Item 6 is a statement by the Minister for Climate Change on building safety. I call on the Minister to make that statement. Julie James.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I am pleased to have this opportunity to share a significant progress update on the series of actions we are taking as part of the Welsh building safety programme. There are six strands to my update today, ranging from our work in making developers responsible for putting right the issues with buildings they have constructed, to taking forward work to remediate orphan buildings ourselves as a Government, where no developer can be made responsible. Together with Plaid Cymru, I am committed to addressing building safety in Wales. Our ambitious programme will ensure residents can feel safe and secure in their homes. 

Dirprwy Lywydd, I have always maintained the position that the industry should step up to their responsibilities in matters of fire safety. Developers should put right fire safety faults at their own cost, or risk their professional reputation and their ability to operate in Wales in future. The first of these strands is the legally binding developers’ pact. In October, I announced 11 developers had signed up to the developers’ pact. The pact represents a public commitment of their intention to address fire safety issues in buildings they have developed over the last 30 years. Our pact is underpinned by legally binding documentation that sets out our expectations in detail. Today, I'm am pleased to confirm that the following developers have signed this documentation in Wales: Redrow, Lovell, Vistry, Countryside Partnerships, Persimmon, and McCarthy Stone. I'm also pleased that Taylor Wimpey, Crest Nicholson and Barratt Homes have also confirmed their intent to sign. I have made clear I will take every opportunity, including legislation and considering prohibitions on development, to ensure developers step up to their responsibilities. This remains the case. 

Dirprwy Lywydd, I am also determined to take every opportunity I can to protect leaseholders. That is why I have provided direct funding for surveys to be carried out, using a consultant procured by the Welsh Government. This means we have independent and consistent reporting, which sets out where responsibilities for any fire safety issues lie. That is why we do not want to limit leaseholder liability. We do not want leaseholders to have to pay at all for something that is not their fault. It is my intention that, where a genuine dispute arises, the Welsh Government will intervene, rather than have these costs fall to leaseholders. In our view, that is the fair way, that is the Welsh way. The Welsh Government approach is that we will do everything in our power to support leaseholders.

Also, here in Wales, our fund is not limited to buildings with unsafe cladding. The Grenfell fire tragedy highlighted the wider issue of fire safety more generally in high-rise buildings. We invited expressions of interest from all responsible persons for all residential buildings of 11m or over in height. However, on the issue of cladding, all high-rise buildings with known aluminium composite material—or ACM cladding, as its known—issues in Wales have either been corrected or are in the process of being corrected. We have a rolling programme of surveys. To date, 137 have been completed and 61 are being progressed with our contractors. I continue to encourage responsible persons to submit an expression of interest if they have not already done so. This is the starting point for accessing support from the Welsh Government.

Dirprwy Lywydd, the second strand is developer loans. I want to ensure that any reasons for delay are minimised and developers are able to carry out works as swiftly as possible. So, today the Welsh Government has approved a £20 million developer loan scheme. The scheme will provide loans over a period of up to five years for developers. The aim of this loan is: to reduce the number of medium and high-rise residential buildings blighted by fire safety issues; to provide assurance to leaseholders that works will be undertaken as swiftly as possible; to enable reductions in service charges and insurance costs; and to remove barriers so that leaseholders can access financial products such as mortgages.

The developer loan scheme is critical in taking our work in Wales forward at pace. The loans will be available for developers who have signed up to our legally binding documentation, allowing them to accelerate their works to address fire safety, so we can end the suffering of leaseholders in Wales. Let me be clear, Dirprwy Lywydd, that this is a loan not a grant and developers who wish to take advantage of this offer will rightly be expected to pay back every penny of funding to the public purse within five years.

