Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru

Bore da, bawb. Welcome, everyone. Croeso to this meeting of the Local Government and Housing Committee. The first item on our agenda today, item 1, is introductions, apologies, substitutions and declarations of interest. Hannah Blythyn is attending today as a substitute for Sarah Murphy, who remains a member of this committee although she has recused herself from all committee business following her appointment as a Minister. As usual, the meeting will be held in hybrid format and all Standing Order requirements remain in place, apart from adaptations relating to conducting proceedings in that hybrid way. Public items of the meeting are being broadcast live on Senedd.tv and a Record of Proceedings will be published as usual. The meeting is bilingual with simultaneous translation available. Are there any declarations of interest from committee members, please? There are not.

We will move on, then, to item 2 on social housing supply, the committee's inquiry, and our evidence session today with the Cabinet Secretary for Housing and Local Government. So, I'm very pleased to welcome Jayne Bryant here today and also her officials: Emma Williams, director of housing and regeneration; Stuart Fitzgerald, deputy director of homes and places; and Neil Hemington, head of planning. Croeso. Welcome to you all. Perhaps I might just ask you, Cabinet Secretary, as you're fairly new to post, as it were, and it's your first appearance before this committee today, whether you want to say anything in terms of opening remarks—anything in terms of your initial thoughts in this post.

Diolch, Cadeirydd. And thank you very much for the opportunity to set out a few remarks, as I am very new in post. I'd like to thank the committee, first of all, for the opportunity to give evidence here today. I'd also like to put on record my thanks to Julie James, my predecessor, for all her hard work and dedication and drive in this area in particular. I'm delighted to have been appointed to this portfolio. The importance of housing to the health and well-being of everyone is vitally important, and I'm keen to do what I can to help ensure that everyone has a decent place to call home here in Wales.

We know that investing in social housing reduces poverty, improves health and helps drive economic growth. Good-quality, affordable housing can positively impact on health, mental health and education. We are committed to ending all forms of homelessness from both sides—that's preventing people from losing their homes at one end, whilst working to deliver more affordable homes as quickly as possible at the other. And we've been clear that it's only by doing this can we achieve our ambitions.

Wales has never moved away from its support for the most affordable housing, social rent and it's why we're working to deliver our programme for government commitment to deliver more homes for rent in the social sector this Senedd term. We are, however, trying to deliver vital homes in one of the most challenging times seen in recent history. The combination of the impacts seen by the COVID pandemic, Brexit, the war in Ukraine, as well as inflationary pressures, making it more costly to build a home than ever before, has placed a significant pressure on the housing sector.

I've also heard about the good work that has taken place between the sector and this Government to overcome and to mitigate these challenges as far as is practicably possible, including providing additional funding to reduce the impact in material cost increases and mitigating the impact of phosphates in Wales. I've written to local authorities and registered social landlords in Wales, setting out some of the things that I think we can do to deliver as many homes as possible. Committee members will have seen the recent report form Audit Wales on affordable housing, and I welcome that report. My officials have already responded to the recommendations, accepting all seven of those recommendations. And, Cadeirydd, I'd be very happy to share a copy of that response with you and the committee if that would be helpful.

It would, Cabinet Secretary. Yes, please.

There's a lot of work that has gone on, and there's a lot more to do. I remain committed to using every means possible to deliver much-needed homes for the people of Wales, both in the short and long term.

Okay, diolch yn fawr. Thanks very much for that, Cabinet Secretary. During the course of this session on social housing supply, we'll certainly be touching on a number of the matters that you've mentioned there. Perhaps I might begin by asking a few questions on measuring and, indeed, meeting housing need. Firstly, the local housing market assessments—we've seen recent changes in terms of these, and I just wonder whether you're planning to evaluate that new methodology, just in terms of how effective it is.

Diolch, Cadeirydd. We published that new approach to the LHMAs in March 2022. They have come a long way, but I do recognise there's still a long way to go. We've seen huge improvement in the consistency and quality of the LMHAs to date, but we are on a journey. For the first time, we have now the data to link funding to housing need, and the first cycle of reports using that new approach has only recently been completed. In fact, the last one [correction: the last draft one] has only recently come in. So, LHMAs are refreshed every two to three years and provide a more detailed, local level of understanding, and that in turn informs local authority local development plans and social housing grant prospectuses. My officials are in the process of reviewing those LHMAs—as I said, the last one [correction: the last draft one] has come in very recently—and they'll be reviewing that against the guidance and working with local authorities to ensure reports, including the minimum requirements.FootnoteLink

Officials are also undertaking a process of lessons learnt, as well as consulting local authorities on what worked well or not so well, to support the new approach going forward in the future. So, I think it is really important that we take stock and learn from this, the first tranche of LHMAs.

I take your point that it's very recent in terms of some of the information that's coming to you through this exercise, Cabinet Secretary, but, I just wonder, will you add up the figures, as it were, so that we know what unmet housing need is across Wales in terms of that exercise?

It's quite a complex area, and, just to say again, we've only just had that final one in [correction: final draft one in]. We will look now at what, perhaps, is useful and that can be aggregated or disaggregated, but perhaps I can bring officials in on this one.

Thanks, Cabinet Secretary. Yes, as part of the exercise, we'll be engaging with KAS colleagues—Knowledge and Analytical Services—to take their professional view on which figures are valid to be aggregated up, which are useful to do that. But, as the Cabinet Secretary says, we've only just had the very final report [correction: the very final draft report] in, so it's only in the last week or two, I believe, that we've had a full data set.

Okay, thanks for that. One matter or suggestion that's come to us a number of times in our work as a committee is that there should be an annual Welsh housing condition survey. I know that the previous Cabinet Secretary considered that the cost involved was prohibitive, but I just wonder what your take on that is, Cabinet Secretary. In terms of expense, if that was your view, given the value of the data that could be provided, would you look at different survey methodologies to see what might be affordable?

Thank you. I know my predecessor made some comments around this as well, but I really don't underestimate the need for quality data to inform our policies, measures and the impact that they have. But we do need to find the most effective and most cost-effective way to deliver it. As I understand it, my predecessor also agreed to work to maximise the use of administrative data, as well as work to consider what data requirements are not being met from administrative data. A commitment was also made to scope a five-year housing survey in more depth during 2024-25 to ensure a value-for-money approach. Now, I look forward to seeing the outcome of this scoping exercise, and this is something that I can keep the committee updated with if that would be helpful.

That would be very useful. Is there any timescale for that?

I think it's quite early on at the moment, but perhaps—I don't know if Emma has a specific timescale.

Thanks, Cabinet Secretary. So, at the moment, we're doing the review work, looking at the various options. We're prioritising, so looking in particular at how we use our analytical services, resources most effectively, and that's looking across the whole piece in terms of record level data on homelessness being a key priority, but we're looking to undertake the scoping work for the five-year conditions survey within this financial year, so hopefully by April next year, we'll have a much clearer idea of the options and the costings available.

And, Chair, to your question about the various options: there were broadly three options that were available to us, in really broad terms—piggybacking on the UK-wide approach to conditions survey, taking a bespoke approach in Wales, or doing a broader survey that brings in a fuller view, so looking at social determinants as well. Obviously, that final approach would be the most valuable in lots of ways, but once we've got the scoping exercise and we can look at the costs and discuss with the Cabinet Secretary the value in that, we'll be able to make a clearer decision.

Okay, that's great. James, you wanted to come in.

