Local Government and Housing Committee

The first group of amendments, group 1, relates to help to retain suitable accommodation. The lead amendment in this group is amendment 19.

I move amendment 19 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary, and call on the Cabinet Secretary to speak to the amendments in the group. Cabinet Secretary.

Diolch, Cadeirydd. Before I set out my amendments, I'd just like to place on record my thanks to you, the committee, the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee and the Finance Committee for their work during Stage 1. I'd also like to express my thanks to Siân Gwenllian and Joel James for their detailed consideration of the Bill and their proposed amendments.

As we'll discuss today, on many parts of the Bill, we agree in principle. Our views may differ on the mechanics, but I believe that our aims are aligned in many areas. I look forward to constructive debate today and throughout further stages of the Bill. I'm also grateful to our partners for their ongoing engagement with us on the aims of the Bill, their enthusiastic support and their pragmatic approach to these amending stages. I remain committed to ongoing work with colleagues here in the Senedd and with wider partners, as we refine this much-needed Bill to ensure that homelessness in Wales is rare, brief and unrepeated.

To now talk to the amendments in this group, these amendments concern changes to section 18(2) of the Bill, the new duty to provide help to retain suitable accommodation. Amendment 22 provides local housing authorities with a discretionary power to continue offering this help to an applicant after the statutory duty has ended. Amendments 19, 21 and 23 to 32 are consequential to amendment 22, and are minor and technical in nature.

I'm committed to these amendments as part of my response to the Local Government and Housing Committee, as I recognise the benefit of clarity on this point. That's why I'm proposing this amendment, which makes it clear that local housing authorities have discretion to continue to provide support beyond 12 months.

It should be noted that this new duty to help retain suitable accommodation is not a universal duty. It applies where a local housing authority has provided help to a person under the Housing (Wales) Act 2014, and it considers that they are at risk of becoming homeless or threatened with homelessness. We do not envisage the power being used extensively, only where the local housing authority is satisfied that the applicant remains at risk of homelessness following a period of 12 months of help.

The committee should note that, in giving local authorities this discretion, there is a clear expectation that it is used. In order to provide clarity on how discretion will be used, local housing authorities will need to set out a supporting policy that sets out their approach to use of this power, including the involvement of other parties.

I believe amendment 63 is trying to do something similar to our amendment, to ensure it is clear that local authorities can continue to provide support beyond 12 months. However, the amendment allows the local authority to provide, or continue to provide, help to retain accommodation where an applicant’s circumstances, including their vulnerability, requires this. The amendment also enables the local authority to provide, or continue to provide, help where an registered social landlord thinks they should.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. Joel James.

Thank you, Chair. I'm speaking to my amendments 63, 62 and 61. When making a judgment on whether the duty to retain suitable accommodation is owed to someone, I'm aware that local authorities will need input from several stakeholders, including registered social landlords, where they are the landlord. These amendments include further details on how local authorities might make this judgment, including co-operation with registered social landlords, and the relevant parties would make this section more effective, I believe. But, obviously, it's disappointing to hear the Cabinet Secretary's views on this, but I would still like to put this to a vote, just to see what the general consensus is of the committee. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Joel. Siân Gwenllian.

Good morning. Our amendment in this group, amendment 44, seeks to ensure essential clarity in the Bill regarding the continuation of the duty to assist an individual to retain their accommodation under section 76A. At present, of course, it's not clear that local authorities have the power to extend the support to retain accommodation beyond the default period of 12 months, even when this is necessary to prevent homelessness and to maintain stability for the individual in question. Our amendment therefore seeks to make it entirely clear on the face of the legislation that the local authority can extend this support when circumstances demand, ensuring real flexibility in the system and avoiding situations where essential support comes to an end too early, which would undermine the core aims of this Bill.

I do hear what the Cabinet Secretary says, but I will be voting in favour of the amendments in this section, in this group, but I'm content to discuss these issues further for Stage 3, of course. What we are all seeking to do is to ensure that this vital support to prevent homelessness isn't limited or restricted by an artificial time limit, and the legislation should reflect the practical reality that continuous support is essential to maintain stability for those people who are vulnerable.

Diolch yn fawr, Siân. I call on the Cabinet Secretary, then, to reply to the debate.

Diolch, Cadeirydd, and thanks to Joel and to Siân for speaking to this. The Government amendments do deliver commitments made to this committee in relation to ensuring help to retain accommodation can continue beyond 12 months. So, in my view, the two non-Government amendments are less precise than the Government amendments on this matter, and I hope the committee can agree to the merit of the Government proposals, support them and vote against the non-Government amendments.

Okay. The question, then, is that amendment 19 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Then amendment 19 is agreed.

Group 2 relates to the right to review. The lead amendment in this group is amendment 20.

I move amendment 20 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary, and call on the Cabinet Secretary to speak to the amendments in the group. Cabinet Secretary.

Diolch, Cadeirydd. This group of amendments relates to requests an applicant can make to have decisions, assessments or plans made by the local authority reviewed.

Amendment 20 replaces section 5(3) of the Bill and inserts a new section 85 into the Housing (Wales) Act 2014. This amendment incorporates the amendments made by the Bill when introduced, and imposes a new duty on a local housing authority to consider all relevant grounds for an applicant's right to review.

For the purpose of clarity, the entirety of section 85 of the Housing (Wales) Act 2014 has been substituted, rather than making a series of further amendments. The Bill as introduced significantly extended applicants' rights to request a review. However, during Stage 1 scrutiny, an issue was raised regarding the scope and nature of the review rights.

Partners flagged some uncertainty as to whether an applicant experiencing homelessness is required to specify the particular grounds on which they seek a review, or whether a general request for a review is sufficient to initiate the review process and to trigger the authority's duty to consider all potentially relevant grounds. Partners were also concerned it was unclear whether, if the applicant cites only one ground, the authority is limited to considering that ground alone, or whether it retains discretion to consider other applicable grounds.

So, the amendment clarifies that an applicant may request a review without specifying the grounds on which that review is based, although they retain the option to identify grounds, should they wish to. This means that, where an applicant requests a review, local housing authorities will be required to consider whether there are any other relevant matters to be reviewed, subject to the limitations in new section 85(4)-(7). This will ensure that applicants who would not necessarily have the legal knowledge or advice available to understand how to describe, specifically, the challenge they wish to pursue, are not disadvantaged and have improved, efficient access to justice.

Amendments 2, 3 and 17 are consequential to the new drafting approach taken by amendment 20 to replace the whole of section 85, incorporating the amendments made by the Bill on introduction. I would welcome Members' support for these amendments.

Okay. Are there any other committee members who wish to speak? No. Then the question is that amendment 20 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Then amendment 20 is agreed.

The third group, group 3, relates to local connection to Wales. The lead and only amendment in this group is amendment 60, and I call on Joel James to move and speak to the amendment. Joel.

Thank you, Chair. And speaking to my amendment, at present, applicants with no local connection to any local housing authority in England or Wales, or any authority in Scotland or Northern Ireland, will not be owed the main housing duty. They cannot be referred, and, while they can be offered interim accommodation for a period, they will remain homeless, with nowhere else to seek a local connection. As drafted, it is my opinion that the Bill risks leaving this very small group of people, typically those who could have highly transient lives, like veterans, for example, without access to settled housing. This would make resolving their homelessness extremely difficult. The amendment preserves the current Welsh position by ensuring that this group continues to receive support. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Joel. Cabinet Secretary.

Diolch, Cadeirydd. I understand the aim of your amendment, but the effect of the amendment, I believe, goes too far. Amendment 60 takes a broad approach to this issue, and would likely raise significant concerns across local authorities in Wales. Local connection is a key tool in ensuring local authority resources are focused on people in their communities. I'd strongly urge Members not to vote for this amendment. The Bill includes mechanisms to account for issues that may arise in relation to the very small group of people who are unable to demonstrate a local connection to Wales.

The circumstances in which a person may have a local connection to an area are unchanged by the Bill. They cover a wide range of circumstances linked to residency, employment, family associations and special circumstances connecting a person to an area. This ensures local housing authorities have flexibility to take into account particular circumstances that may be specific to individuals or their own area, as needed.

The Bill provides that, where the final duty is not owed because a person has no local connection with Wales, interim accommodation must be provided for a sufficient period to allow the person a reasonable opportunity to secure alternative accommodation. Additionally, the Bill contains regulation-making powers that give us the ability to add detail to the meaning of 'local connection' and provide specific exemptions to the requirement to have a local connection to Wales in a targeted and measured way. These powers will allow us to refine the scope of local connection over time, as needed, but this will have to be done very carefully, in partnership with partners.