Dirprwy Lywydd, the third strand is orphan buildings. There remains the question of those orphan buildings where the developer is unknown or has ceased trading. In my written statement in January, I announced that I had agreed to an initial cohort of six such buildings to be remediated. I am pleased to announce today that I have extended this initial cohort of buildings. We will now be taking forward 28 buildings, which represents all eligible applications for our initial phase of work. For all 28 buildings, the developer has either ceased trading, is unknown, or the building was developed over 30 years ago. Responsible owners of the buildings are being contacted to go through next steps and arrangements for work plans to be prepared and the works to be undertaken. This will form part of the second phase of the Welsh building safety fund—£375 million of Welsh Government money put in place as part of the co-operation agreement with Plaid Cymru, which will be used to address fire-safety issues, including remediating the orphan buildings.

The fourth strand is progress in the social sector. Alongside the support I have outlined that is being provided to the private sector, substantial works have also been undertaken to remediate medium and high-rise residential buildings in the social sector. To date, works have been completed on 26 social sector buildings and are under way on a further 41 buildings. Today, I am also announcing that £40 million has been made available to undertake fire safety works on a further 38 buildings in the social sector.

The fifth strand is leaseholder support schemes. I'm pleased to say that our leaseholder support scheme is designed to help people in Wales who are in or facing significant financial hardship as a direct result of these building safety issues. In January, I announced that a review of the criteria had been completed. As a result of this, our case handlers have seen a significant increase in inquiries about the scheme. I am pleased to tell you that the first properties are now proceeding with their sales and, once completed, this will allow those leaseholders to move on to new homes. I continue to urge any leaseholders in financial difficulty to complete our eligibility checker, to see if they can access support through this scheme. For further information, please visit the Welsh Government website.

The sixth strand is lenders. I am also pleased to confirm that the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors have agreed to extend their guidance to valuers to apply to both England and Wales. We are working closely with them as this guidance is updated. This guidance will provide consistency in the valuation approach for properties in Wales that are included in the developer-led work, those buildings in our initial orphan cohort, or where we have been able to confirm buildings are either below 11m in height or deemed low risk. This will help support the removal of barriers and allow leaseholders to access mortgages and other financial products. I continue to work with UK Finance to ensure lenders recognise the situation in Wales, so that lenders can provide mortgages for those living in buildings affected by fire safety issues.

Regular updates are available on the Welsh Government's building safety programme via our newsletter. This provides information on both progress and highlights any formal announcements that have been made in the Senedd on this subject. Dirprwy Lywydd, I am very happy to provide details of how to subscribe to this newsletter if Members or their constituents are interested.

The Welsh Government are committed to addressing building safety in Wales and will continue to take forward our building safety programme. I look forward to updating Members as we develop our ambitious plans for delivery. Diolch.

Minister, can I thank you again for bringing forward this statement, in particular the fact that it's come forward a lot sooner than it was indicated? We were expecting a statement—I wouldn't even say of this nature—but we were expecting to hear something from you between Easter and summer, so the fact you've come forward today with it, I think, will provide much reassurance to a lot of tenants and leaseholders.

Regarding the legally binding developers' pact, it's actually good to hear that 11 developers have signed up. You say you're pleased that Persimmon, Taylor Wimpey, Crest Nicholson and Barratt have also confirmed their intent to sign. I'm a great believer that 'intent to sign' is not worth the paper it's not written on, so I suppose really what I'm asking today is: what steps are you taking to ensure that they sign up, and quickly?

You mentioned that you want to take every opportunity to protect leaseholders. You'll be aware that your response to my spokesperson's questions last week have really—. I don't like to use the word 'ignited', but it has, and inflamed a situation where private leaseholders felt they were being left behind with the numbers of millions that have been spent in the rented social sector on remediation. This was a heart-rending message that was on Twitter the other day, and I know that you follow Twitter:

'Dear @JulieJamesMS my flat is also my home. The place where I am meant to rest & fell safe. It is NOT an "investment" to me. My partner and I worked 4 jobs between us to afford it! #EndOurCladdingScandal'.