Yes, on the conditions survey. It's nothing new, it's been bandied about for years as far as I can remember—years ago, when I was in local government, it was being bandied about then. Have Welsh Government done any estimates of how much this will cost local authorities if a conditions survey was asked to be done? Because local authorities aren't awash with surveyors and everything at the minute because of the limited resource they have. Has Welsh Government done any work around the cost of how much a conditions survey would cost local authorities, and would Welsh Government, if it did implement that policy, meet the cost of that?

So, the last conditions survey that was undertaken was funded by Welsh Government. The estimate of what an annualised conditions survey would cost is around £1.5 million to £2 million a year, and I think one of the challenges is, as you rightly say, having enough surveyors out there. The UK-wide—England and Scotland undertake a conditions survey at the moment, and it's a very real challenge that they are facing. So, as part of the scoping exercise, we'll be looking at what's realistic, what's deliverable.

Thank you.

Could I just come in there?

Yes, Lee.

One million pounds to £2 million sounds like a lot of money, but in the scale of the amount of spend on housing, it's a very small amount. Do you have a rough scale of how much you spend on monitoring and evaluation? Because I don't really see how we can properly have an evidence-based policy if we don't have the evidence. And there is a sniffy view about data: it's nice to have, but rather expensive. I view it the other way around. But do you have any sense, a metric, on how much you spend as a proportion of overall spend on monitoring and evaluation?

I don't have a figure off the top my head, but I'm very happy to calculate one and write to the committee with further information.

I think on the conditions survey in particular, one of the things that we noticed from the last conditions survey was that, in terms of the data back, it gave some valuable insights, particularly around fuel poverty, for example, but in terms of moving to an annualised survey, the conditions of our properties don't change that quickly, so that's part of the justification there. But the work overall work and the prioritisation that I referred to is exactly as you say, about trying to ensure that we are prioritising the most important data sets. As the Cabinet Secretary says, we absolutely recognise that we have data gaps, and the work that we're doing with Knowledge and Analytical Services to knit together all of our administrative data to give a far richer picture by drawing on alternative data sets, including from the Office for National Statistics, Land Registry et cetera—

I take your point that an annual survey may not be terribly revealing. Is there a cycle that would be more instructive—every three years, every four years?

So, the cycle that we're considering is every five years.

Okay. Thank you.

Okay.

We'll keep you up to date with progress on that.

Yes, I'd appreciate that, because, yes, that evidence base is so important, isn't it?

Absolutely.

Cabinet Secretary, if we move on, one thing that we've also consistently heard about as a committee is the shortage of one-bedroomed properties in Wales. Is that something that concerns you and do you have any views as to how that shortage is best addressed?

Yes, absolutely. I absolutely recognise that we've got an urgent need for suitable homes for single-person households. This is evident in these LHMAs and from the number of single individuals in temporary accommodation. And, as you say, it's evidence that I'm sure all Members have heard within their own constituencies as well. Sustainable balanced communities do need a mix of housing type, households and tenures. Officials review those LHMAs under the new arrangements to check that they reflect that local need, but planning considerations will also assess the balance in a development and local area. 

LHMAs are saying that it's really important and reflected in our SHGs—the social housing grant programme—and we're seeing an increased proportion in the programme. However, solely developing one-bedroomed accommodation would not align with our planning policies in Wales to ensure balanced communities with that mixed tenure that we want and mixed type of accommodation. So, I do absolutely recognise the challenge. There's a lot that has been done, but certainly more to do.

Just before I bring James in, in terms of mixed communities, we did hear evidence that one way of addressing that need to have mixed communities whilst providing more single-bedroomed properties would be through acquisitions and infill development. Is that something you'd be supportive of?

Yes, absolutely. We're looking at those opportunities and it's something that we're already investing in. We are safeguarding but converting existing larger properties into single-person accommodation. So, we've seen examples of terraced housing where they've been converted into that single-person accommodation, but, importantly, they could also be converted back in future to family homes. So, it's about being flexible with that as well and responding to the needs at the time and in the future, obviously. 

Okay, thank you for that. James.

Cabinet Secretary, in my part of the world, a lot of single-person accommodation tends to be older persons' bungalows. In Powys, for example, you don't tend to have many high-rise flats and estates. One thing we do have, though, is a lot of flats that are above old shops, which local authorities cannot procure because of the WHQS—the Welsh housing quality standard. So, for younger people who tend to be stuck on the housing register, waiting for that single-person accommodation, there's nothing for them. Do you think the Welsh Government should look at the standard and think, 'Right, a property might not quite meet WHQS now, but, for an active young person, where there is an opportunity to put them in a flat above a shop, or something like that, or a couple of flats, it is an option for those people'? Local authorities can't buy them currently because they don't meet the standard that they currently have to meet. That is some way, if, with a few little tweaks, we could actually get more single-persons accommodation for younger people who are fit and active to use those properties, which would actually free up as well some of the older persons' accommodation which is being taken by younger people as well. Is that something that the Welsh Government are looking at, because it used to frustrate me greatly years ago that I couldn't actually do things like that that could actually help housing waiting lists as well?

Well, I completely take your point, and again it's the point of looking at different areas and responding to that local need. Perhpas I can bring in Emma to give some specifics, or Stuart.

Absolutely. I'll start, if that's okay, Cabinet Secretary, and then Stuart will come in. So, on the standard, there is quite a lot of flexibility and it's something we've done quite a lot of work on over the last 12, 18 months, aligning the various standards. So, for aqcuisitions, there is scope for an acquisition to be made with a plan to bring it up to WHQS, and the support is there. Properties can be bought into stock, with an agreement that if they can’t be bought up within a timescale, then they will be disposed of. So, there is quite a lot of flexibility in the system. Stuart, do you want to—?

Yes, to—. Sorry, did you want to come back on that?

Yes, I just wanted to say that it's a bit of short-termism, isn't it? In Brecon, for example, there are a lot of two-up, one-downs—the other way around, sorry—which will never meet the WHQS standard, but they're a perfectly fine house for somebody who is fit and active. And as long as there's flexibility in the system, if that person became less able, they could move on to another property. I know the local authority in Powys has had to buy properties, has put people in them, then had to sell them, put them back on the open market, because they don't meet WHQS standards in time, and those people have had to go and live in bed and breakfasts, or different things like that, afterwards. That's not an appropriate way to start housing people. I think a little bit more flexibility around that could help, because some properties are never going to meet WHQS standards in certain parts of the country. They never will. In old market towns, it's just impossible without knocking them down and starting again. And the national park won't let you do that anyway. So, we do need to have a bit more flexibility in the system around that, I think. It's still a bit too rigid for my liking, because I think it's making properties that are perfectly good and available for people to have become the second homes of people coming from London who can afford to buy them to come and live in on the weekend or a couple of weeks a year.

It's an incredibly challenging area, that balance between investing in a long-term home and investing public money in something that is a long-term home and making sure that we don't slip into a downwards spiral towards something being incrementally better than temporary accommodation in a B&B. The aim here is to move people on into long-term, sustainable homes that sustain their lifestyle, but it is a difficult area. Around some of the transitional accommodation capital programme projects that we've done, we've taken the approach of the team working very closely with the local authority or the registered social landlord, and with technical expertise from architects, et cetera, to find the best and pragmatic solution for properties. And we've got a number of conversion properties in particular that have taken that pragmatic approach. So, we're trying to be flexible where we can, but whilst maintaining a minimum standard that is about investing money in homes that are long-term homes and that support people's dignity and ongoing lifestyle.

I think that's an important point around the pragmatism, really, but I certainly recognise the point you've outlined, which is frustration within the locality. But, it is about being pragmatic, keeping as close as possible and making sure that we are not going down on standards. We have to have those aims and we have to be pragmatic as well. But, as Emma has said, there is that flexibility within the system at the moment.