This approach, already provided for in the Bill, is much more appropriate than the proposed amendment. It allows for proper consideration of all groups that may struggle to demonstrate a local connection, working with partners to ensure a consistent approach is applied across Wales as needed, and I strongly urge Members to vote against this amendment.

Okay. I call on Joel James then to respond.

Thank you, Chair. Obviously, it's disappointing to hear the Cabinet Secretary's response to what I think is quite an important amendment. I am conscious that there are legislative powers that can be utilised to help with this, but this will give those groups of people added protection, because, as we know, the parliamentary term is almost ending; we don't know what Government is going to be coming in next year, and that mindset might change. So, this would give added clarity as well, and added protection. So, I'd still like to push it to a vote, if that's okay.

Okay. Thank you, Joel. The question then is that amendment 60 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Okay, we have an objection. We will proceed to a vote. The question is that amendment 60 be agreed. Will those in favour please raise your hands? Will those against please raise your hands? And I believe there are no abstentions. Okay, so, in relation to amendment 60, there were two in favour and four against. So, it is therefore not agreed.

I move amendment 2 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. The question is that amendment 2 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Then amendment 2 is agreed.

I move amendment 21 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. The question is that amendment 21 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Then amendment 21 is agreed.

I move amendment 22 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. The question is that amendment 22 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Then amendment 22 is agreed.

I move amendment 23 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. The question is that amendment 23 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Then amendment 23 is agreed.

I move amendment 24 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. The question is that amendment 24 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Then amendment 24 is agreed.

Joel, amendment 61.

Yes, please.

Yes. The question is that amendment 61 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is an objection. So, we will move to a vote. The question is that amendment 61 be agreed to. Would all those in favour please raise your hands? And all those against. Any abstentions. Okay. So, there voted two in favour and four against. So, amendment 61 is not agreed.

I move amendment 25 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. The question is that amendment 25 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Then amendment 25 is agreed.

I move amendment 26 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. The question is that amendment 26 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Then amendment 26 is agreed.

Joel, amendment 62.

Yes, please.

Okay, amendment 62 is proposed. Does any Member object to that amendment being agreed? [Objection.] There is an objection. We will then move to a vote. So, the question then is that amendment 62 be agreed. Would all those in favour please raise your hands? And all those against. Any abstentions. No. So, in relation to amendment 62, there voted two in favour, four against—

Did Siân abstain?

Sorry, Siân.

Abstain.

Right. Sorry, we have one abstention then. So, in relation to amendment 62, we have two in favour, three against and one abstention, and amendment 62 is therefore not agreed.

Chair, could I just have some clarification on amendment 61, and what the voting was there, because, from looking here, it looked like Siân was abstaining to that as well, rather than voting against it?

Yes, I was. There is a delay, I think, isn't there? I did abstain on 61.

Oh, I'm sorry, Siân. Yes, an abstention on 61. That will be recorded, then, Siân. I will allow a little more time, Siân. Okay.

That's the result of 61.

So, amendment 61, then, is two in favour, three against and one abstention. But it remains not agreed.

Okay, then. Joel, amendment 63.

Yes, please.

The question is that amendment 63 be agreed. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is an objection, so we will then move to a vote. Would all those in favour of agreeing amendment 63 please show? And all those against. And any abstentions. Okay. So, in relation to amendment 63, there voted two in favour, three against, with one abstention, and it is therefore not agreed.

I move amendment 27 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. The question is that amendment 27 be agreed. Does any Member object? No. Then amendment 27 is agreed.

Siân, amendment 44.

I move.

The question then is that amendment 44 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Okay, there is an objection. We will then move to a vote. Would all those in favour please show? And all those against. And any abstentions. So, in relation to amendment 44, there voted three in favour and three against, and I therefore use my casting vote as Chair against the amendment and the amendment is therefore not agreed.

I move amendment 28 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. The question is that amendment 28 be agreed. Does any Member object? No. Then amendment 28 is agreed.

I move amendment 29 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. The question is that amendment 29 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Then amendment 29 is agreed.

I move amendment 3 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. The question is that amendment 3 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Then amendment 3 is agreed.

I move amendment 30 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. The question is that amendment 30 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Then amendment 30 is agreed.

I move amendment 31 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. The question is that amendment 31 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Then amendment 31 is agreed.

I move amendment 32 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. The question is that amendment 32 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Then amendment 32 is agreed.

That brings us to group 4, relating to the ending of duties to help applicants. The lead and only amendment in this group is amendment 64, and I call on Joel James to move and speak to the amendment. Joel.

Thank you, Chair. I wish to move and speak to my amendment 64. While I recognise the negative impact of unacceptable behaviour on local authority officers and firmly believe that it's unacceptable for any staff member to face unmitigated risks in the workplace, there are concerns about the impact of this section of the Bill. The committee recognised in its Stage 1 report that, where applied, these clauses would have a particularly punitive impact for the individual, making it extremely difficult for them to access supported housing in the future and ultimately build a life beyond homelessness. Essentially, the application of these clauses can cause someone to face homelessness over a very long period with very little support, leaving them extremely vulnerable. Furthermore, there is concern that many individuals facing homelessness have experienced significant trauma, often through the experiences that push them into homelessness, as well as through the experience of homelessness itself. This can, in turn, impact a person's mental health and behaviour. What may appear as inappropriate behaviour may be as a result of unmet support needs, the result of a very specific set of circumstances or the culmination of the pressures and traumas that an individual has been facing. This amendment is designed to ensure that the ending of the duty only applies as a last resort and with the requirement on a local authority to demonstrate that it has no other option. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Joel. I call on the Cabinet Secretary to speak.

Diolch, Cadeirydd. Amendment 64 inserts an additional line into section 20 of the Bill, which sets out further circumstances in which duties to help applicants may be brought to an end. These circumstances are very tightly defined and are intended to be used in very limited scenarios. They are necessary to safeguard people using and delivering homelessness services. One of those circumstances is where property has been intentionally or recklessly destroyed or seriously damaged. Amendment 64 proposes that a duty can only be brought to an end due to intentional or reckless damage where the behaviour involved means the local authority cannot exercise its functions safely. The Bill already makes it clear that a duty cannot be ended if there is a reasonable excuse for the behaviour. It also makes it clear that the duty should be continued if there are special circumstances that mean it would be appropriate for the duty to continue. I have serious concerns about the subjectivity of the term 'safely', which will raise unnecessary confusion and complexity in implementation. Throughout the development of the Bill, I've been clear that whilst we must work towards an inclusive and trauma-informed system, we must also protect our workforce. There have to be red lines. The measures already in the Bill ensure that local authorities are able to respond strongly to behaviour that places their staff and others at risk, and I believe that we've struck the right balance. I therefore urge the committee to reject amendment 64.

Okay. And Joel to respond.

Thank you, Chair. I recognise the Cabinet Secretary's strong feelings on this amendment, but I would still like to put it to a vote to see what the consensus of the committee is. Thank you.

Thank you, Joel. The question is that amendment 64 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is an objection. We will therefore move to a vote. Will all those in favour please show? And those against. And then the abstentions. In relation to amendment 64, there are two in favour, three against, and one abstention. It is therefore not agreed.

Group 5 relates to the duty to 'ask and act'. The lead amendment in this group is amendment 65. I call on Joel James to move and speak to the lead amendment and other amendments in the group.

Thank you, Chair. I wish to speak to and move amendments 65 and 66. I'm aware that the legislation as currently drafted does not include a specific requirement to enquire whether a person is experiencing or at risk of homelessness, which is a critical part of the 'ask' part of this duty. It appears as though this step is assumed rather than spelled out in text in the Bill. There's concern that this could result in services not being proactive in enquiring about homelessness, which means that the other elements of this part of the Bill, i.e. to 'act', will only happen if it is very obvious that the person is homeless or at risk of homelessness. With these small amendments to the legislation, I hope this can be resolved. Thank you.

Thank you, Joel. Siân Gwenllian.

Thank you, Chair. Our amendment in this group seeks to ensure that the Welsh Ministers are subject to a clear duty to issue guidelines to the specified public authorities on how they should exercise their functions under this section. Our aim, of course, is to ensure clarity and consistency with the 'ask and act' duty, as the current position in the draft leaves too much room for variations between public bodies.

The evidence that we have heard reinforces this. Under the current violence against women, domestic abuse and sexual violence legislation, Welsh Women's Aid said that 'ask and act' can work effectively, but only if there are appropriate resources, information and training to ask the right questions and to respond in a safe and appropriate manner, knowing exactly where to refer someone for help.

That, therefore, is why I feel that statutory guidelines are so essential: they will be the basis for training, practical implementation, and ensuring that all public bodies understand and carry out their duties in a consistent way throughout Wales. Without these guidelines, there is a real risk of inconsistency and of services failing people at times of greatest need.