We've had similar other messages coming in, saying, 'You have to be more in terms of equality,' 'You should really be treating all equally.' Last week, you made the point that it was because it was someone's investment that it wasn't necessarily the same as being in the rented social sector. A house that is not safe to live in—to me, it doesn't matter whether it's rented, social, or whether it's owner owned, a private leaseholder.

The orphan buildings have been worrying me, where the developer is unknown or has ceased trading. Where you had agreed to an initial cohort of six buildings, that's increased now to 28 buildings, and you mentioned that responsible owners of the buildings are being contacted to go through the next step. The Welsh building safety fund: £375 million of Welsh Government money. I'm still trying to ascertain how much of that money you've spent already and what is left to spend.

You move on to progress in the social sector, and that's not where my concerns are.

You mention that the first properties are now proceeding with their sales, and once completed this will allow those leaseholders to move on to new homes. I am sure that that will come as a really huge assurance to them. However, my question again is: when will we know the numbers that have already shown an interest? Those at the meeting I held didn't seem to be too aware of how they do this. So, can you, as well as putting, 'Please visit the Welsh Government website'—? Maybe you could make a statement or—I know there's a big budget now here in this Welsh Government for social media—use social media as a medium to get that message across that people can come forward to you.

I'm glad that you're working with UK Finance. I had to change what I was expecting to put towards you today. But I do think it's a more proactive statement than what we've heard of late. I don't want to repeat, but I need to know how much you've been spending.

Now, you're refusing to replicate sections 116 to 125, and I'm sorry to keep labouring this point, but it is a fact that the people caught up in this really don't understand legislation like we do—those who actually work in the Welsh Government or those in Parliament holding you to account. I just wonder why you will not allow Welsh private leaseholders to have the same legal levers as those across the border. You could bring in legislation here that replicates sections 116 to 125 to a degree whereby it can still have Welsh identity on it. Minister, will you consider looking at sections 116 to 125 again? How you do it, I don't think people are interested, but if you can actually give those same protections to the people living here in Wales, I think you will make an awful lot of people very happy and not afraid to keep living in their homes, as they are today. Thank you.

Thank you, Janet. The 'intent to sign' part is merely that the companies in question have to get the permission of holding company boards. We have letters saying they intend to sign. It is actually worth the paper it's written on, and I do expect them to sign formally very shortly. But they have to go through a board process in order to do that. So, that just is what it is. But they are signed up and they will do the work. So, I don't think people should worry about that bit of it.

In terms of the private sector leaseholders, I just don't know how to explain this to you. You've just said the social sector is not where you're concerns are. I'm sure that's not what you meant. There is a real difference in being able to identify the owner and responsible person of a building in the social sector compared to the private sector. There is a real difference. The difference is really straightforward to understand. The registered social landlord is there on the record, they are easy to contact, we fund them, and there is a mechanism in place. It is easy. In the private sector, it is very complicated indeed. I understand entirely that people might be working four jobs to keep their home, and I have every sympathy with that. I don't want them to lose their equity. But it is the equity that we're discussing, because we could just land charge it all and use that as the funding. I don't want to do that. I am trying to protect the hard-worked-for investment of the private sector leaseholders. But the idea that there's not a complexity, because it suits people to say so, is just nonsense. Each building is different. Each responsible person is different. Each managing agent is different. The leases are different. The repair obligations are different. Each building is different. There's no getting away from that, and that's the difference. [Interruption.] That's the difference. 