Could I just—

Sorry, Stuart.

Sorry, Stuart. Go on.

So, housing above shops in town centres is a huge opportunity for housing. There is a lot of it, and there's a double outcome for regenerating our town centres as well. You'll see in our position statement that we need more mixed-tenure homes in town centres. So, it is a huge opportunity for us. We've got a range of things happening. There's loan funding to bring forward to purchase and renovate. Compulsory purchase orders are an issue. So, getting hold of the property is really difficult, and we've got a fund in place to de-risk the legal cost of CPO-ing. And we've got the TACP fund, which, once we've managed to purchase the property, we can use. And those standards on TACP go to a minimum standard. So, it's fitness for human habitation, and then up to a standard. We can work on remodelling through TACP. So, can we make a room—? Generally, it's room size, so can we remodel to make it larger over that period so that it doesn't have to be sold? So, there's lots there, but it's hard to get—that balance has got to be right, and it can't be a race to the bottom on standards, which is a term that I hear in the sector. So, there is a huge opportunity around that, and it's something that we're really interested in and we've got lots of interventions there, but the key barriers around it are, quite often, getting our hands on, or helping local authorities to get their hands on, those properties above shops and being able to convert them into housing.

And just to say, I've seen this in my own constituency. It's worked particularly well within Newport, where you have seen, in the city centre, that the local authority, and housing associations, have bought up some properties above shops and we've seen more people living above the shops in the city centre, and it has really had an impact. I think, for too long, as well, when we talk about older people's living, we've been thinking outside and away from services, but actually having people living closer, in city centes, town centres and places, as you mentioned, in Brecon, are really important opportunities.

I certainly agree with that in terms of the experience in Newport, Cabinet Secretary, and it’s so important in terms of regenerating those town and city centres as well, isn’t it. It has multiple benefits. Hannah.

I think Stuart actually part answered the question I was going to ask before I asked it with regard to the role that—. I know, particularly in my locality, the lack of one-bedroomed properties is a real issue for the local authority, and, obviously, particularly for younger people that live there, and single people as well. I think you talked about the opportunities there in terms of town-centre regeneration. I just wanted to ask: are there ways in which that could potentially be accelerated? Is there more that we can do to accelerate that work, and, if so, what would that look like?

I know there are the various packages of funding to support local authorities, but what consideration, perhaps, has the Welsh Government given to potentially becoming public sector landlords as well? Because I think a lot of the challenges within town centres is who owns the properties, isn’t it, and what they do with it, and, again, there’s that power of the public purse and intervention to really drive the outcomes and the standards that everybody around this table would like to see.

Diolch. I think that’s an important point about—. I’m keen to look at what more we can do within that area, so I can certainly assure you that I’ll have those discussions to see how we can accelerate that. I think the point you make around just how important it is for people to live close to those services, being in those town centres, city centres, using all opportunities that we can—. And I’m sure it does frustrate people when they think there are lots of empty properties that could be used for housing and not understanding that the local authority perhaps doesn’t own all these places that can be redeveloped in that way. But, I think, it’s having that look at the minimum standards, making sure that it’s suitable, and making sure that we do all we can to get some of these properties back, and a lease of life into these properties, but also a home fit for people that deserve to have a home.

Okay. Lee. 

Can I just touch on the issue of acquisitions, particularly in areas of shortage? So, we’ve seen the trial of increasing council tax in areas with high levels of second homes, and we read that there is now a glut of property on the market in some of those areas. Are you looking at how you can work with housing associations and local authorities to try and purchase some of those properties that have been put on the market to make them available for social rent?

Yes, I think, certainly, acquisition is a really important aspect now of how we’re looking to bring more social homes for rent into the mix of everything, really. So, that is something we’re looking at. I don’t know if Emma would like to say a bit more about the pace.

Certainly. Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. So, one of the things that we’ve changed is the threshold for use of social housing grant for acquisitions. So, local authorities are able to put more of their social housing grant towards acquisitions than they used to be able to, if that’s the right thing to do in an area. The TACP also supports acquisitions, and Stuart may want to elaborate on some of the conversations he’s had with our delivery partners around an increased focus on acquisitions.

Some of our RSL partners, for example, have got quite specific programmes of looking for what they term as 'buy-backs', so looking for ex-social homes—they know the areas, they’re often in areas where they’re already managing properties, and so those are quite attractive to them, and quite a number of those—. I think we’re seeing an increasing number of acquisitions in the programme, but, of course, it’s again about that balance of not wanting to slow down on new build. We need more new gold standard social homes, but accepting that, actually, acquisitions is a very good way to increase our capacity much more quickly, and, in some areas, it’s the attractive option.

That’s a general answer, and that’s good in general, but, specifically about these areas where we have been targeting additional measures to deal with second homes, people are putting their houses on the market, and there’s an opportunity there to step in. Is that something you’re looking at?

So, the local authorities would lead on that. Stuart, I don't know if you've got anything to add?

Yes, that’s quite recent, isn’t it. But we’d see it as an acquisition, as an off-the-shelf or a right to buy. We haven’t directed them to do that yet, but—

Surely it's not unexpected. We've introduced an extra tool to— 

Yes, I wouldn't—

—drive second home owners out of the market and create capacity for locals. 

I'd expect to see those coming forward when they—. So, the way TACP works is the local authority and RSLs will work to put a set of opportunities to us. That includes acquisitions, and I'd expect those to be included in those opportunities.

Okay, so that's the Welsh Government being reactive. But are you proactively looking, with local authorities, at how you can sweep up some of these properities that have been put on the market?

We haven't asked for that yet, but, other than the assumption—

I think, yes, that's there in general terms, but not specifically in those areas. 

I think that's a fair—. I think what you've raised is an important aspect and we can certainly look for that, Lee. Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, we will need to move on but, James, if it's very brief.

It's actually building on Lee's point a little bit. In some of these areas where some of these homes are coming back on the market, those local authorities are not stock-holding local authorities either. Powys, for example, still retains its own housing stock, because we've got the housing revenue account and the ability to buy these properties if costs are viable and the HRA can afford it. But how would you support local authorities to buy properties if they're not stock-retaining local authorities and don't have a housing revenue account to pay for them?

They would partner with their RSLs.

It's going through the RSLs, is it?

Yes.

Obviously, that would be a conversation with Government, because, obviously, they've got a business model as well, since some of those properties are a lot more expensive, probably, than others.

Having said that—sorry, Cabinet Secretary—a non-stock-holding local authority can have a small stock of properties. So, generally, 50, although there are a few exceptions to that. And we do see some local authorities and we support some local authorities in making acquisitions that they hold as their own stock, primarily for temporary and emergency accommodation, but there is some capacity there.

Okay.

Okay, James, we will need to move on. Siân Gwenllian. Siân.

Diolch, Siân. First of all, I'd just like to put on record my thanks to Audit Wales for their report into affordable housing. We have already considered their findings and their recommendations and responded. We can, Cadeirydd, again, perhaps, make sure that you've got a copy of the response, if that would be helpful to the committee to see, but we have accepted all those recommendations.

As Audit Wales said in their report, modelling how much it will cost to deliver the remaining pipeline is very complicated. It's not a linear process, so I think we have to recognise it is a complex area. I don't know if you wanted to add anything, Emma or Stuart.

Yes, I can. So, yes, that figure in the Audit Wales report is based on money that we had and average grant rates. So, it is quite a basic calculation, if you like, across a number of years. In reality, it is more complex. Schemes cost different amounts. Some schemes that we funded in the last Government term will count towards this target, and the same—some that we fund this year will contribute to the next target. Acquisitions are generally a cheaper grant rate than new build, and the different tenures cost very different things.

