English: Thanks to Plaid for bringing today's debate. The new system of universal credit is causing major concern among those who will be affected by it. We are seeing this from the results of the roll-out so far. So, in UKIP, we share the concerns. We agree with Plaid to that extent, and we think that Plaid are right to bring this forward as a subject for debate, although we don't support Plaid's ambition that welfare should be devolved to Wales. In that regard, we actually support Labour on this occasion, in that we don't think that devolving the welfare system to the Welsh Assembly is a viable solution to the problems facing Wales, and it may actually make things a lot worse, because of the reasons that we've heard advanced, of Wales being a net recipient of welfare and the lack of knowledge that we will get the same level of funding if welfare is devolved. I accept that Steffan Lewis may have raised a point that needs to be further investigated, but that's our position as it stands at the moment. We also agree with the Conservatives to some extent, in that the principles behind universal credit may have been laudable in terms of helping people back into work, as a concept. It is just that the way that the new set-up has been designed is so very flawed that it leaves us very probably in a worse situation than we were in before. We heard evidence on the subject on the Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee. We had academics from social policy units coming in who'd interviewed a lot of the claimants who were involved in the roll-out, and a sample of the claimants were asked what they thought about the new scheme. Overall, the new system wasn't welcomed. The major issues included accessing the system in the first place, delays over payment, issues over whom the payment goes to where there are joint claims, and sanctions. One aspect of the new system is the difficulty of making the claim in the first place. Now, a few years ago we had a change from a system whereby most new claimants for benefits would make an appointment to see someone, a real-life person, at a jobcentre or a similar office, to a system whereby the majority of new claims were made over the phone. So, that raised one level of difficultly. Now, with universal credit, we're moving on to a new level of difficulty, because now the initial claims are made online. So, this raises the issue that some claimants aren't online and can't do things online, and the risk is that many of those people could fall through the cracks. Once you actually get your claim processed, the next problem is the delay over payments. Well, we've heard a lot on that subject today. Bethan Jenkins detailed that in her opening contribution when she highlighted the risk of claimants falling into more debt due to the delays. There's also the risk of the rent arrears, which we've also heard about, due to the system whereby the claimants themselves get paid the rent in a large lump sum, and it's not actually paid direct to the landlord. Unfortunately, this method does increase the risk of people getting into arrears and landlords not getting their rent. Eluned Morgan highlighted the issue of the problems of the joint claims, and who gets the payment, and the fact that there isn't really any protection built into the system for women and children, although, obviously, it's not always the woman who gets the payment, but in general that is a point that we need to consider. Once you are in the system and you are getting your payment there is the ever-present threat of sanctions, which Leanne Wood mentioned. Now, under universal credit, the sanctions regimes are tougher, and, of course, as in any bureaucracy - and the welfare system is a massive bureaucracy - the sanctions can be misapplied. Here is a for instance. The universal credit system has to deal not only with people not in work, but also people who are in work, but who are in low-paid jobs. This is because it is also replacing working tax credits. The problem is that, under the old system, you could claim working tax credits without visiting the jobcentre, as they were claimed through the tax system. Now, if you have a job, but it is low paid, you still have to go to the jobcentre to claim your top-up payments. So, you are in work, perhaps in a regular full-time, nine-to-five job, but you also have to go to the jobcentre at regular intervals. I wonder if you can see where we are going with this: yes, people who have jobs are being given jobcentre appointments that clash with their hours of work. They're missing these interviews, understandably, and are then sanctioned by the jobcentre for failing to keep them. If one is caught up in this kind of trap, one is entering a Kafka-esque world of battling against a heedless bureaucracy, and the individual will very rarely win that battle. Even if you have a job that takes up, say, 10 hours, you will encouraged - in other words, blackmailed - into getting another job for 15 hours. This inflexible approach leads to absurdities such as a woman of 60-plus who had three jobs totalling 21 hours and was still told to get another job. Sanctions can come quite randomly, and can occur six months after the alleged misdemeanour occurred. The problem with this is twofold. One issue is that the person being sanctioned will probably no longer remember the reason for it, so won't be able to effectively appeal. Another issue is that it will be largely unforeseen, so it again raises the risk of the claimant going into debt or rent arrears -