You asked me specifically again about sections 116 to 125. Sections 116 to 125 are specifically written for the building safety regime in England, which is not the same as here. So, you can't just lift them up and put them down here, even if you wanted to. But just to be clear, I don't want to. Those sections limit the amount of money that the leaseholders are liable to pay. That means they are liable to pay some money. I have never ever wanted the leaseholders to be liable to pay anything at all. We have always taken the position here that residents in medium and high-rise buildings should not have to pay for these works. We are doing it differently here. I don't need to give those residents a right to sue somebody and get stuck in the courts. Your own evidence showed that they were spending millions on litigation. I don't want people to be in that position. We are substituting the Welsh Government into that position, so if the developer doesn't do what they're supposed to do, we will be the people who take the legal risk. I think that's better. I make absolutely no excuse for that. I have no intention of bringing in sections here that would give leaseholders fewer rights than we are intending to give them. The Welsh Government will take the risk, not the leaseholders. I just don't know how to make that any clearer to you.

On the orphan buildings, all the buildings that we have identified as orphan buildings that have put in an expression of interest will now be remediated, because we have a mechanism to do so. They'll all be written out to very shortly and will begin those works as soon as possible, certainly before this summer. So, they will all start to go into remediation, and I really hope that several of the other buildings will. I'm aware that several buildings are now in remediation. There are buildings in my own patch that are now in remediation that I'm in contact with the leaseholders of. So, very soon, people will be out of this situation. But, where they find themselves in difficulty, then there is a scheme where we will buy them out, and we are now buying people out. You need to publicise that. We will certainly put it on social media again. Actually, lots of people aren't on social media. It's on the websites and we write out through Rent Smart Wales to draw it to people's attention an so on. If you can help me get that out to people, then please do. Please tell them to apply if they're in those circumstances because we're very happy to help them.

I'm very happy with what we've been able to do here in Wales. It has taken far too long, I completely agree, but that's because, whether people like it or not, this has been an absolute nightmare of complexity. I think we've finally got somewhere. The only people who will now not be in the system are people who have not put in an expression of interest. So, please make sure that anyone you're talking to has checked that their building has put in an expression of interest. That's absolutely imperative; there's no route to payment without putting in an expression of interest. Then they will go through the system. If they're an orphan building, they'll get included, and if they're not then we'll contact the responsible people and get the surveys done and so on. We're reimbursing people for the cost of surveys that were undertaken before we came in, provided they meet our requirements, which are that we can rely on the survey, that it was properly tendered and so on, all the things you'd expect. I'm looking again to see if we can reimburse people for other costs that they've incurred. I'm not yet able to say so because it depends on how those costs were incurred and so on.

So, actually, Janet, I think we've done an all right job. I absolutely have sympathy for the people who have lived through this for years and years and years, but we have now got a system where they should be able to sell their house, because people can get a mortgage on it, or they can sell it to us if they're in financial hardship, or indeed they can sit tight and we will remediate the buildings very shortly. That's where we are, and I'm very pleased to say it. 

I thank the Minister for today’s statement. It's an important statement that we on these benches welcome, and it will mean that we see a major step being taken forward to tackle this very serious problem. It's good to see the fruit of the agreement between Plaid Cymru and the Government on this work making a positive contribution to people's everyday lives. 

For far too long we have seen a culture of corner cutting by major developers at the expense of public safety. This came to the fore in the evidence recently heard by the Local Government and Housing Committee, which is looking at building safety, and the residents of buildings in Cardiff and Swansea clearly demonstrating the basic failings in some of those buildings, such as Celestia and Altamar. But on top of this poor building work, the shadow cast by Grenfell has further darkened the lives of every one of these residents. We need to show that large corporations cannot have free rein to operate as they wish for personal gain, and we must see a culture change to safeguard people today and tomorrow.

We know that there are 171 buildings with safety concerns related to them, including the 28 orphan buildings that you have mentioned today that you will look to remedy. I wonder whether the Minister therefore can give us an idea of the percentage of buildings outwith the scope of today’s statement and confirm what work is being done on these and the next steps for residents in these buildings, please. While this statement is to be welcomed very warmly, the truth is that until the remedial work has been completed to make these buildings safe, the residents will continue to live in fear. The announcement with regard to borrowing is to be welcomed. I would, therefore, like to ask the Minister when we can expect to reach a point where every building will be safe for residents without them or the owners having to pay for the work. What is the timetable? 