That said, it is really pressured, and we do require extra budget. The strategy going forward of how we mix new build and acquisitions will be important to consider as we set budgets going forward. Again, all of that said, we've got a really strong pipeline across our capital programmes, SHG and TACP, and most of the schemes and homes within that programme are funded—if not completely, in part. So, I would say it's not all as gloomy as it perhaps comes across in the Audit Wales report there, and there are lots of things we can do to get as close as we can, and that's some of the actions that the Cabinet Secretary set out in her letter to local authorities. So, really difficult, but looking at the actual pipeline of schemes and homes we've got coming forward, I think we can be quite positive.

Siân.

Yes. But you did say it's really difficult and, of course, we have to accept what the audit report is saying, what Audit Cymru is saying to us, about this gap, a huge gap, in the capital budget. So, you can't just sit around and wait for everything just to happen; what are you doing in terms of trying to find this extra money within the housing budget, or what conversations will the Cabinet Secretary be having with her colleagues around the Cabinet table to emphasise the need now to be really moving into this area in terms of budgetary commitments? Because, after all, if we are following the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015, and we are looking at preventative ways of combating problems, well, housing and investing in housing is absolutely crucial to that.

No, absolutely, Siân, and I think one of the things that we do need to recognise—and I said at the start, really—is around that preventative side of things as well, and working both sides, making sure we're preventing people being pushed into homelessness as well as solving the longer problem. But I want to put on record that we are providing record levels of funding to support the delivery of social housing this Senedd term, with more than £1.4 billion allocated, and so that's at the backdrop of these extremely challenging budgets. We've protected the budget for social housing last year; we awarded an additional £61 million on top of the original £300 million budget for social housing grant, and an overall budget of £330 million has also been set aside for the social housing grant in 2024-25.

We must recognise that the increased budget has been impacted by the highest levels of inflation and increased costs in building materials. To put it simply, our investment doesn't go as far as it now does or once did, but I can assure the committee and assure the Member that these discussions will be had around the Cabinet table. This is really important and I see this agenda, in terms of delivery, as not just something that would sit within my portfolio; it's about having discussions with other Cabinet members and Cabinet Secretaries, for example, around skills and around trying to unlock some of the potential with what we've heard of with phosphates, for example. So, it's about having those discussions, and I can assure the committee that I will certainly be doing that.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. Lee.

Just to ask specifically on the social housing grant and the foundational economy, I know there's some good work taking place within the Welsh Government; there's a secondment into the Welsh Government to try and marshal around new build in particular, the local supply chains, which is excellent. I was at a conference last week where that was updated, and I was very encouraged by it.

One of the issues that strikes me with the social housing grant, which is something like a £300-million-a-year programme—. In other areas of the foundational economy, we've encouraged what's called communities of practice—we bring together the different actors to try and spread good practice and to challenge each other—and it seems that the social housing grant sector would be ripe for doing something similar. Because, at the moment, there doesn't seem to be any institutional learning for how that money is spent and how we can get better at the many objectives that we have. So, I just wonder if it's something you'd take away and consider, whether or not there's scope for having a community of practice specifically for the social housing grant.

Yes, absolutely, and thank you for raising that, and, certainly, I'm happy to have a discussion with you about that and also about the conference that you went to, which sounds very interesting. But, absolutely, I would certainly consider that.

Okay. Did you—? Do you want to add to that?

Only that—there isn't a specific community of practice, as you describe—we do have quite extensive networks across the sector, increasingly trying to make sure that those networks are not split according to RSL or local authority, and increasingly also trying to combine the conversations around homelessness prevention and supply, so that we're not having those separate conversations. But, as the Cabinet Secretary says, having a more formalised community of practice may well be something that could have real value.

Thank you.

Okay. Siân.

Diolch, Siân. Obviously, with the recent changes around the Cabinet table—. This was something that Jack Sargeant was due to be chairing, but that has not progressed, because of those changes around the Cabinet table. The taskforce was intended to look at some key areas of blockage in housing delivery. I can assure the committee that this is something that I am very keen to progress, and I will certainly keep the committee updated. It was very clear yesterday, and I think over the last week—few weeks, actually—that the First Minister is really keen on driving delivery. She's appointed a new Minister for delivery as well. And this is something where the First Minister and myself are really keen to see progress, and we'll continue to drive that. So, I will be announcing a chair of that committee in due course, and I will certainly keep the committee updated with progress in that area.

It's useful, perhaps, that the delivery Minister is very familiar with these issues, Cabinet Secretary. [Laughter.]

Yes, aboslutely.

How significant might it be if those blockages could be removed? What sorts of numbers are we talking about?

Well, I think it would be really significant. It's really important, as I mentioned, there are—. It's not straightforward, in terms of we're not just talking about money, we're talking about areas where we've seen—. We've talked about the phosphates, and there's been a real focus on that. So, I think having those discussions with the Cabinet Secretaries, but also making sure that officials are working across portfolio on this, so that we can unlock as much of that potential as we possibly can. We have to have a real focus on this. As you say, the Minister for delivery is very familiar with this area, and she'll be taking a strong interest in that. I don't know the specific numbers, but we can certainly keep you posted. Stuart.

So, our very latest data collection from the sector—. We have six-monthly projections. When I said a 'strong pipeline' earlier, Chair, there are enough schemes and homes in there to get really close to the target. And what we do then is ask the sector to RAG status those—so, red, amber, green—and then we have a delivery group internally to look at—across planning, sustainable urban drainage specialists—all those kinds of things that can represent blockages, to really hone in on those red and amber schemes that might not deliver in this Government term—it might be in the next—to try and accelerate and bring them forward. One of the things that the Cabinet Secretary put in her letter out to local authorities was to come forward with any schemes that perhaps aren't in the main programme at the minute for the local authority, but could be started and completed. So, there's a conversation to be had around that. If it isn't in the main programme, but just requires funding, we need to know about these schemes that could deliver, so let's hear about them and let's try and work that through. So, lots of things are going on to try and turn those red and amber schemes into greens and make sure they deliver by the Government term. So, really, that's our focus at the minute.

And just to mention about that letter, which I said I'm very happy to share with the committee, just saying that, in the short term, as Stuart said, some of my asks have been consideration of the schemes within the social housing grant programme that could be delivered before the end of this Senedd term, an accelerated focus on those acquisitions that we've talked about as well, utilising all those funding streams to support the development of more affordable homes and prioritising planning efforts on schemes that deliver the most significant levels of social housing. So, I have been really clear in that letter that a longer term focus is needed, and we should endeavour to allocate affordable-housing-led sites in development plans to ensure that future pipeline of supply. So, as I say, this letter has gone out; I'm looking forward to receiving all the responses and the positive responses, because this is a real collective effort. We all have to put our shoulders to the wheel now on this. It's a really important area. 

Okay. Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. James, very quickly, because we are quite pressed for time. 

Yes, very quickly. I hope you can enlighten me, Cabinet Secretary, on the new delivery Minister, since we're talking about delivery—it's the new buzz word of the Government. We've moved away from 'deep-dives' to 'delivery'. So, I'm just wondering how you interact with the new delivery Minister, because if you don't deliver, does that mean Julie James is going to have to deliver for you? I'm just interested in how this all works in terms of scrutiny, really, and how you interact to make sure the Government is delivering those targets, because if you don't deliver, Cabinet Secretary, does that mean the other Minister is going to have to do it for you? 

Well, that's an interesting point, but, yes, it's very early days. And I'm not sure all deep-dives have gone away, have they, but some might have different views. 

A lot of people around this table—[Inaudible.]

