Mr. Gavin Lawlor:

I am always happy to go first.

Where does the Deputy want us to start? One of the first ports of call - we ourselves are almost sick of saying this - is resource.

I do not disagree with any of the things he said. That is the whole purpose of a review of a national planning framework. Time moves on. If targets move on, they move on. If 50,000 is the correct number of houses following a review that we need to be building, so be it.

On the idea or the concept that we failed, the whole concept of where to build houses and how to build houses is like an oil tanker - one does not change it overnight. In one cycle of a national planning framework, it is highly ambitious to expect that one would and. therefore, what we have to do is look at some of the metrics. We need to reflect and look at what has been successful and what has not been successful and be very honest with ourselves as to both of those answers in terms of what was the policy, what worked and what did not work.

It has to be remembered that the NPF is a policy. That does not necessarily affect what actually happens on the ground and if it has not affected what is on the ground, what are the tangible things that have? We talk a lot about things like the value sharing and the taxation of unused lands, etc., as a way to try and drive development but we need to start to look at incentives. If the stick is not working, an appropriate carrot needs to be used to try and encourage development in what we term would be the "right" location. The answer is a proper objective set of metrics where we properly reflect on what has happened, why it has happened and how certain changes can be made to make a difference, what the expected change would be, and then one carries out the changes and one reflect on it. That is the way to do it.

There are other bigger issues than housing. I refer to energy and transport. It is not one size fits all. To make sure we have sustainable housing, we have to get everything else right, as the OPR said. Everything else has to work. It works like a jigsaw. It is not just a case of saying it did not work.

The last, but not least, piece here is there is a certain legacy. We have zoned certain lands. We are responsible for zoning those lands. Some of those lands are developed. Some of those lands are not developed. Policy does not determine which land gets developed first and that type of market intervention, if that is what one attempts to do, has certain ramifications. It is a little more complex than the ambition to build 50,000 houses. We would say it is really important. Data is the key piece and let us have more resources to get more data.