue that the reports of a programme not being broadcast do suggest the extent to which the vested interests of some people in power stand in the way of positive change. So, in that new, more urgent context, would you agree to provide us with a timetable for when that legislation could be introduced, please?

Yes, so, Delyth, I'm afraid I'm going to give you an answer you've had many times before. I didn't know about the BBC programme. If that's true, it's appalling, and the BBC really needs to think about what message it's giving, if that's what it's doing. 

It's on iPlayer. 

It's on iPlayer, is it? Good. Right.

Can I raise a point of order, Llywydd?

No, I don't need a point of order in the middle of questions.

It's not true. There's a BBC tweet saying that's untrue. That's all. 

Okay. I need to get everything back to order here. But, thank you for the clarification from both Sam and Huw. 

In answer to the substantive question, Llywydd, which is the timing of the environmental governance and biodiversity targets, we will bring those forward as soon as we can. I absolutely understand the urgency. But, just to be really clear, Delyth, we're not waiting for the legislation to be put in place and then taking action. I am absolutely signed up to the 30x30 goals. That gives us seven and a bit years to get to where we need to be. Clearly, if we waited for the legislation to go through we would be really struggling. So, we are already working at pace. We've done the biodiversity deep-dive, I've done a whole series of things this week, which the Llywydd will get very cross with me if I start to list, but trust me we are working at pace. We will bring that legislation forward. I want that legislation to be robust. I want the agency to have teeth to hold our feet, or any successive Governments' feet, to the fire, and I want the biodiversity goals to be meaningful and make real differences on the ground. So, we are working at pace to do all of that in advance of the legislation. I will be bringing it forward as soon as we possibly can, but we also need to get it right, and I want it to be robust and vigorous legislation, as I know you do too.

Thank you to Sam for pointing that out, something that has been published on Twitter too, but I'll return to that in a moment.

It is encouraging that the biodiversity deep-dive commits to bringing forward legislation that sets general targets for nature restoration, and also provision regarding environmental governance, and to do so as early as possible in this Senedd term, and I take on board what you just said. It also commits, of course, to a series of statutory targets that are more specific on nature restoration, which will have a role to play in ensuring that Wales plays its part in the global framework on biodiversity that exists.

Do you agree, and I'm bearing in mind what you just said, that you can't give a specific timetable, do you agree that it's now a matter of some urgency, perhaps following the decision, perhaps—? Yes, as Sam Kurtz just pointed out, no matter if this was a decision that had already been made by the broadcaster, some people think that a decision was made to not broadcast a programme that talked about how fragile the natural systems are in Wales and what the reasons for that are, and no matter whether that was done because of Government pressure—it seems it was not—or because the public wasn't in a position to want to hear that, or to be open to hearing it, no matter at what point that happened, do you agree that we need to do so much more to bring the public with us, so that we can all understand? We talk, for example, about a climate emergency and a nature emergency, but I'm concerned sometimes that we are losing this idea of how fragile the situation is. Over the weekend, we saw it on our screens. We will lose that, and the public need to understand that. What do you think that the Welsh Government can do to reinforce how critical this situation is with regard to nature in Wales?

Yes. Delyth, I share your concern there. Actually, David Attenborough's programmes have done an enormous amount over the years, haven't they, to raise awareness of the fragility of the natural world. I've only seen the first episode of the one in question, but my goodness, it's emotive in the extreme, and very beautiful as well. It does make you realise, doesn't it, as I said when I came back from COP15, when you see the beauty of the natural world and then watch the species extinction that goes alongside it, it really makes you realise quite how fragile the planet we live on actually is.

That's why I was so determined to sign up to those goals, and that's why we're so determined to get it right. It does matter to get it right. We've also—. I'm going to say this rather controversially, but it's absolutely true. We know from other legislation that's gone through this place that actually just getting the legislation through is just the first bit. I want this to be implementable. I want the legislation to go through, and then I want us to be able to actually do it immediately. I don't want to spend five years implementing it, so we need to get it right. If that's a bit slower introduction because then we get it right, I make no excuse for that. I think that's a lesson we've learnt.

We're about to embark on a behaviour change programme, which will help people come along the net-zero and nature-positive pathways with us. We're out to consultation at the moment. We're going to be doing a lot of work—. My colleague here, Jeremy Miles, has been doing a lot of work in schools with the Eco-Schools project and so on, because our young people are very evangelical about this. But I agree with you. We need to take the public with us. We need to counter some of the disinformation that's out there, and we need to work at pace with all sectors of society or we just will not—. This is an existential crisis. We will not do it alone. We have to do it with everyone else.