Some might have different views. It is early days, but I think what is important is having the Minister for delivery focusing on a particular area, working with her as well. I think, luckily in this area, she very much knows this probably back to front as well. So, I think having—. The importance is having a focus on these particular areas where we need to deliver. We'll see how well those all work together, but I'm very confident that with that focus on delivery, working together, like I say, all putting our shoulders to the mill on these particular issues, we'll hopefully see real progress.  And, as I say, in terms of that taskforce that I would like to see as well, I think there are opportunities to see where we can unblock the system. There had been terms of reference for that taskforce, so that is ready to go, and I'd like to see that happen as quickly as possible now. I don't know if you want to just perhaps say a few bits about the taskforce terms of reference, Emma. 

Thanks, Cabinet Secretary. So, linking back to earlier conversations, one of the things that the taskforce will be set to look at is how we make stronger links between LHMAs and local development plans. So, it's strengthening that link to make sure that when local need is assessed, it matches with the land that's available and then feeds on into the planning system. Also, looking at—straying into Neil's area here—but looking at the role of regional approaches to planning. We know that there are real pressures in planning, so, actually, is there scope there? 

And, forgive me, I have forgotten the third area, Stuart.  

Modern methods of construction. 

Thank you—rescued by my colleague. 

So, we've got a number of reports with some excellent recommendations to follow up on there to try and support the MMC sector, and help us to deliver more homes more quickly. So, yes, an important area.  

So, I think that just gives a bit of an outline of the focus on delivery, really. 

Okay. We're more than halfway through our allotted session and we've got through about a quarter of the areas we want to cover, so we really need to speed things up, I'm afraid, in terms of questions— 

And answers.

—and, indeed, answers. Siân. 

Diolch, Siân. We've had that recent report from Audit Wales, and it is really important that we focus around long-term delivery, and I've outlined how we've written to the local authorities and the RSLs. I think this, combined with the actions being taken as part of the affordable housing programme and our commitment through the land division, our four-year funding programme for the social housing grant and our actions to support the planning sector, all provide that long-term commitment to affordable housing delivery. 

Just on the point around the percentage that you said, let me be clear that delivering more affordable homes in Wales is an absolute priority. Yes, of course I want to see a higher share, and that's why we're focusing on building more social homes and on acquiring homes from the private market to bring into social ownership, and investing in schemes like Leasing Scheme Wales. The 16 per cent, I don't know if that's particularly referencing—. Emma.

Social housing. Social housing, in many parts of Europe, the percentage of the housing stock that is social housing is higher than the 16 per cent, and I'm asking you what your long-term vision is for developing social housing. I am a little bit concerned about what is in the evidence you've presented to the committee, which seems to be putting the emphasis on creating competition within the market. This is point number 47 under section 8, where you're saying that, by promoting a more varied and competitive market, that is how we can start to provide more social housing. Now, I'm not sure that that is the way forward. I would argue, and many others would argue, that it's the market that's created the present crisis. So, I was a little bit concerned to see that approach starting to appear in your evidence. I'm just wondering whether you can elaborate on that. 

Thank you. So, I'm just rapidly refreshing myself with what point 47 actually says there. I think that mainly relates to the sector and the construction sector, so, trying to make sure that we have as vibrant a sector in play, and that we bring more of our volume builders into scope, in terms of being able to build the quality of homes that we want in the social sector. So, for example, on some of our own landholdings, where we've gone to the market, we've been keen to encourage a wider range of developers to bid to demonstrate that the sector at large, not just RSLs and local authorities, can deliver the kind of quality social homes that we want, and to prove the viability of much higher levels of affordability in a development. So, I think, just referencing very quickly, that's what that competition, that market is about. It's about the construction sector and having a much larger pool of construction to draw on, because one of the challenges that we face collectively is the capacity of the system to be able to build at the scale and pace that we need.

I think Neil would just briefly like to come in.

Yes, just very briefly. If you look back at the data, we've only ever got close to meeting the need for housing, and social housing in particular, when the state in one form or another was building a lot more. So, if you look back at the 1970s into the 1980s, that's when we were getting much closer to meeting housing need. In the 1980s, there was a policy decision at that time that was to more or less rely on the market to meet that. So, you ended up in a position where, of market schemes, there was a small amount of affordable housing provided as part of that. The policy changes we've introduced in planning policy are trying to reverse that. So, rather than seeing, if you like, social housing, affordable housing as residual on market sites, it's now an opportunity to specifically allocate sites where the majority of the housing will be affordable, not the minority. That does impact on land values as well. So, if you want to get closer to meeting need, you have to look at a different way of actually delivering housing, and it's much more about having a stronger interventionist role.

Yes, I agree with that, but that is not how I interpreted the section here. Maybe it's the wording, so I hope it is. So, in terms of more intervention by Government, do you agree that we need to be thinking about some kind of corporation that is tasked with the role of accelerating the process of developing the local land assets?

Well, the Welsh Government has established that internal land division, with a remit to contribute towards the acceleration of the delivery of more well-designed, sustainable homes and places on public sector land. More recently, the land division's remit has been expanded. It now includes the acquisition of appropriate landholdings, providing further assistance to unblock obstacles faced by privately held stalled sites, and undertaking site assembly in strategic areas so that holistic placemaking can be delivered. We now have a pipeline of sites that will drive forward that delivery of more social homes. That is what I think is the right way to deliver it at the moment.

With the functions of a land division, it seems to be there's no need for a new body that's evident at this point, but I look forward to seeing the evidence. But perhaps—

Would the land division then, in your view, need to be scaled up, if we're talking about delivering new towns, urban extensions, and so on?

In terms of new towns, I've seen the announcements by UK Government. In Wales, any proposals for new towns should be brought forward through those strategic development plans and be designed to meet part of the housing need of that region as a whole. It's unlikely that a single local planning authority would need to accommodate growth of this scale, because new towns need to be at least 10,000 homes, to sustain necessary economic and social infrastructure. I think urban extensions, delivered by local authorities, are a better fit for Wales. We've seen that, Cadeirydd, in your own constituency with Glan Llyn, for example, and we've also seen Plasdŵr in Cardiff. So, they're being explored through the current LDP review process.

Okay. Hannah.

Thanks, Chair. It links to what Siân Gwenllian said earlier around ways in which we potentially can accelerate the development of public land assets. Along with, Cabinet Secretary, the rapid reading that no doubt you've been doing as you come into a new post, you may have picked up that witnesses to this committee inquiry had said that they thought Unnos would have a development corporation role, but instead, in their words, it had become a 'dumping ground' for too many functions, like the place to put everything you don't know where to put anywhere else. Do you think it has a focused function, and how would you perhaps see its role developing over time? 

Diolch, Hannah. As Members will know, the original co-operation agreement did not include a development corporation role for Unnos. The Unnos programme has been an important enabler for increasing the scale and pace of delivery of affordable and social housing. This work has included the local authority delivery programme, research to determine the potential and capacity of off-site modern methods of construction, supporting the work of a net-zero social housing pattern book for Wales, developing a rural housing action guide and leading on an empty homes handbook for Wales. That's all really vital work, and that continues in support of delivering those more affordable homes.

Okay, Hannah. Altaf.

Thank you very much. Cabinet Secretary, can the Welsh Government do more to provide social landlords with greater longer term funding certainty for rent policy, the TACP and decarbonisation?

Diolch, Altaf. Committee members will have seen that one of the recommendations from Audit Wales was to explore longer term funding for the sector—something we've talked about this morning—and, again, I have accepted that recommendation in principle. The social housing grant programme already has a longer term time frame, providing support over four years. Officials will explore the longer term funding approach used by education capital programmes and whether that can be applied to funding for affordable housing. So, we are looking at different ways.