I do recognise that Welsh Government has committed to providing guidelines on this new duty, but I believe it is beneficial to place that commitment on the face of the Bill. Therefore, I hope that you will all support amendment 47.

Diolch, Siân. The Cabinet Secretary, please.

Diolch, Cadeirydd. I'd like to thank Joel for his amendment and contribution today. I understand the purpose of amendment 65 in including an explicit identification element in the 'ask and act' duty, however the need to identify risk of homelessness is inherent within our current drafting. A public authority must be able to identify risk of homelessness in order to consider whether an individual is at risk. I do not believe further changes are necessary to our drafting, and guidance is a more appropriate vehicle to set out the steps that could form part of 'ask and act'. This guidance is being prepared, and will be supported by a training package tailored to each body. This statutory guidance will cover identifying risk, asking about risk, taking appropriate action, and making the referral.

Amendment 66 seeks to ensure that the duties placed on bodies to 'ask and act' do not inadvertently affect the rights of those bodies to secure possessions of their accommodation, for example by providing potential defence against a possession claim in the rare instances where they are made. I've been happy to offer reassurance to partners that it has never been our intention to legislate in relation to possession claims and we want to ensure that there are no unintended consequences arising from the Bill. While I'm unable to support the amendment put forward by Joel James because it goes further than is needed and could have unintended consequences, I'm very happy to work on an alternative amendment for Stage 3 if the Member were agreeable.

Amendment 47 seeks to impose a duty on Welsh Ministers to issue guidance in relation to 'ask and act' to the bodies that will be subject to it. The Bill already requires bodies to have regard to guidance issued by the Welsh Ministers when exercising functions under 'ask and act'. I fully intend to issue guidance on 'ask and act', and this guidance will include body-specific information. This guidance will be developed in partnership with those bodies. It is my intention to withdraw the current code of guidance and reissue a revised code that covers the entirety of the Bill, including 'ask and act'. I've made this very clear to our partners, and my officials have already begun discussions with them on how this guidance will be developed. I do not therefore consider this amendment to be necessary.

Turning to amendment 4 made by the Government, section 22 of the Bill makes an amendment to the existing duty to refer in England to enable public bodies that are subject to it to refer a person to a local housing authority in Wales if requested to do so. During Stage 1, some partners raised concerns about the potential for differing treatment by local housing authorities in Wales when people are referred to them under the new 'ask and act' duty or under the existing duty to refer in England. Section 21 of the Bill already provides that, where a person is referred to a local housing authority in Wales under 'ask and act', that notification is to be treated as a homelessness application.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. I call on Joel James to reply to the debate.

Thank you, Chair. I'm grateful for the Cabinet Secretary's response. If the rest of the committee are agreeable, I'm happy to withdraw our amendments 65 and 66 to have further discussions with the Cabinet Secretary and her office.

Regarding amendment 65, does any Member object to its withdrawal? No. That amendment is withdrawn.

With regard to amendment 66, it's not moved. Well, I think you did move it initially, actually, Joel.

No, it hasn't been moved, so that's fine.

Joel did mention in his opening remarks that he would be moving—

I'm happy to withdraw both.

There are no objections to withdrawal, no? Amendment 66 is, in any event, withdrawn.

Group 6 relates to 'ask and act' and authorities covered by the duty. The lead amendment in this group is amendment 67. I call on Joel James to move and speak to the lead amendment and other amendments in the group. Joel.

Thank you, Chair. Speaking to my amendments 67 and 68, there are some key services and agencies missing from the list of public bodies in section 21 and section 32. Health is included in the list of public bodies; however, primary care is excluded. As you know, primary care is the part of the health system that people most frequently come into contact with, and therefore provides the biggest opportunity for the early identification, intervention and prevention of homelessness. I am aware of assurances about the plans for the GP contracting process, but still believe that primary care should be included in the list of bodies subject to the 'ask and act' and co-operation duties.

Education is also not included in the list of public bodies subject to the 'ask and act' and co-operation duties, despite this being in the expert review panel's recommendations. I strongly believe that education should be included in some form. I understand the Welsh Government believes that existing legal requirements relating to safeguarding and the welfare of children are sufficient, but we are concerned that these are not specific to homelessness. I also appreciate that there is very good practice taking place in some schools, but, as with all good practice, it is likely to be variable and often relying on passionate and committed individuals rather than being systematic. With that, I will close my section there. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Joel. Siân Gwenllian.

The purpose of the amendment that we have tabled is to include Wales police forces as part of the 'ask and act' duty, as they come into contact with vulnerable individuals more often than almost any other public body. From a policy point of view and in practical terms, it makes sense that they can refer individuals to help, as the police play a key role in cases of domestic violence and are often present when people are about to lose their homes. That is why such a duty has been described as a key way of ensuring action by stakeholders, and why we see the police's exclusion as a missed opportunity. Very often, the police are the first point of contact for people at risk of homelessness, be that on the street or in incidents of domestic violence. As such, their inclusion is reasonable and a moral duty.

We recognise that the Cabinet Secretary is discussing with the Home Office the formal inclusion of the police, and we welcome those discussions. So, we would welcome clarity from the Government today about what discussions have already taken place and what the response of the UK Government has been, and, therefore, how viable this amendment is. If no progress has been made, I will be very disappointed, but if that is the situation, I will consider specifically whether to move this amendment or not, because, clearly, I don't want to place the passing of this Bill at risk if there are questions regarding the ability of the Senedd to legislate in this area. In my view, policing should have been devolved to the Senedd, and the situation that has arisen with this Bill is a clear indicator of the urgent action needed on devolving policing.

Thank you, Siân. Cabinet Secretary.

Diolch, Cadeirydd. I thank Joel James for tabling the lead amendment to this group. I'll talk to his and Siân Gwenllian’s amendments before addressing the Government amendments in this group. Section 21 of the Bill sets out a new duty to 'ask and act', supporting our wider policy aim to support public services to be able to identify and to make sure that they ensure individuals at risk of homelessness are referred to a local housing authority for help.

I do sympathise with the amendments that seek to add further to the list of bodies subject to 'ask and act'. However, as we have explored extensively during this committee, there are a number of bodies where it is either unnecessary to add them to the face of the Bill, where this is not the right approach in meeting our policy intention, or it does not align with broader sector agreements. The Bill contains a regulation-making power to allow us to add bodies to the list, should this be possible in the future. I'm sure you will be unsurprised that I urge Members to reject these amendments for the reasons we have already discussed.

I cannot support amendments 45 and 56, which seek to apply the duty to 'ask and act' to the police in Wales. The police are a reserved authority. We require the consent of the UK Government to place a duty on them. As I made clear during the general principles debate, the Home Office will not provide this consent. To place a duty on them, without consent, would be outside of the legislative competence of the Senedd, placing the entirety of this Bill at risk. I therefore strongly urge the committee to reject these amendments to ensure that the Bill remains within the legislative competence of this Senedd.

Amendments 67 and 68 seek to apply the duty to 'ask and act' to primary care services, not just GPs, but NHS pharmacists, opticians and dentists and all providers of primary, secondary and further education in Wales. The 'ask and act' duty will already be placed on local health boards, which will cover a range of priority health services, including urgent and emergency care, in-patient care, mental health and substance-use services, and some services that may be accessed via a primary care service. When making asks of primary care, the Welsh Government generally does so via contracting arrangements managed by local health boards across Wales. Any new requirements of primary care must be managed within our existing work on inclusion health and implemented in partnership with the various sectors. I recognise the important role that primary care services play in homelessness.

GPs already operate under ethical and professional obligations and assist local health boards in safeguarding and inclusion health and care. GP appointments are already time limited. Imposing a statutory 'ask and act' duty inside a 10-minute consultation could displace clinical care and risk unintended consequences for access and safety. Other primary care services are similarly stretched. I believe the duty is best placed on health boards, which already hold wider statutory responsibilities and commissioning levers. This includes urgent and emergency care, in-patient care, and mental health, substance-use services. Work is under way with health services to take further steps in this area outside of the legislation. I do not believe that adding primary care services to the Bill is necessary or appropriate.

On amendment 68 and amendment 80, which is consequential to 68, local authorities already have duties under the Education Act 2002 to make arrangements to ensure that their education functions are exercised with a view to safeguarding and promoting the welfare of children. Local authorities and other relevant bodies, including governing boards, must have regard to any guidance issued by the Welsh Ministers in deciding what arrangements they must make to comply with their duty.

In my view and the view of the Cabinet Secretary for Education, this existing duty to promote the welfare of children covers arrangements for children at risk of homelessness. Given the breadth of the existing law, we do not need to duplicate it within this Bill and instead can place our efforts on building on the good practice that I have seen for myself in schools, amending the existing 'Keeping learners safe' guidance, or issuing additional guidance if necessary. There is some excellent practice happening in schools, linked to community-focused school initiatives, family engagement and safeguarding. This provides the right basis for us to do our work and brings schools, teachers and the education unions with us.