As I mentioned earlier, the current situation has enabled developers to cut corners leading to serious implications for people’s health and safety. It is shameful that some developers have continued to refuse to take part voluntarily alongside the Government in this important work. Shame on them. I support the Minister when she says that she will look into every option, including amending legislation and preventing further developments to ensure that these developers live up to their responsibilities. So, will the Minister give further details on these options, please, and confirm whether she is looking at blocking developments if an irresponsible developer refuses to co-operate with the Government? Will the Minister confirm how many developers have declined to take part to date or have not expressed their willingness to enter into discussions with the Government?

The public discourse on this scandal has revolved around who is responsible for the remedial work. Therefore, as a final question, I’d like to ask the Minister what mechanism is in place to resolve disputes with developers on detailed issues in specific buildings. Who will regulate the dispute process? What is the mechanism for the resolution of disputes? And in terms of the legal documents that will be submitted as part of this process, what real legal leverage will they have in the dispute? Thank you. 

Thanks very much for that series of questions. In terms of other buildings, do you mean buildings under 11m? Is that what you meant? Yes. We aren't doing anything about that at the moment, because we need to make sure that those in the higher risk buildings, who are the ones who would have most difficulty in escaping, for example, are remediated first. Once we've done that, we will turn our attention to the other buildings. But I will say that, as we go through this process with the developers, we have encouraged the developers and received good feedback from the developers that they will remediate all of their buildings, not just the ones that are over height. I can't say that it applies to houses, I must say, but buildings in multiple occupation, so blocks of sorts—we have had that discussion. But we will turn our attention to that next. Bite-size chunks is where we've gone. And it has been based on a risk analysis; we have to start somewhere.

All the developers that we are aware of who have developments in Wales have now signed up, or have indicated their intent to sign and are going through their internal processes in order to do it. We have, occasionally—there's one at the moment; I won't name them—come across ones that thought they didn't have any buildings in Wales, and, actually, we think we've now found one that should. But I'm pretty sure they will sign up, if we can establish that they're responsible for the building and it isn't an orphan building. It'll be one or the other. Either way, the people in the building will get the remediation they want. I haven't got anyone refusing to sign, so that's good. That's very good.

The big issue for us now will be the amount of supply chain and workforce that is necessary to get this to happen, and that's why we're very keen to work with them in terms of cash flow. That's the developer loans I've just introduced. I don't want them to not be able to do it because there's a cash-flow issue. And also in terms of supply-chain issues and workforce issues, we don't want them all competing with each other and driving the prices up and so on. So, I actually think the Government has a pretty pivotal role in making sure that there's a good supply of buildings coming forward. We know which ones need what doing to them now. The legal documentation does underpin that. I'm not going to go through all of the various bits of the legal documentation, but it's robust, there's a dispute mechanism, as you'd expect, and ultimately they will end up in the courts if they don't do as we ask. We've made that extremely clear and plain.

It's in these people's interests now, isn't it, to get this work done, because let's face it, their reputation is trashed. Actually, they're quite anxious to get their reputations back and for people not to say, 'My goodness, I'm not buying that' because it was built by whoever. That isn't a good place for them to be. They've all signed up to various codes of practice, they've signed up to the new homes ombudsman. They're anxious to get themselves back into a good business footing, and rightly so—they should be ashamed of how they got themselves into this situation. I'm not anticipating any real difficulty other than the supply chain and suitably skilled craftsperson issues. We will work with the developers to make sure we have that supply chain under way and that we have a pipeline of activity that allows people to take advantage of that in the right way, and that those are firms who have the skilled workforce necessary to put right the wrongs of the past, so that we can be sure that they now have done the remediation in the right way.