In terms of rent policy, we’ve commenced a significant programme of work to review, in close collaboration with the sector, the current rent and service charge standard to inform the development of our future social rent policy for Wales. And although inflation remains relatively steady, under 3 per cent, our economic challenge remains. But it’s vital we take the time to ensure we develop a social rent policy that’s fit for purpose and aligns with our legislative programme. Affordability is key, and we’ll need to work collectively to embed this commitment to affordability at the heart of our future social rent policy. In the interim, I have already written to landlords setting out the current standard, and I’ll be expecting it to cover the next financial year.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary.

Altaf, can we move on to planning at this stage?

Yes, that should be all right.

Is that okay? Thank you. James.

Diolch, Cadeirydd. Cabinet Secretary, the First Minister outlined yesterday that as a Government priority she’s going to speed up planning decisions, which is welcomed, I’m sure, across the whole system. But outside the developments of national significance process, how are the Welsh Government going to do that?

Thank you, James. As you know, there’s now a Cabinet Minister who has responsibility for planning, which is not me. Neil had agreed to come to the committee before the role was changed, but I am grateful to Neil for being here today. So, there is a Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Energy and Planning, and I think there’s a lot of work to do across portfolios, as I said. So, I’ll be looking to have early discussions with the Cabinet Secretary on some of these matters, but I don’t know if Neil wants to come in specifically.

Yes, certainly. It’s probably fairly well known that planning as a profession, particularly in local authorities, has seen quite a few cuts in recent years, and we have issues about capacity and capability within local government. So, there are a number of things we’re looking to do. We’re starting to work with the Royal Town Planning Institute, for example, to look at the baseline of planners in Wales and associated areas. Because you’ve got to remember that, if there’s a planning application, there’s always a highways engineer somewhere in the chain, there’s a biodiversity officer, and if we don’t have the right people in the chain it won’t work. So, RTPI are going to start looking at the baseline so we can prepare a workforce plan. So, that’s one thing we’re doing.

We’re also looking to move much more towards cost recovery for planning applications. At the moment, they nowhere near cost recover. There'll be a consultation hopefully in the autumn, which will set out a pathway to full cost recovery. So, we’ll be getting more money in through the door for planning authorities to actually employ staff. I think the biggest challenge is where do we find those people, because as we know, when one local authority advertises for someone, it’s great for the individual, they get a pay increase, but it leaves a gap somewhere else. At the moment, we’ve just got a merry-go-round going on. So, in the long term, we want to get more people into the profession, but that won’t happen immediately.

We also need to actually focus the people we have on the areas where we have the biggest impact. The Cabinet Secretary has already spoken about writing to local authorities. She’s written to local authorities, and one of the things she said was, ‘Can you prioritise affordable housing applications for me, please?’ Similarly, we’re looking at how we can prioritise DNS applications. So, the biggest impact applications is where we focus the resource that we have.

There are a number of things we can do. We're potentially looking at regionalisation as well. We already have examples of some specialist areas—minerals and waste—where that function is provided on a regional basis. We could also provide some more resilience, potentially looking at things like historic buildings, looking at areas like biodiversity, looking at other associated things. But you’re always going to need a case officer to get the application out the door. So, we're starting, but it’s a long journey.

I think the issue around the workforce is really important. I know the previous Cabinet Secretary has said that. But it is around making sure that we’re encouraging people and have those skills. We’re keen to have discussions with the Minister for skills as well on this.

Cadeirydd, I’ll take some direction for you. As the Cabinet portfolios have changed and some of my questions are directly to the new Cabinet Secretary, I’d like some direction from you over the line of my questioning, because I don’t think it’s fair on Mr Hemington to answer all the questions on behalf of the Cabinet Secretary as an official. I'm sure he would, but I'm not sure if it's appropriate considering the Cabinet Secretary doesn't cover this portfolio responsibility and Mr Hemington doesn't have his Cabinet Secretary here. 

I think factual questions that relate to this inquiry are absolutely fine without straying into the political sphere, James, if you can manage that.

I'm not sure I can, really, John, but I'll try my best. [Laughter.]

I'm not quite sure who to address my question to, but I'll go to you, Cabinet Secretary and you can defer if you want. Regional planning structures was something that was brought in by Government, and Mr Hemington talked about the lack of planning officers. Moving to a regional structure could actually create more problems in the system, couldn't it, because you may move more planning officers to a regional level, but actually, planning officers, then, are leaving local authorities to go there, so planning decisions at a local level are then getting slowed down because they don't have the resource in the system. Is that something that the Government is aware of and what's it going to do to make sure that all parts of the planning system work? We could have a fantastic regional system but local authority planning departments could be as slow as anything and not determining any planning applications. Is that something that we have to be aware of? If you need to defer, that's fine.

I think that does sound like something that we would do. We've got the corporate joint committees and there's that existing legal requirement for them to prepare those strategic development plans. But again, I think it's really important that we do look at the workforce and look at, as you say, whether that's on a local basis or on a regional basis. Because it takes time to make sure that we've got the skills in those areas. And that goes across the board within all of these really important things. We have to try to encourage young people to go into these jobs and I think that's something I'm keen to focus on, as well. Neil.

Specifically on the regional point, yes, there is an additional resource requirement. What we're seeking or trying to do is time the strategic plans when capacity becomes available at a local level—people have completed their local development plan, are there a number of staff who can move across to work on the strategic plan. We're seeing that now, starting in south-east Wales, and there's a potential to do that in north Wales. The important thing for us is to maintain plan coverage, so, where places are in the course of reviewing their local development plans, we're supporting them to get on and do it and not necessarily to start work on their strategic plan at this point in time. So, we're making that sort of invest-to-save decision. Once you've got a strategic plan, it makes it much easier to prepare a much briefer local development plan, so we will cut out stages of the process—you know, things like the overall quantity of housing required in a region will have been set. Potentially, sites for major development, like new towns, will have been identified, so it's a way of, if you like, making better use of the resources we have. But in the short term, there is definitely a hump that we need to get over.

I think some of these issues, just to say, are not just in Wales, this is a UK-wide issue. But I hope that assures you that there are measures being taken to mitigate this and a pragmatic approach, which is really important.

One thing that we've heard, and I hear anecdotally from my time in local government, as well, is about statutory consultees and the time they take to respond back to planning applications. I know Welsh Water, for example, Natural Resources Wales and others take an exceptionally long time to respond to planning applications, especially more technical planning applications like big social housing developments, which we've got a major issue with across Wales, hence why we're having this inquiry. What measures can the Welsh Government bring in to actually speed up statutory consultees? Because there comes a point—and it was discussed in Powys at one time—when if they don't get back to you by a certain point, you turn around and say, 'Well, I'm sorry, you've passed the deadline, we're going to proceed anyway'. But there is a nervousness, isn't there, around doing that, especially around Welsh Water, which is a repeat offender, and NRW, over flooding matters and over phosphates and pollution. Because if planning authorities make those decisions without the statutory consultees, they could be subject to judicial review if something goes wrong. So, I'm just interested in what the Welsh Government's view on that is and how we can speed up the statutory consultees coming back. Because we're talking about speeding up planning applications and this is a key part of it that could actually get the system moving quicker.