Further education institutions already have a range of safeguarding and well-being responsibilities and rather than duplicating the duties, we want to build on what's already in place. Further education institutions already work closely with Medr and local support services to identify and assist learners at risk of homelessness. This includes signposting to housing advice, welfare support and support for learners in accessing services that can provide emergency accommodation where appropriate. Through Medr's new regulatory framework, further education institutions will be expected to make robust learner welfare arrangements through staff and learner welfare condition and this recognises the impact that homelessness can have on learners' well-being and ability to achieve. We believe that the best approach is to work with the sector to strengthen the existing support systems, rather than impose a new legal duty that may not fit well with how these institutes operate.

Okay. Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. Joel James, then, to reply to the debate.

Thank you, Chair. As highlighted in my opening statement, the good practice that the Cabinet Secretary has highlighted isn't necessarily across the board, and this amendment would try to ensure that and put a duty of care, really, on the education sector. Obviously, it's already there, but it would strengthen it, you know. Education and social care are sometimes the front line in terms of identifying homelessness. We would still like to move this to the vote, then. Thank you, Chair.

Okay. So, the question is then that amendment 67 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is an objection. We move to a vote. Will all those in favour please show? Those against. Any abstentions? Okay. So, in relation to amendment 67, there voted two in favour, three against, and it is therefore not agreed.

Okay. I move amendment 33 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. The question is that amendment 33 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Then, amendment 33 is agreed.

Siân, amendment 45.

I am not going to move this one.

You wish to withdraw that amendment, Siân? Okay.

Not moving.

Right. Not moving. Does any other member of the committee wish to move that amendment? No. Then amendment 45 is not moved.

Joel, amendment 68.

Yes, please.

Okay. The question is that amendment 68 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There are objections. Will all those in favour please show? Those against. Any abstentions? Okay. So, in relation to amendment 68, there voted two in favour, three against, with one abstention. And it is therefore not agreed.

I move amendment 34 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. The question is that amendment 34 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Then, amendment 34 is agreed.

I move amendment 35 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. The question is that amendment 35 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Then, amendment 35 is agreed.

I move amendment 36 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. The question is that amendment 36 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Then, amendment 36 is agreed.

That takes us then to group 7, reporting on ‘ask and act’ provisions. The lead and only amendment in this group is amendment 46. And I call on Siân Gwenllian to move and speak to the amendment. Siân.

Thank you very much, Chair. This amendment echoes what has been emphasised time and time again in the committee, namely that more guidance, clarity and firm guidelines are needed around the 'ask and act' duty. And that is why we're proposing to place a statutory duty on the Minister to publish a report before the end of 2031 on the implementation and impact of the duty, including its impact on specified public bodies, and also, importantly, whether bodies need to be added or removed from the list, and how the duty is monitored. This is essential. Without understanding the effect of the policy, we cannot strengthen or improve it.

In essence, the amendment emphasises the reality that the 'ask and act' duty cannot work without sound guidance, without good data and without systematic training. A statutory report would be key not only to measure impact, but to inform the improvements needed as we move forward, and it will offer an opportunity to reflect and perhaps include a wider range of public bodies as part of the duty. The report, therefore, will offer a clear review point to assess how the duty works in practice and to consider whether this is the time to add further public bodies to the duty.

I have listened to the arguments of teachers and GPs, and that's why I was abstaining on Joel James's amendments to include them straight away on the face of the Bill. But I do think in the future that there's a need to be really certain that exempting them from the Bill, that that is the right thing to do, and also, of course, we need to allow the police and other bodies to be added as time moves on. So, there's a need—[Inaudible.]—open in order to include more bodies in the future, if necessary, and I encourage you, therefore, to support amendment 46.

Thank you, Siân. Do any other Members wish to speak on this amendment? No, then I call on the Cabinet Secretary. Cabinet Secretary.

Diolch, Cadeirydd. I'm grateful to Siân Gwenllian for amendment 46, which seeks to introduce a specific statutory duty for Welsh Ministers to prepare and publish a report on the operation and effect of the 'ask and act' duty by the end of 2031 and to take all reasonable steps to implement any recommendation in the report. However, as I will set out when we come to group 13, the Government has already brought forward amendments 41 and 42, which provide for a comprehensive review of the operation and effect of all the changes made by this Act, including the 'ask and act' duty, as well as regular progress reports on implementation. The Government's approach ensures that the review and reporting requirements are both robust and proportionate, covering the full range of reforms in the Bill and ensuring consultation with partners, including those with lived experience of homelessness, as part of the review process.

Amendment 46 would duplicate the Government's provisions but with a narrower focus. This risks creating unnecessary complexity and confusion in the review and reporting process, and could lead to overlapping or even conflicting requirements. So, I do not believe that a separate parallel reporting duty on the 'ask and act' duty alone would add value, given the Government's amendments already require a thorough review of the changes made by this Bill, including 'ask and act'. For these reasons, I cannot support amendment 46, and I urge Members to support the Government's comprehensive approach to review and reporting, which will ensure proper scrutiny and accountability for the implementation of the Bill as a whole.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. Siân Gwenllian then to respond.

I accept that there are amendments from the Government as well, but I do think that this amendment is a more robust one and sets out a specific timetable, and so I do move the amendment.

Okay. Diolch, Siân. The question then is that amendment 46 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is an objection. Would all those in favour please show? And those against.

Because of the delay.

Sorry, there's a time lag.

Could we just re-run that?

Yes, sorry. We'll just do that again. There's a slight time lag with the connection to Siân Gwenllian. So, in relation to amendment 46 then, there is an objection, so there is a vote. Would all those in favour please show? And all those against. And any abstentions. So, in relation to amendment 46 then, there voted three in favour and three against. And again, as Chair, I use my casting vote against the amendment, and it is therefore not agreed.

Siân, amendment 47.

Move.

Okay, amendment 47 is moved. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Okay, so we will then move to a vote. Will all those in favour please show? And all those against. And there are no abstentions. So, again, in relation to amendment 47, there voted three in favour and three against. And I therefore use my casting vote as chair against the amendment and it is therefore not agreed.

I move amendment 4 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. The question is that amendment 4 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Then amendment 4 is agreed.

And that takes us to group 8, co-operation between wider public authorities. The lead amendment in this group is amendment 69, and I call on Joel James to move and speak to the lead amendment and other amendments in the group.

Thank you, Chair. Speaking to my lead amendment 69, the purpose of this amendment is to ensure wider public sector bodies are involved in the development of local protocols to support complex needs and to provide for central guidance to inform the production of local protocols on duties to co-operate. We know that the triggers and consequences of homelessness can extend beyond the doors of housing services. However, as currently drafted, the burden of developing the protocol for handling cases involving persons in particular need of support is entirely on the local authority, not on any other public body. Common frustration from local authority homelessness teams, housing associations and third sector support providers is that other public bodies are not responsive enough in co-ordinating support for people with complex support needs. While it is right that the local authority is able to lead the development of the protocol, there is a need to have explicit reference to other public bodies’ involvement. The amendment to section 95 of the Housing (Wales) Act 2014 would mean that the development and delivery of such protocols is explicitly referenced in the co-operation duty. Thank you, Chair.

Okay, thank you, Joel. And the Cabinet Secretary.

I thank Joel James for setting out his amendments, which I will respond to before setting out the Government amendments in this group. Amendment 69 restates the existing duty to co-operate, which requires local authorities to make arrangements promoting co-operation between its housing and social services arms. It adds a new objective that those arrangements must seek to achieve, namely the development and delivery of a protocol for handling cases involving persons in particular need of support. I cannot support amendment 69, which duplicates and conflicts with existing provisions in the Bill, particularly new sections 95(1)(a), 95(1)(c) and 95(1)(e), while leaving out provisions that are important. The Bill already requires local authority arrangements for co-operation between its social services and housing arms to include a protocol for handling cases involving certain groups of young people and care leavers. It also requires local authority arrangements for promoting co-operation with partner organisations to include a protocol for handling cases involving those who may be in particular need for support or services. Amendment 69 is therefore not necessary, and would overlap with or potentially conflict with those requirements.

Importantly, amendment 69 does not include the new objective of ensuring the effective discharge of the authorities' functions under the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014, which would otherwise be included as an objective by section 24 of the Bill. It is important that this objective stays in. The Bill imposes new duties on local authorities under the Act in relation to care leavers. It is right that the effective discharge of these new functions should be an objective of the local authorities' arrangements for co-operation between its housing and social services arms. The provision included in amendment 69 enables Welsh Ministers to give guidance and requires local authorities to have regard to it. This is unnecessary. The existing law already does those things. The Bill already sets out an extensive range of provisions that will improve multi-agency approaches, and, in my view, we have gone as far as we can within this Bill.