I'm quite pleased with where we've ended up. I'm very, very sorry that it's taken so long. We have actually been continuously working on it for years now—well, since the appalling events of Grenfell. The next piece, which you didn't ask me about, but which I'll say anyway, Dirprwy Lywydd, testing your patience, is that, obviously, we need to get the new Act in place that puts the obligations onto the right responsible people, so that we don't have this in the future.

I'm very pleased we're having this statement today. As the Minister is aware, it's been a cause of concern to my constituents living in Altamar and South Quay, and it's generated many e-mails and requests on the business statement from me for a long period of time. I welcome the statement today and the progress being made with the developers. Everyone should feel safe and secure in their home. I think that it is a problem that we have to say that, because it's something that we all take for granted.

I welcome the commitment that the Welsh Government will do everything in their power to support leaseholders. I have two questions, and I'm happy to have a written answer on both, because they're getting fairly detailed. Is South Quay in SA1, which was built by Carillion, on your list of orphan buildings? And, as of 20 March, I am told by the Altamar management company that Bellway will not engage with them. Can the Minister intervene or explain how Altamar management can get Bellway to engage with them?

Thank you, Mike. I will write back to you on the very specific points you made. It's worth doing that because I think it's more of a detailed answer than here. But just to be really clear, buildings that don't have anybody responsible left for them standing—so, the developer and everybody else has gone out of business; Carillion is a very good example of that—will, as long as they've put in an expression of interest to be included in the list, and I can't know off the top of my head, I'm afraid, whether the building in question has or hasn't. But I'll write back to you on both points. 

Thank you so much for this statement, and following on from what Janet said, I do welcome it coming so quickly—thank you so much for that, Minister. I just, really, want to concentrate on developers in the short time that I have, and we've heard from my colleague, Mabon ap Gwynfor about some of the issues that I wanted to cover. But I just wondered what range of sanctions was available to non-compliant developers as we go forward. They have had years, literally years, to step up to the plate and they haven't, and it has come at considerable cost to people who are living in these blocks of flats. So, I think my sympathy is totally stretched when it comes to thinking that they can be given any more latitude here. So, can I ask you what sanctions are going to be available to non-compliant developers? For example, are you looking at the option of barring them from building any further developments within Wales, and how would that happen? 

And secondly, I understand that there are some developers who are involved in court action against affected leaseholders, and therefore they seem to be in a place where they are agreeing to one thing but still continuing with court action against some of their leaseholders. So, it is just wanting a little bit more detail, if I may, Minister, in terms of how we're going to be dealing with some of those developers should they be non-compliant going forward. Thank you. Diolch yn fawr iawn. 

Thank you very much, Jane Dodds, for that set of questions. The last one first. We can't interfere in existing court proceedings; we just can't. So, if there's an existing court proceeding, that will have to see its route through the courts. I have absolutely no detail in front of me about which court proceedings are which, or what stage they're at, or any of the legal arguments you'd need to have an understanding of to be able to—. We have no locus to intervene in that, so, I'm afraid I can't do anything about that. 

We have pressed the developers to remediate all of the buildings we're aware of, but I'm aware of at least two buildings that are in extensive litigation that probably will have to see that litigation through to its end, whatever that end is. I have no idea whether it's settleable or anything else, I'm afraid. It's partly why we didn't want to implement the sections that are being discussed all the time, because when people start court action under those sections, then it becomes even more immensely complicated than before. And actually, this is a very straightforward way of doing that—that we intervene with the developers, we give ourselves a contractual relationship with that developer, and the developer is then in a contractual relationship with us, the Welsh Government, and then, if they don't carry out that contractual arrangement to our satisfaction, then we have good legal grounds to go after them. And that's exactly the position we've wanted to get into, and it's taken us a while to do that, but I'm very pleased that we're there now. And then, as I said to Mabon ap Gwynfor, we will then need to also ensure that the work is done properly by skilled people with the right supply chain, and all the rest of it.  