The important thing there is that when we're talking about having sufficient resource in the system, it's all parts of the system—so, have statutory consultees got the people they need. I have very frequent discussions with NRW and their planning team about whether they've got the people they need. Again, as the Cabinet Secretary said, we need to line up Cabinet Ministers across Government, the rural affairs Minister being one of those, in terms of saying to NRW, potentially, ‘This is a priority for you as well.’ There are things we can do in that regard. At the moment, statutory consultees are engaged at two places. For major applications, they’re engaged at the pre-application stage, and then they’re re-engaged when the application’s in. At pre-application stage and when the application’s in, we actually measure their performance. They produce performance reports, and that’s in the public domain. As you say, ultimately, you can make the decision to carry on and determine the application. But I accept what you say, there is a fear about potential judicial review in those circumstances, so it’s very much a local decision about whether they proceed or not.

This is my final point. That’s where the Welsh Government have got a role, then, isn’t it? It's in actually supporting those local authorities to make those decisions without the statutory consultees coming back. That could be something perhaps coming from Government, perhaps back to the Cabinet table, Cabinet Secretary—that if consultees don’t come back and local authorities, no matter who it is, decide to press on, that the Welsh Government will support them if anything does go wrong, rather that saying, ‘Sorry, you shouldn’t have done that.’ Because I think that would be a clear statement of intent from the Government: 'We want to get delivering, and we’ll support you to make the decisions.’

I’m very happy to have those discussions with my colleague. I don’t want to get her into trouble already by making all these commitments. I don't want to get on her bad side already. But I’m really keen to have those discussions with the Minister for delivery as well.

Lovely. Diolch yn fawr iawn. Diolch, Cadeirydd.

Thanks, James. Cabinet Secretary, it would be very useful if you and your officials were able to continue until 11:00 rather than 10:50, if that's possible. 

That's fine, yes. That's okay with me.

Thank you very much. Lee Waters.

Thanks. I just want to focus on land, briefly. The evidence that you submitted is pretty curt on the potential for maximizing the uplift in land values from public sector development. We’ve heard evidence about the potential that the metro has for the Welsh Government being able to seize on the uplift in land values of areas surrounding new metro stations and developments. This has been long trailed by Mark Barry and others for years, and it seems the Welsh Government still seems pretty silent on the potential of it. You say in your evidence that you don’t really have any plans or views on the role of land uplift other than section 106 agreements. We’ve had separate evidence that local authorities need help in being able to better negotiate section 106 agreements. There does seem to be quite a significant blind spot in the Government’s thinking. I just wondered if you could give us some more information on why that is.

Thank you, Lee. I’m very new into post, but very happy to look at this area as well. Our land division has made significant progress in accelerating development potential of land holdings, but also acquiring new land for development. Our acquisitions that we’ve had in Haverfordwest, for example, and Porthcawl, are examples of where the private sector interests on previous stalled sites have been acquired and their development potential is being unlocked to create significant affordable housing-led regeneration opportunities. So, there is work going on. I’m very happy to look at that in terms of, as you mentioned, the south Wales metro. I don’t have specifics to hand on that, but I’d be happy to write to the committee further on that. I don’t know if Emma or Neil would like to come in. 

The UK planning system is quite atypical in the sense that it creates value through a plan-making process and a consenting process, and then hands it over to the market to deliver. The paper talks about the tools we have at the moment, and section 106 is one of those, in terms of the subsidy from land value coming in to provide affordable housing or other infrastructure. Then also, the UK Treasury benefits from capital gains tax. It would take a combination of different approaches to address that. It would require working with the UK Government around compensation for compulsory purchase, for example. There are moves in that direction for affordable housing, because we don’t have competence for compensation in relation compulsory purchase at the moment. We’ve had previous discussions about interventions with the UK Government in terms of taxation. A vacant land tax was another one. So, there is a taxation element to this as well. I think you're right, the private sector's ahead of the game. So, I would be pretty sure that most of those stations have options signed on all the land around them with private sector developers at the moment—so, those sites would have been picked up. The system isn't quick enough, and it's back to the point that we have a system that is about facilitating the market in the sense of creating value, but not intervening in terms of taking of public ownership of that land and then selling it on afterwards. So, it's the way the planning system is constructed, and I know there's been a lot of work to think about whether that should change within the UK.

Sure. Correct me if I'm misunderstanding this, but, by the time it gets to the planning system, as you say, the options are complex, so surely a strategic approach would be thinking about this before it gets to the planning system. So, when planning the south Wales metro, for example, why were we not buying up the land around that ourselves, so we get the land value capture from that? Clearly, we're missed that opportunity, and we have failed there, and that has been raised a number of times by Senedd committees with the Government over the years. What are we doing to make sure we don't keep repeating this mistake?

If I could come in briefly there, we are looking at the moment at scoping a longer term land strategy—so, looking at how we can have a much longer term view about where the Government might proactively buy land. We've recently done some work with Savills, looking at the land landscape across Wales at the moment, and we'll use that to inform a plan. So, it's early days, but we are starting to move, around the work of land division, in that direction, and trying to be more strategic about where we invest and proactively purchase land in order to unlock sites that would otherwise be challenging for the market, and not necessarily market attractive, but also trying to get those join-ups across Government.

Okay. Well, I think we're likely to make some recommendations on this in our report, so it would be good if some thought can be put into this when responding to our report.

Just on the issue of section 106 and how additional help can be given to local authorities who are underpowered to deal with slippery developers who often find a way out of section 106 commitments, what consideration have you given to options for doing that?

Well—[Interruption.] Oh, sorry. [Interruption.] No, no. I was just going to say, Welsh Government has, in the past, provided support to local authorities in developing those 106 agreements, and we are aware of the English guidance, which is largely already reflected in 'Planning Policy Wales'. So, viability assessments are required for all strategic sites within LDPs and a representative sample of other sites. I don't know if you want to add a bit there, Neil.

Yes. So, the policy we've followed is, essentially, to try and nail down the viability when the sites go into the plan, and then it gives you a much better position in terms of resisting those renegotiations, unless there are normals that come up. What we're seeing so far is that, of the second iteration of LDPs, they are in a much better place than the first iteration, where, essentially, a developer would promise you anything to get their site into the plan and then renegotiate. So, having that much more robust evidence at the outset makes it much more difficult to negotiate away. We have done work in the past in terms of supporting local authorities in terms of what section 106 agreements should actually look like, but I think, in general, most local authorities are much better at negotiating now than they were probably 10, 15 years ago, because they have that experience. So, I'm not seeing as many moves away in terms of what's offered in the plan and then what actually happens on site later.

Okay. I just wonder if there's a parallel with some of the town-centre development work and the help for local authorities with compulsory purchase advice, given that that capacity's been denuded in local authorities. I wonder whether there's a read-across here for section 106 and some provision, either at the Welsh central level or at a corporate joint committee level, for coming together, either through a community of practice or through some central expertise they can draw on, to try and give them extra heft in those negotiations.

It sounds a very sensible idea, yes.

Okay. Well, I'm sure we'll make some recommendations. Thank you.

Lee, are you content?

I'm done.

Right. [Laughter.] Altaf.

Thank you very much. Cabinet Secretary, can you please tell us more about the Welsh Government's work with Constructing Excellence in Wales? How will this work ensure that the construction sector is capable of building the social homes we need?

Thank you, Altaf. As I understand it, the main support for CEW rests with my colleague, the Cabinet Secretary for the economy. I understand that CEW provides specialist construction advice to support Ministers and civil servants. This advice covers a very wide range of subjects, but includes the development of a Wales edition of 'The Construction Playbook', and there's specific joint research on a variety of subjects included in the pipeline. As well as the core work of CEW for Welsh Government, we've also separately commissioned them to review the contracting and procurement processes and behaviours for social housing in Wales. The intention is to deliver a report that challenges the current practices and deliver a set of recommendations aimed at changing behaviours and identifying best practice for new social housing delivery in Wales. So, CEW is very much part of the solution, but there is an important role in developing the skillset to support the delivery of much-needed homes in Wales. And I'm keen to have further meetings, as I said earlier on, with the Minister for skills, and also the Minister for Further and Higher Education, to see how we can take that forward.