Turning to the Government amendments, amendments 38 to 40 set out the revised approach that we will take to regulation-making powers in new section 95(6) and to respond to UK Government's concerns raised during the Minister of the Crown consent process. In making these changes, I'm very optimistic that consent will be forthcoming.

These amendments will provide a mechanism that enables the Welsh Ministers to impose the duty to co-operate on additional reserved authorities, or modify how the duty applies to them in future by regulations. The Welsh Ministers will be able to do so with the consent of, or in some cases following consultation with, the relevant Secretary of State. Consent or consultation will not be needed to remove reserved authorities from the scope of the duty.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, and Joel James, then, to respond.

Thank you, Chair. Given the Cabinet Secretary's strong concerns about amendment 69, I'd like to withdraw it, if I may, and maybe come back at Stage 3 with something a bit tighter.

Okay, so it is proposed that amendment 69 be withdrawn. Does any Member object to the withdrawal? No. Then amendment 69 is withdrawn.

I move amendment 37 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. The question is that amendment 37 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Then amendment 37 is agreed.

I move amendment 38 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. The question is that amendment 38 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Then amendment 38 is agreed.

I move amendment 39 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. The question is that amendment 39 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Then amendment 39 is agreed.

I move amendment 40 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. The question is that amendment 40 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Then amendment 40 is agreed.

Group 9, co-operation between social landlords and local housing authorities. The lead amendment in this group is amendment 70, and I call on Joel James to move and speak to the lead amendment and the other amendments in the group. Joel.

Thank you, Chair. Speaking to my amendments now, I'm conscious that there are no specific data-sharing provisions made in the Bill, and this seems like a missed opportunity to streamline processes. I believe having some data-sharing obligations set out will help enable a successful multi-agency partnership-working approach to flourish between all partners locally. I also believe that a data-sharing provision will help promote confidence among stakeholders. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Joel. Cabinet Secretary.

Diolch and thanks, Joel, for opening this. This group of amendments relates to co-operation between social landlords and local housing authorities in section 33 of the Bill. Section 33 introduces a new duty on social landlords to comply with a local authority’s request to make an offer of suitable accommodation to an applicant owed the final duty, unless there is good reason not to.

In my evidence session with the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, I committed to ensure that guidance in relation to this duty would be provided. Amendment 5 will require the Welsh Ministers to give guidance, replacing the previous discretionary power to issue guidance on this matter. The purpose of the guidance is to support local authorities and social landlords to implement the new duty in section 33. In order for it to be used effectively, it will be provided to partners prior to commencement. I'm grateful to Joel James for indicating his support for this amendment, and urge the committee to support it.

To respond to the non-Government amendments in this group, amendment 73 requires the guidance to be in place ahead of enactment of section 33. I do not believe this addition is necessary, and I have demonstrated my commitment to producing this guidance in a timely way through amendment 5.

Amendment 70 will require local authorities, when requesting a social landlord to make an applicant an offer of suitable accommodation, to provide the social landlord with all relevant information about the applicant and any member of their household. Similarly, amendment 72 places a duty on local housing authorities to comply with any reasonable request for information made by the social landlord in relation to a request made under section 33. Since local authorities can only discharge the final duty into suitable accommodation, it follows that they will need to share relevant information in accordance with existing arrangements to achieve that. I therefore ask Members to reject amendments 70 and 72, as they're not necessary.

Amendment 71 specifies that a good reason for a social landlord to not comply with a request for making an offer of accommodation would be that the landlord does not have housing accommodation available for allocation. I've already tabled amendment 5, which will provide that Welsh Ministers must give guidance in relation to the co-operation between social landlords and local housing authorities, and that this must include what constitutes a good reason in not complying with a request for an offer of accommodation. It's likely that there will be multiple good reasons, and it would not be appropriate to specify one of these good reasons on the face of the Bill and the remainder in guidance. I'm also confident that these good reasons are better set out in guidance, as this allows the requisite flexibility for ongoing reflection and review. I do not, therefore, support amendment 71 and would urge the committee to reject it.

Okay. And Joel James to respond.

Thank you, Chair, and, as the Cabinet Secretary highlighted, I wish to reiterate our support for amendment 5. But we still wish to proceed with moving our amendments as well. Thank you.

Okay. So, you move amendment 70, Joel. Yes. Okay. So, amendment 70 is moved. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is an objection. We will then move to a vote. Will all those in favour of amendment 70 please show? And all those against. And any abstentions. Siân, was that a vote against?

It was. Against.

It was. Against. Thank you very much. So, with regard to amendment 70, then, there voted two in favour and four against, and it is therefore not agreed.

Joel, amendment 71?

Yes, move.

Okay. Amendment 71 is moved. Are there any objections? [Objection.] There are. We will therefore move to a vote. Will all those in favour of amendment 71 please show? And all those against. No abstentions. So, there voted two in favour, four against. And amendment 71 is therefore not agreed.

Joel, amendment 72?

Yes, please.

Okay, amendment 72 is moved. Are there any objections? [Objection.] There are. We will therefore move to a vote. All those in favour, please show. All those against. Okay. And there are no abstentions. So, there voted two in favour, four against, and amendment 72 is therefore not agreed.

I move amendment 5 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. The question is that amendment 5 be agreed. Does any Member object? No. Then amendment 5 is agreed.

Joel, amendment 73?

Yes, please.

Amendment 73 is moved. Are there any objections? [Objection.] There are. We will move to a vote. Will all those in favour please show? And all those against. And there are no abstentions. So, there voted two in favour, four against. Then amendment 73—[Interruption.] Was it—? I thought it might be. Shall we—

If we could take the vote again, please. Sorry.

Shall we take the vote again on amendment 73? Will all those in favour of amendment 73 please show? And all those against. And there are no abstentions. So, in relation to amendment 73, there voted three in favour, three against. And, again, as Chair, I use my casting vote against, and amendment 73 is not agreed.

Joel, amendment 74?

Yes, please.

Amendment 74 is moved. Are there any objections? [Objection.] There are. Let us move to a vote. Will all those in favour please show? And all those against. Okay. So, in relation to 74, again, there were three in favour, three against. And I use my casting vote as Chair against, and amendment 74 is not agreed.

That brings us to group 10 on social housing allocations. The lead amendment in this group is amendment 57, and I call on Siân Gwenllian to move and speak to the lead amendment and the other amendments in the group. Siân.

Thank you very much. This amendment asks you to remove section 35 of the Bill, as it has been drafted currently. And then it asks to add a simple sentence that makes the current legislation clearer and more robust, and more trauma-informed.

So, I'm going to concentrate on why there's a need to leave out section 35. Including 35 would give powers to local authorities to decide who should be eligible for social housing. And I think that would not be a wise move, and would take us back, rather than forward. There's a real danger that this would create new ways of filtering and leaving people out, rather than offering sustainable solutions. Social housing should be a universal resource that anyone can apply for, not something that is limited by damaging criteria and changing criteria that vary from authority to authority. And if we're not careful, the current approach that's included currently—section 35—risks reinforcing stigma that exists, unfortunately, around social housing. And we need to get rid of that, rather than reinforce it.

We have heard already that there are significant variations in how housing lists are administered across Wales, including the level of data being collected about households, which creates complexity when trying to understand the extent of demand for social housing. As the Bill is currently drafted, a new power for local authorities to determine eligibility for housing registers could make this complexity even worse.

And stakeholders have drawn attention to the serious danger that this power, even with protections on the face of the Bill, can be misinterpreted, and lead to people being unjustly excluded from the housing register, especially given the potential for wide variations between local authorities. So, we want to see this section being removed, and we need to focus on having a system based on fairness, universality and dignity, not one that creates additional barriers or hides the basic shortcoming, namely that we don't have enough social housing.

Diolch, Siân. Joel James.

Thank you, Chair. Whilst we acknowledge the Cabinet Secretary's commitment to bring forward secondary legislation alongside the Bill to exempt all veterans from the local connection test for social housing allocations in Wales, and that this will bring entitlement in line with provisions in England, we feel that having specific mention of veterans on the face of the Bill would be beneficial in providing clarity for their position. Given the lateness of this Bill in the parliamentary term, it will be for the next Government to bring forward that secondary legislation, and while I hope that there will be goodwill to do that, we have to accept that there is no certainty. The Welsh Conservatives would like to see a strong commitment to veterans, and this amendment achieves that. Thank you.

Cabinet Secretary.

Diolch. This group relates to the allocation of social housing, the application of the deliberate manipulation test and the subsequent impact on reasonable preference for applicants. My thanks go to Siân Gwenllian for tabling the lead amendment in this group. I've been grateful for her constructive engagement on this Bill.