And just to get this number right—I think Mabon mentioned a number—. Just bear with me a second. Yes, we've got over 270 expressions of interest on 163 sites. So, you can see that we simply do not have the supply chain and the workforce to just suddenly do all of them, so we will have to carefully calibrate that. We will try and take a worst-first approach, and so on. So, more detail of that to follow, but we are asking the developers to do that as speedily as possible, and that's why I'm pleased to have put the loans in place as well, because I don't want any further excuses. So, there's no excuse; the money is there, the survey is done, we know what the work needs to do—all we need now to do is ensure that the skilled contractors are in place and able to get the supplies they need to do the work, and we'll be doing that as the next phase. 

Finally, Rhys ab Owen. 

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd, and I also welcome the commitments made in this statement as part of the co-operation agreement between Plaid Cymru and the Welsh Government. I also agree with the comments made by Mabon ap Gwynfor. In visiting many of these developments, it's incredible to see how many other problems some of these developments have, outwith the problems in terms of fire safety. So, I would first of all ask you: when will we see legislation introduced in this Senedd to ensure that developers can't continue to behave in this way?

I was very pleased to see that you've asked developers to sign legally binding contracts to complete the work. That was one concern that had been expressed to me with regard to the pact—that the pact itself would not be binding. I notice that you didn't give a timetable to my colleague Janet Finch-Saunders, but when do you expect all 11 developers to have signed the contract? And can I just see whether I understood what you told Mabon ap Gwynfor? Are you saying that no developers are not engaging with you at the moment?

I also wanted to deal with the dispute between developers and leaseholders. What role do you foresee Welsh Government playing in any future dispute between developers and leaseholders? And I don't want to pre-empt the short debate tomorrow, but what leaseholders really want to see, and what we hear time and time again from them, is that what they want is a clear timetable. I appreciate that timetables might have to move because of lack of skilled workers or resources, but when do you expect, Minister, that all remediation work in Wales will be completed? Diolch yn fawr.

Thank you very much for that. That last question is just an impossibility to answer at this point in time. What we need is a properly set out pipeline, if you like, of work, so that we have all of the skilled people that we can get our hands on in Wales doing the work at the right level, to the right spec, with the right supply chain. I absolutely cannot say how long that will take. As I said, we've got 163 sites to get through, but the big issue there is that we've made sure that those leaseholders who want to move on can move on, because we've got the lenders to get on board with that; they understand what will happen. We've got the leaseholder support scheme for those people who are really struggling to find a buyer for their flat because of the issues there, which the Welsh Government will help with—I absolutely want to allow people to get on with their lives. So we've worked very hard on other aspects of this in order to allow that to happen. So, I'm afraid I'm not going to speculate on that. It would be me speculating, and I don't think that's useful.

But we are, of course, urging the developers to go as fast as they can, using their own workforces and their own supply chains where they are sufficiently skilled and they can meet the specs coming out of the survey work. But it's very important that this is done right. What you don't want is to be talking to me, or whoever's standing in my shoes in the next Senedd, saying that we've got the same problem again. I simply cannot have that, so we need to make sure that it's right. 

On the rest of it, what we want to do is bring forward a Bill that's fit for purpose. We've committed to doing that in this Senedd term. We have been doing a lot of work on this aspect of it, of course, but we've also been doing extensive consultation alongside responsible people, and so on, about what that should look like, who should the responsible people be, how should they be named, what their obligations should be for the build phase, the occupation phase and, indeed, the demolition phase. These buildings won't last forever. So, we need to get that right as well, but we will be taking that through in this Senedd term and I know that all Members, on every side of the house, are very anxious to see that in place. But again, that needs to be fit for purpose, doesn't it? It needs to have the right inspection regime and it needs to have the right responsible person regime in it. I would like to get it right, not fast. We'll get it right in as fast a way as we can, but correct is more important than speed in this instance, and it has to work. It has to be manageable, and it has to actually hold people's feet to the fire in terms of what they build in the future, so that we don't end up back here again. 

I thank the Minister.