Altaf, if James could just come in briefly. James.

Just below a ministerial level—. I'm still on the old 'ministerial', not Cabinet Secretaries. On the old ministerial level, below that, how do officials work together to break down the silos, silo working within departments? Because in big organisations—. I know a previous Minister, across the table, always said there were too many silos in Government. Departments tend to work within those silos; they don't tend to talk across. Government Ministers talking around the Cabinet table is great about how we can work together, but actually the people delivering that are the officials—they don't tend to be at director level, it's the people below that again, isn't it? So, I'm just interested: how does that work in practice to make sure that officials are talking to each other to make sure that these things are being delivered? Because if the directors want it to happen, the Cabinet Secretaries want it to happen, that's fine, but it's got to happen at lower levels of Government to make sure it's actually deliverable, hasn't it? So, I wondered just how that works, because I'm sure that that will aid on this question.

Yes, absolutely. Perhaps it's better to ask the officials how they work themselves.

So, it's different in different fora, obviously. On Construction Excellence Wales, that's actually a contract that is jointly funded by three departments. So, at the ministerial and the budget level—. Is it still three departments after the changes? Not quite sure on that one. But it was a jointly funded, jointly ministerially supported project. It has a working group, if you like, that is made up of officials from the key departments that have a key interest in construction. So, the conversation is happening at all levels. I think another excellent example of cross-Government working that I would quote is the phosphates work—the river pollution work—where Stuart was our main representative, but also members of his team on that group, and excellent joint working, wasn't there?

Yes. So, we constructed a deep-dive into some of those schemes that were stuck with phosphates and brought together everyone with a stake in that across Government—because it's housing, natural resources—plus external stakeholders and had some really focused discussions and managed to unlock a number of schemes. We've learned from that and done the same with the 20,000 delivery group. That's not just housing, that's everybody with a stake and ability to influence schemes that are stuck in planning because of SuDS issues, because of funding, coming together on a fortnightly basis to focus on those red and amber schemes I talked about earlier. So, we do talk, and we'll do it through governance at a programme level as well. So, our social housing programme has different tiers of governance that has different parts of the organisation on it. So, there are strategic ways that we do that through programme governance and quite tactical groups as well that we bring together to tackle specific issues.

I won't follow up, but I think it's quite useful.

A deep-dive into delivery for you, James. [Laughter.]

Yes. Lovely, a deep-dive again.

I learnt it from somewhere.

Altaf.

On the Cabinet table, really, unless you get deliveries, you cannot be delivering. So, that is how you can work when you work together. That is very important from the point of view of what we were talking about. Now, my last question is on engagement with local communities. What more can the Welsh Government do to support community-led housing? Will the Welsh Government look again at the proposal to create a revolving loan fund?

Thank you, Altaf. Yes, and the Welsh Government does have a long history of supporting co-operative and community-led housing in Wales, stemming back to 2010. We've a particularly successful community in the Chair's constituency again, Loftus Gardens—

There's a lot going on.

—so he will know that very well. However, in line with the recommendations from the affordable housing supply review, I'm not minded to create a bespoke fund. However, work has been undertaken to allow community-led housing groups to access some existing funds, including the social housing grant, empty homes grant, and we are trialling support through the land and buildings development fund. Coming new into this portfolio, there are a lot of different pots of funds, so it's nice to know that there are these existing funds that we hope that we can engage communities in.

Okay, Altaf?

Thank you.

Cabinet Secretary, could I just ask you a few further questions? Firstly, in terms of smaller infill sites within existing communities, if you agree that more needs to be done to unlock the potential of those sites, how might that be done, in your view?

Yes, absolutely, we do see that as a real potential, in terms of infill. Planning policy provides a clear preference to developing infill sites within settlements ahead of greenfield sites. Through the work of the land division that we've mentioned today, we're looking at those development opportunities, including those small infill sites. As we can appreciate, these will have a significant impact on those smaller communities and, as part of the affordable housing work programme, we've commissioned work to develop a rural development guide, which I hope will assist in unlocking and unblocking smaller infill sites in rural areas in particular.

Okay. Thank you. And in terms of data on public land ownership, we've heard concerns in terms of it not really being available and easily accessed and understood. Might there be any developments to address those issues?

Well, the UK Government's electronic property information and mapping service, which is EPIMS, has been supported by Ystadau Cymru for a number of years now, and there's a database broadly identifying public sector collaboration opportunities. A new upgrade of the platform is being prepared, which I believe is expected to go live in 2025.

Okay. And finally, I don't know if you would have a figure for this, but we're interested as a committee, and some of our witnesses have been interested, in how many social homes have been lost over the course of the current Senedd term through sales and demolition. Obviously, if we're trying to build up the number of social houses available, if we are losing them in that way, that's a real problem.

Absolutely. I believe that, due to our continued investment in funds such as major repairs and dowry, and policy decisions around removing the right to buy, the numbers would be very low in terms of sales and demolitions. I know that the early stage of TACP is investment in bringing voids back into use, and my clear expectation would be that we use every single home, but I do accept there may be valid reasons to demolish homes or sell on occasion. But I will be clear that, where a social property is sold or demolished, the funds or lands are reinvested into delivering more affordable homes. I don't have the specific number, but I don't know if there's anything Emma would like to add.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. The numbers are extremely low, especially on demolition. I think they're in single digits; we can provide the exact numbers to the committee. And on sales, there are a few sales that take place from social housing stock. As the Cabinet Secretary outlines, that is discouraged and, effectively, only tolerated where there are very good reasons for that being the right choice for the social landlord, and that money is, as the Cabinet Secretary says, reinvested. But there has been a significant fall, as I recall, over the last few years, with some strong messages to the sector, coupled with the introduction of the TACP, which enabled landlords to invest the necessary money where properties needed a significant amount of refurbishment in order to bring them back into use. So, the focus has been on finding ways to have every property in use. So, we've reduced the voids, we've reduced the sales, and demolitions are very, very rare.

Okay. We would be grateful for the figures. Okay, thank you very much. Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, and thank you to your officials for giving evidence to committee today and for going beyond the allotted time. You will be sent a transcript to check for factual accuracy in the usual way. Diolch yn fawr.

Diolch yn fawr. And we will send you that correspondence that we've assured you we will. So, thank you.

Diolch yn fawr. Okay, committee, we'll break briefly.

Sorry, we will have to deal with papers to note first. Okay.

They're all fine.

'They're all fine', said James. So, papers to note. We have papers 2 to 9: a letter from the Finance Committee in relation to Welsh Government's draft budget 2025-26; a letter from the Welsh Local Government Association with additional information on this social housing supply inquiry; a letter from Joel James MS relating to our forthcoming inquiry regarding community and town councils; a letter from Business Committee regarding committee remits, which I think will now, initially at least, be dealt with by some conversations between the relevant committee clerks; a letter from the Cabinet Secretary for Housing, Local Government and Planning in relation to abuse in politics; a letter from the Development Bank of Wales with regard to this social housing supply inquiry, providing additional information; and so too additional information for this inquiry from the Housing Justice Cymru organisation; and then, finally, a response from Housing Europe, again with additional information regarding this inquiry. Are Members content to note those papers? I see that you are. Thank you very much indeed. 

So, we will now then, just very briefly, deal with a motion under Standing Order 17.42, if committee is content, to resolve to exclude the public from the remainder of this meeting and from the next committee meeting on 25 September. Is committee content to do so? I see that you are. We will move to private session.