Amendment 57 seeks to remove most of section 35 from the Bill. In doing so it removes the proposed powers for local authorities to set qualifying criteria for social housing. Amendments 16A, 58 and 59 are consequential technical amendments. The original policy intention behind section 35 of the Bill was to provide local authorities with discretion to determine qualifying criteria for social housing in their local area, in order that those not in housing need could be removed from these lists should the local authority think this necessary. This would enable local authorities to manage and prioritise local need more effectively. Whilst I am of the view that sufficient safeguards were built into the Bill as introduced, I note the views expressed by this committee in their Stage 1 report, the concerns of some partners and of the tabling Member, and I am therefore prepared to support this amendment.

Amendment 57 retains the Government’s original proposal that when applying the unacceptable behaviour test when considering eligibility for social housing, local housing authorities will be required to take into account, in particular, the likelihood of the unacceptable behaviour reoccurring at the time the application for social housing is being made. This is an important provision as it is intended to ensure that current, rather than historical, behaviour influences the assessment and ability of an individual to access affordable housing solutions. It aims to recognise positive changes, so that where a person has taken steps to improve their behaviour, their history does not continue to undermine their housing stability. I therefore support this amendment.

If I turn now to amendment 75, tabled by Joel James, this amendment creates a specific exemption from the local connection test in relation to the allocation of accommodation for some veterans and associated persons. I recognise the unique challenges faced by veterans and I have assured the committee of my commitment to deliver for them. I also recognise that a lack of local connection can lead to de-prioritisation for social housing, which can act as a barrier to veterans accessing suitable accommodation in a timely manner.

There are existing powers for regulations to specify factors that a local housing authority cannot take into account when allocating social housing. These regulations can go further than the proposed amendment, which is limited only to prioritisation within reasonable preference categories. I've already advised the committee that my officials are considering plans to use the existing power to prevent local connection acting as a prioritisation mechanism for veterans applying for an allocation of social housing. This approach is more appropriate because it allows regulations to be developed in partnership with partners, helping to avoid any unintended consequences.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. And Siân Gwenllian to reply to the debate. Siân.

Thank you very much. And I'd also like to thank the Cabinet Secretary for the constructive engagement around the majority of section 35. I'm very pleased that she agrees with me that including this section would create a situation that's not acceptable, and that would create variations, inconsistency, and not create a system that's based on fairness across Wales. So, I'm very pleased that she supports this amendment, and I move amendments 57, 58, 59 and 16A.

Diolch, Siân. So, the question is that amendment 57 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Then amendment 57 is agreed.

I move amendment 6 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. The question is that amendment 6 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is an objection. We will move to a vote. So, with regard to amendment 6, will all those in favour please show? And all those against. And any abstentions. With regard to amendment 6, there voted four in favour, with two abstentions, and it is, therefore, agreed.

I move amendment 7 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is an objection. We will then move to a vote. Will all those in favour of amendment 7 please show? And those against. And any abstentions. Okay, so with regard to amendment 7, there voted four in favour and two abstentions. So, it is therefore agreed.

I move amendment 8 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes. So, we move to a vote. With regard to amendment 8 then, will all those in favour please show? And all those against. And any abstentions. With regard to amendment 8 then, there voted four in favour, with two abstentions, so it is therefore agreed.

I move amendment 9 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. Are there any objections? [Objection.] There are. We will move to a vote then. Will all those in favour of amendment 9 please show? And all those against. And any abstentions. With regard to amendment 9 then, there voted four in favour, with two abstentions. And it is therefore agreed.

Joel, amendment 75?

Yes, please.

Amendment 75 is moved. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is an objection. We will therefore move to a vote. Will all those in favour of amendment 75 please show? And all those against. And any abstentions. With regard to amendment 75, there voted three in favour with three against, and I use my casting vote as Chair against. Amendment 75 is therefore not agreed.

Group 11 relates to housing registers. The lead amendment in this group is amendment 10.

I move amendment 10 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary and call on the Cabinet Secretary to speak to the amendments in the group.

Group 11 contains a set of amendments to section 38 of the Bill relating to housing registers. As previously discussed with the committee, I agree that the initial drafting of section 38 is too broad and may have unintended consequences impacting the ability of social landlords to offer and manage accommodation that would not be typically accessed through a common housing register. I've therefore tabled several amendments that remedy this.

Amendment 10 will mean that in relation to accommodation allocated to nominees of a Welsh local housing authority, a social landlord can only offer accommodation under their social housing allocation scheme to applicants on the common housing register. The amendment will still ensure a single accessible application process and a single register of applicants for social housing, whilst allowing social landlords to continue their business operating outside of those related to social housing.

Amendment 10 also provides a new regulation-making power that will allow further exemptions to the duty requiring social landlords to allocate housing only to those on the common housing register, should this be required in the future. This will be subject to the Senedd approval procedure and is in response to feedback provided to us by representatives of social housing providers.

Amendment 11 is a technical amendment to ensure consistency of terminology in the offer of social housing accommodation, and amendment 13 broadens the potential scope of accessible housing registers by allowing the inclusion of all housing stock, not just that held by social landlords. This will help provide a more comprehensive register of accessible housing options within a locality.

Amendment 15 is consequential to amendment 13 and ensures consistency of terminology in relation to accessible housing registers. Amendments 12 and 14 are also technical amendments and act to remove the original data protection provisions relating to common and accessible housing registers. Recent legislative changes to section 106 of the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025 render the original data provisions redundant.

Turning to the non-Government amendments in this group, amendment 51 affects the regulation-making power relating to common housing registers. It also seeks to require Welsh Ministers to make regulation-making provision for, and in connection with, common housing registers. This amendment is unnecessary; the regulation-making power has been specifically sought to enable Welsh Ministers to be able to make these regulations. The purpose and intended scope of the regulation is set out in the Bill. The provision in the Bill provides the necessary flexibility for Ministers to develop these regulations at the appropriate time on the relevant policy matters, and there's no need to change the current wording.

Amendment 52 provides an additional example of what the regulation in relation to common housing registers could cover. It does not require that the regulations cover this specific matter. The list in this subsection is illustrative, not exhaustive, and the regulations may include other provisions as appropriate. As such, it's unnecessary, as Welsh Ministers will have sufficient powers under the Bill as it was introduced.

I'm also concerned that should the amendment be inserted into the Bill, it will create an unrealistic expectation for applicants and place unimaginable burdens on local authorities. It's our policy intention to provide greater transparency for applicants throughout their social housing application. Applicants are currently able to make enquiries regarding their position on the waiting list and have a right to request information held about them by their local housing authority. This includes information in relation to the priority they have been awarded and where they are on the waiting list at any given time.

However, we must acknowledge the dynamic nature of nominations and allocations processes. Social housing waiting lists change frequently as people are added and priorities change. Setting any expectations that an applicant can monitor their entry via an electronic system will mislead applicants, overburden local authorities and may well have significant resource implications for those whose common housing register does not lend itself to the electronic reference in this amendment. So, I cannot support amendments 51 and 52 and ask Members to reject them.

Amendment 77 relates to the type of accommodation that registered social landlords and private registered providers of social housing offer to people on a local housing authority’s common housing register. I believe it's seeking to remedy the same issue that the Government amendment addresses. This amendment defines social housing and housing accommodation, relying on a definition within English legislation that is not appropriate or relevant to the Welsh statute book.

Several exceptions to the definitions are set out in a list, meaning that these types of accommodation would not have to be offered to those on the common housing register. In my view, the proposed inclusion of a list raises risks that we will not capture all forms of accommodation that are not to be considered social housing. Whilst I note the regulation-making power to specify other types of accommodation to be excepted, I'm still concerned that the drafting is incomplete and could have unintended consequences in an ever-evolving housing market.

Through my amendment, the right steps have been taken to narrow accommodation types on the register. The Government amendment provides an effective balance of maintaining flexibility for social landlords in managing their stock and in supporting local housing authorities in addressing the needs of those registered on the common housing register. I therefore ask Members to reject amendment 77. Amendment 76 is consequential to amendment 77 and therefore should also be rejected.

The effect of amendment 78 is that the requirement to allocate accommodation to those registered on the common housing register does not additionally affect the right of social landlords to manage their housing stock to comply with any of their own policies, duties or contractual obligations, or compliance with other legislative duties, including any requests to provide accommodation under new section 96A.

This is an all-encompassing provision that risks very broad interpretation and potential misuse. I'm therefore of the strong view that the Government amendment sets out the necessary flexibility for social landlords to manage stock that is not social housing while they comply with any other legislation. As such, I view this amendment as unnecessary.

I call on Members to support amendments 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15, and to reject amendments 51, 52, 76, 77 and 78.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. Joel James.

Thank you, Chair. As we know, the common housing register is a complicated area. There is some uncertainty over whether the proposed wording in the Bill safeguards management transfers such as for urgent issues of flooding, safety, change of disability circumstances, et cetera. From discussions with organisations such as Community Housing Cymru, this wording is preferable to that of the original, and with that in mind, I'd still like to move the amendments.

Thank you, Joel. Siân Gwenllian.

Thank you, Chair. The purpose of the amendments in this group is to improve the transparency and accessibility of the common housing register, by ensuring that people are not just listed, but that they can access and monitor the information held about them, and they should be able to do so electronically. At the moment, the Bill provides for the limited sharing of information, but we want the Bill to be amended to ensure that individuals can see all of their own data and track any changes digitally. I'm disappointed to hear the Cabinet Secretary's view on this. I believe that moving towards what is proposed here would ensure a clear national standard for the operation of the register, including individuals' right to see and track their own records. I do believe that the amendment also allows reasonable flexibility for Ministers to decide which elements belong to secondary legislation.

Diolch, Siân. The Cabinet Secretary to reply to the debate.

Diolch, Cadeirydd. The Government amendments deliver commitments made to this committee and the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee. I think they address the unintended consequences relating to the initial drafting of the Bill and ensure greater scrutiny opportunity for the Senedd. I hope that the committee can agree to the merits of these proposals, support them, and vote against the non-Government amendments.

Thank you very much. The question is that amendment 10 be agreed to. Does any Member object? There are no objections. Therefore, amendment 10 is agreed.

Joel, amendment 76.

Move.

Amendment 76 is moved. Are there any objections? [Objection.] There are. We will move to a vote. Will all those in favour of amendment 76 please show? All those against. Any abstentions? In relation to amendment 76, there voted two in favour, three against, with one abstention, and it is therefore not agreed.

Joel, amendment 77.

Yes, please.

Amendment 77 is moved. Are there any objections? [Objection.] There are. We will move to a vote. Will all those in favour please show? All those against. Any abstentions? With regard to amendment 77, there voted two in favour, three against and one abstention, and it is therefore not agreed.

Joel, amendment 78.

Yes, please.

Amendment 78 is moved. Are there any objections? [Objection.] There are. We will move to a vote. Will all those in favour please show? All those against. Any abstentions? With regard to amendment 78, there voted two in favour, three against and one abstention, and it is therefore not agreed.

I move amendment 11 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. The question is that amendment 11 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Amendment 11 is agreed.

Siân Gwenllian, amendment 58.

Amendment 52?

No, amendment 58.

I've got the wrong—. It's the one about the electronic registration, so I'll move.

You'll move amendment 58. The question is that amendment 58 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Amendment 58 is agreed.

Siân, amendment 59.

Moved.

Amendment 59 is moved. The question is that amendment 59 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Amendment 59 is agreed.

Siân, amendment 51.

Moved.

Amendment 51 is moved. Are there any objections? [Objection.] There are. We will move to a vote on amendment 51. Will all those in favour please show? And those against. There voted three in favour and three against, and I use my casting vote as Chair against. Amendment 51 is therefore not agreed.

Siân, amendment—

Chair, is it possible to take a comfort break soon?

Yes, sure. We'll have a comfort break after this group, if that's okay.

Amendment 52, Siân.

Yes.

Amendment 52 is moved. Will all those in favour please show? And those against. With regard to amendment 52, there voted three in favour, three against, and I use my casting vote as Chair against. Amendment 52 is therefore not agreed.

I move amendment 12 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. The question is that amendment 12 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Amendment 12 is agreed.

I move amendment 13 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. The question is that amendment 13 be agreed. Does any Member object? No. Amendment 13 is agreed.

I move amendment 14 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. The question is that amendment 14 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Amendment 14 is agreed.

I move amendment 15 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. Does any Member object? No. Amendment 15 is agreed.

That takes us on to group 12, but we will have a short break for committee and resume at 12:15. Thank you very much.

Welcome back to committee. We have reached group 12: housing registers and publication of data. The lead amendment in this group is amendment 53. And I call on Siân Gwenllian to move and speak to the lead amendment and the other amendment in the group. Siân.

Thank you very much, Chair. Currently, a significant number of bodies and organisations have to rely on freedom of information requests to get even the most basic picture of the demand for social housing in Wales and the demographics on the waiting lists. That is not acceptable and it's a clear sign of a system that is too piecemeal and too reliant on incomplete data. Placing this on a statutory basis would move the system towards consistent, public and meaningful data, strengthening transparency and making policy making more robust. The aim, therefore, with this amendment is to be able to build a comprehensive picture of the situation in terms of housing allocation. This is fully in line with a number of findings that show that improving data is critical and necessary to improve the transparency of housing and homelessness systems in Wales. This also echoes the experiences of people on the ground, with people often expressing their frustration at the lack of transparency in the housing allocation process.

I would like to ask for a discussion before Stage 3 with the Government, in order to see whether there's a means of coming to an agreement on the content of this amendment. I do think that there is a real opportunity with this Bill to strengthen significantly the data that we gather and that that data is purposeful and useful to those who create policies and strategies in the housing field.

Diolch, Siân. And I call on the Cabinet Secretary, then.

Diolch, Cadeirydd. I would like to thank Siân Gwenllian for amendment 53 and for her feedback during scrutiny on social housing allocations data. I also want to acknowledge the work of this committee in highlighting the need for robust, standardised data on allocations and waiting lists. The Government does recognise this issue, and it has been raised by partners and is reflected in the ending homelessness outcomes framework, and has formed part of mapping work on the data needs related to the Bill.

The amendment seeks to require Welsh Ministers to make regulations about the publication of data from common housing registers and accessible housing registers, with annual publication and electronic access. As the Bill already contains powers to make regulations for and in connection with common housing registers and accessible housing registers, the amendment in its current form is not necessary. There are also practical and technical challenges associated with this amendment that must be addressed to ensure that any published data is meaningful, accurate and not misleading. As the committee is aware, register data is not a direct measure of housing need and there are significant inconsistencies in how data is collected, prepared and managed across local authorities and registered social landlords. Data is also owned and processed differently across Wales.

I am not, therefore, able to support the amendment as currently drafted. However, I note and agree with the principle of the amendment and would be willing to explore an amendment at Stage 3 that aligns with powers already in the Bill, meets the policy principle, whilst being practically robust. I hope Siân Gwenllian and Joel James, who supported this amendment, will accept this offer, and I look forward to continuing this important conversation and to working together to improve the quality and accessibility of allocations data in Wales.

Amendment 55 specifies the procedure for the amendment and is consequential to amendment 53. Therefore, I'm unable to support either amendment at this time.

Okay. Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. Siân Gwenllian to respond. Siân.

Thank you very much to the Cabinet Secretary for acknowledging the need for better data and more comprehensive data, and I look forward, therefore, to working with you to bring forward a sensible amendment that we can all agree with during Stage 3. So, I will not move the two amendments.

Okay. So, amendment 53, then, is proposed to be withdrawn. Does any Member object? No. Then it is indeed withdrawn.

That takes us on to group 13, managing implementation. The lead amendment in this group is amendment 41.

I move amendment 41 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary, and call on the Cabinet Secretary to speak to the amendments in the group.

Diolch, Cadeirydd. I'm pleased to introduce these amendments, which strengthen the Bill’s provisions for transparency, accountability and post-legislative scrutiny. I'm grateful to the committee for the detailed consideration that you've all given to reporting and evaluating mechanisms during Stage 1 scrutiny. Each committee made recommendations relating to how the Senedd should be kept informed of the implementation of the Bill and its impact in practice. Several Members also emphasised the importance of robust mechanisms for monitoring delivery and impact during the general principles debate.

Amendment 41 places a statutory duty on Welsh Ministers to review the operation and effect of the changes made by the Act. This review will be informed by consultation with partners, including local authorities, voluntary organisations and, crucially, people with lived experience of homelessness. The review report must be published and laid before the Senedd within four years of the Act coming fully into force. To ensure that the evaluation is both meaningful and timely, the amendment allows the Welsh Ministers to carry out the review at a time when they consider the Act is substantially in force. As the committee is aware, I have committed to phased implementation of this legislation.

Amendment 42 introduces a rolling requirement for progress reports on commencement. The Welsh Ministers must prepare, publish and lay a progress report before the Senedd if the Act is not fully in force by 31 December 2028, or by 31 December 2029. If the legislation is not fully commenced by then, further reports will be required as soon as possible after 31 December of every second year thereafter. Each report will set out the progress made towards bringing the Act fully into force and specify any further steps to be taken to do so. This rolling approach provides the Senedd with a rigorous mechanism by which to scrutinise commencement and ensure efficient implementation of the legislation.

Amendment 18 is a consequential amendment to the Bill. It amends paragraph 12(5) of Schedule 2 to the Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016, omitting the reference to the duty under section 73. This change is necessary because section 73 is being removed by section 6 of the Bill.

Amendment 79 makes the abolition of priority need contingent on a statutory test of robust housing supply. As I've made very clear, I am committed to a phased approach to implementation, with abolition happening as early as possible, but by 2031. The regulatory impact assessment sets out that successful implementation depends on increasing housing supply, reducing reliance on temporary accommodation and ensuring sufficient workforce capacity. These dependencies are being actively managed through investment, guidance and partnership working. We are committed to a phased and locally responsive approach, informed by readiness assessments and transitional arrangements. However, introducing a statutory requirement for robust housing supply would reduce flexibility, risk unintended delays and could undermine the Bill’s core objectives. I cannot therefore support amendment 79, and urge Members to vote against it.

Okay, thank you, Cabinet Secretary. Joel James.

Thank you, Chair. The current position is that the priority list is scheduled in the Bill to be removed only when the Welsh Government Ministers are satisfied that the housing supply is robust. However, there's no definition of ‘robust housing’, which means that it's entirely subjective. It means that Ministers can in fact keep kicking this into the long grass for years to come.

There have been calls to have a time backstop introduced. I'm not necessarily in favour of this, because not all local authorities may be in a position to remove the priority list. I think by introducing a definition of ‘robust housing’ the Ministers will be setting themselves a target, and the Welsh Government can be held accountable for that target.

Finally, as this is the last time I'm due to speak, I just want to thank everyone here, the Cabinet Secretary and the committee, for quite a constructive debate this afternoon and this morning, and I'm looking forward to hopefully working with you closely to try and bring some of the amendments that we have withdrawn back at Stage 3. And I'd just like to thank the support I've had from my staff in the group office as well. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you very much, Joel. Siân Gwenllian.

Thank you very much. I just want to speak in opposition to amendment 79. I oppose this amendment because it would postpone the removal of the priority need category for an indefinite period of time, and in practice that could mean, of course, that the removal never happens, and that would be contrary to the purpose of a great deal of this legislation.

Of course, we also need to increase the supply of homes in order to enable that to happen, but I don't think that this amendment is going to enable that to happen. Thank you.

Okay, diolch, Siân. And the Cabinet Secretary to reply to the debate.

So, the Government amendments provide robust mechanisms for post-legislative scrutiny, transparency and accountability. They ensure that the Senedd and partners are kept informed of progress and that implementation is actively monitored. Again, I ask Members to support these amendments and to reject the non-Government amendments, which would duplicate or undermine the comprehensive approach that we have set out.

Okay, thank you. The question, then, is that amendment 41 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No, then amendment 41 is agreed.

That brings us to group 14, which is the final group of amendments. It relates to financial assistance. The lead and only amendment in this group is amendment 54, and I call on Siân Gwenllian to move that amendment and speak to it. Siân.

In this group, our purpose is to draw real attention to an opportunity to strengthen the Bill by introducing a provision on rent guarantors, in line with the Welsh Government's clear intention in the White Paper on adequate housing. In the White Paper, the Government itself recognises the need for a consistent national approach, with clear eligibility criteria to help people who don't have a guarantor in the UK, including people experiencing homelessness, individuals fleeing domestic violence and so forth, and including carers leaving care and students with no credit history.

The White Paper clearly outlines how such a guarantor could reduce barriers, support vulnerable people to access the private sector and build a credit history to help them secure future tenancies. It appears that this Bill is an opportunity to achieve the policy ambition that the Government has already committed to. As work on rent guarantors has not progressed during this term, including a provision in the Bill could revive the work and open the door to play a very important role in reducing homelessness.

The amendment would make it a requirement for Welsh Ministers to publish guidelines on rent guarantors and therefore achieve that policy pledge to practical action, and ensure a consistent national approach that makes a direct difference to the most vulnerable people in Wales.

Diolch, Siân, and the Cabinet Secretary, please.

Diolch, Cadeirydd, and thank you, Siân, for amendment 54 and for raising the important issues that you've said today. I found it a bit difficult to interpret the amendments and had been unable to identify the effect that was trying to be achieved before today. But I do very much note the barriers that young people, including care leavers, can face when accessing all forms of housing, including challenges related to affordability and negative perceptions of young people.

Part 6 of the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014 code of practice recognises the barriers to private rented accommodation for care leavers if social housing is not available or appropriate for their needs. The code encourages local authorities to explore a range of interventions to support young people, including landlord accreditation schemes and rent deposit and bond guarantee schemes.

Our White Paper on adequate housing, fair rents and affordability also proposed to create national guidance, in partnership with local authorities, for a consistent rent guarantor scheme to help tenants who cannot secure a UK guarantor. Further policy analysis and drafting will be necessary before potentially any amendments to the Bill. So, I thank you for raising these matters and I welcome the opportunity for further discussion, but I must, at this time, reject this amendment.

Okay, and Siân Gwenllian to respond.

Thank you very much, Cabinet Secretary, and even though you say that you're not entirely sure of its intention, you have drawn attention to what was in the White Paper, and that is exactly the intention of this amendment. It is a probing amendment in order to see if there is a desire to work together on this, and you have shown that. Therefore, I'm very happy to move forward before Stage 3 to have those discussions, and to see exactly what is possible. Therefore, I won't move this specific amendment.

May I also just take the opportunity to thank everybody who has been helping during this period of drafting amendments and during the period of discussion, and thank all stakeholders who have taken part in the scrutiny work of the committee? I do think that the general principles of this Bill are ones that are going to move us in Wales towards a system that is more preventative in terms of dealing with homelessness, and that is to be very much welcomed.

Diolch, Siân. Siân, do you wish to withdraw amendment 54? Yes. Does any Member object to its withdrawal? No. Then, amendment 54 is withdrawn.

I move amendment 16 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. Before disposing of amendment 16, we will first dispose of the amendment to it. Siân, amendment 16A.

Move.

Okay, amendment 16A is moved. The question is that amendment 16A be agreed. Does any Member object? No. Then, amendment 16A is agreed.

The question is that amendment 16, as amended by amendment 16A, be agreed. Does any Member object? No. Then, amendment 16, as amended by 16A, is agreed.

Siân, amendment 55. Had you previously indicated, Siân, that you wish to withdraw or not move amendment 55?

This is the one on data. It's on data, yes. So, I won't move this.

You will not move it. Okay. Does any other committee member wish to move amendment 55? No. Then, amendment 55 is not moved.

I move amendment 17 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. The question is that amendment 17 be agreed. Does any Member object? No. Then, amendment 17 is agreed.

Siân, amendment 56.

Can you remind me what that is about?

In relation to police forces and their inclusion, Siân.

Oh, yes. No, I'm inclined not to move that.

Not to move that. Okay. So, amendment 56 is not moved. Does any other committee member wish to move that amendment? No. Then amendment 56 is not moved.

Joel, amendment 80.

Thank you, Chair. Can I just have some clarification? I think amendment 80 was only to be moved if 68 was agreed. So, it's gone and—

It's fallen.

It hasn't fallen, but the Member may choose not to move it as it's consequential.

Right. It hasn't fallen, but you may wish not to move it, Joel. It's up to you.

It's probably for the best.

Okay. So, amendment 80 is not moved. Does any other committee member wish to move that amendment? No. Then amendment 80 is not moved.

I move amendment 43 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. The question is that amendment 43 be agreed. Does any Member object? No. Then amendment 43 is agreed.

I move amendment 18 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. Does any Member object? No. Then amendment 18 is agreed.

Joel, amendment 79.

Yes, I'd like to move that.

Amendment 79 is moved. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is an objection. We will therefore move to a vote on amendment 79. Will all those in favour please show? And all those against. And any abstentions? No. So, in regard to amendment 79, there voted two in favour, four against, and it is therefore not agreed.

I move amendment 42 in the name of the Cabinet Secretary. The question is that amendment 42 be agreed. Does any Member object? No. Then amendment 42 is agreed.

And that brings us to the end of our amendments.

May I thank the Cabinet Secretary for her attendance today? You will of course be sent a transcript to check for factual accuracy, Cabinet Secretary, in due course. This completes our Stage 2 proceedings. Stage 3 begins tomorrow. The relevant date for Stage 3 proceedings will be published in due course. Standing Orders make provision for the Cabinet Secretary to prepare a revised explanatory memorandum taking account of the amendments agreed today. The revised memorandum will be laid at least five working days before Stage 3 proceedings. Thank you all very much for your attendance today. Diolch yn fawr.

There's only one motion remaining for committee members, and that's a motion under Standing Order 17.42 to resolve to exclude the public from the remainder of this meeting. Is committee content to do so? I see that you are. We will move, then, to private session.