Welsh: Diolch i Blaid Cymru am gyflwyno'r ddadl heddiw. Mae system newydd y credyd cynhwysol yn peri pryder mawr ymhlith y rhai a fydd yn cael eu heffeithio ganddi. Rydym yn gweld hyn o ganlyniadau'r broses o'i gyflwyno hyd yn hyn. Felly, yn UKIP, rydym yn rhannu'r pryderon. Rydym yn cytuno â Phlaid Cymru i'r graddau hynny, ac rydym yn meddwl bod Plaid Cymru'n iawn i gyflwyno hyn fel pwnc ar gyfer dadl, er nad ydym yn cefnogi uchelgais Plaid Cymru y dylai lles gael ei ddatganoli i Gymru. Yn hynny o beth, rydym yn cefnogi Llafur ar yr achlysur hwn mewn gwirionedd, gan nad ydym yn credu bod datganoli'r system les i'r Cynulliad Cenedlaethol yn ateb ymarferol i'r problemau sy'n wynebu Cymru, a gallai wneud pethau'n llawer gwaeth mewn gwirionedd, am y rhesymau a glywsom, fod Cymru'n dderbynnydd net o ran lles a'r anallu i wybod a fyddwn yn cael yr un lefel o gyllid pe bai lles wedi'i ddatganoli. Rwy'n derbyn efallai fod Steffan Lewis wedi codi pwynt sydd angen ei archwilio ymhellach, ond dyna ein safbwynt fel y mae ar hyn o bryd. Rydym hefyd yn cytuno â'r Ceidwadwyr i ryw raddau, y gallai'r egwyddorion sy'n sail i'r credyd cynhwysol fod wedi bod yn ganmoladwy o ran helpu pobl yn ôl i'r gwaith fel cysyniad. Ond mae'r ffordd y mae'r drefn newydd wedi ei llunio mor ddiffygiol fel ei bod yn ein rhoi mewn gwaeth sefyllfa nag o'r blaen yn ôl pob tebyg. Clywsom dystiolaeth ar y pwnc yn y Pwyllgor Cymunedau, Cydraddoldeb a Llywodraeth Leol. Cawsom academyddion o unedau polisi cymdeithasol yn dod i mewn a oedd wedi cyfweld llawer o hawlwyr a oedd yn rhan o'r broses o gyflwyno'r credyd a gofynnwyd i sampl o'r hawlwyr beth oedd eu barn am y cynllun newydd. Ar y cyfan, nid oedd croeso i'r system newydd. Roedd y prif broblemau'n cynnwys mynediad at y system yn y lle cyntaf, oedi gyda thaliadau, problemau ynglŷn â ble y bydd y taliad yn mynd lle y ceir ceisiadau ar y cyd, a sancsiynau. Un agwedd ar y system newydd yw'r anhawster i wneud y cais yn y lle cyntaf. Nawr, ychydig flynyddoedd yn ôl cawsom newid o system lle y byddai'r rhan fwyaf o hawlwyr newydd am fudd-daliadau'n gwneud apwyntiad i weld rhywun, person go iawn, mewn canolfan waith neu swyddfa debyg, i system lle y câi'r rhan fwyaf o geisiadau newydd eu gwneud dros y ffôn. Felly, roedd hynny'n codi un lefel o anhawster. Nawr, gyda chredyd cynhwysol, rydym yn symud ymlaen at lefel newydd o anhawster, oherwydd erbyn hyn caiff y ceisiadau cychwynnol eu gwneud ar-lein. Felly, mae hyn yn codi'r mater nad yw rhai hawlwyr ar-lein ac ni allant wneud pethau ar-lein, a'r perygl yw y gallai llawer o'r bobl hynny ddisgyn trwy'r craciau. Ar ôl i chi gael eich cais wedi ei brosesu, y broblem nesaf yw'r oedi dros daliadau. Wel, rydym wedi clywed llawer am y pwnc hwnnw heddiw. Manylodd Bethan Jenkins ar hynny yn ei chyfraniad agoriadol wrth iddi dynnu sylw at y risg y bydd hawlwyr yn mynd i fwy o ddyled oherwydd yr oedi. Ceir risg hefyd o fynd i ddyled gyda'r rhent, rhywbeth arall y clywsom lawer amdano, oherwydd y system lle y telir y rhent i'r hawlwyr eu hunain mewn cyfandaliad mawr, ac ni chaiff ei dalu'n uniongyrchol i'r landlord mewn gwirionedd. Yn anffodus, mae'r dull hwn yn cynyddu'r perygl y bydd pobl yn mynd i ddyled a landlordiaid yn methu cael eu rhent. Amlygodd Eluned Morgan y problemau gyda cheisiadau ar y cyd, a phwy sy'n cael y taliad, a'r ffaith nad oes unrhyw amddiffyniad go iawn wedi'i gynnwys yn y system ar gyfer menywod a phlant, er nad y fenyw sy'n cael y taliad bob amser wrth gwrs, ond yn gyffredinol mae hwnnw'n bwynt sydd angen inni ei ystyried. Pan fyddwch yn y system ac yn cael eich taliad, mae bygythiad hollbresennol o sancsiynau, a grybwyllwyd gan Leanne Wood. Nawr, o dan gredyd cynhwysol, mae cyfundrefnau'r sancsiynau'n llymach, ac wrth gwrs, fel mewn unrhyw fiwrocratiaeth - ac mae'r system les yn fiwrocratiaeth enfawr - gall sancsiynau gael eu gosod ar gam. Dyma enghraifft. Mae'r system credyd cynhwysol yn gorfod ymdrin nid yn unig â phobl nad ydynt yn gweithio, ond hefyd â phobl sy'n gweithio, ond mewn swyddi ar gyflogau isel. Mae hyn oherwydd ei fod hefyd yn cymryd lle credydau treth gwaith. Y broblem yw y gallech chi, o dan yr hen system, hawlio credydau treth gwaith heb ymweld â'r ganolfan waith, gan eu bod yn cael eu hawlio drwy'r system dreth. Nawr, os oes gennych swydd, ond bod y cyflog yn isel, mae'n rhaid i chi fynd i'r ganolfan waith i hawlio eich taliadau ychwanegol. Felly, rydych yn gweithio, efallai mewn swydd reolaidd amser llawn, naw tan bump, ond mae'n rhaid i chi hefyd fynd i'r ganolfan waith yn rheolaidd. Tybed a allwch weld i ble rydym yn mynd gyda hyn: ie, pobl sydd â swyddi'n cael apwyntiadau yn y ganolfan waith sy'n gwrthdaro â'u horiau gwaith. Maent yn methu'r cyfweliadau hyn, yn ddealladwy, ac yna'n wynebu sancsiynau gan y ganolfan waith am fethu dod i'r apwyntiadau hynny. Os caiff rhywun ei ddal yn y math hwn o drap, mae'n camu i fyd Kafkaidd o frwydro yn erbyn biwrocratiaeth ddi-hid, ac anaml iawn y bydd yr unigolyn yn ennill y frwydr honno. Hyd yn oed os oes gennych swydd sy'n mynd â 10 awr, dyweder, byddwch yn cael eich annog - eich blacmelio mewn geiriau eraill - i gymryd swydd arall am 15 awr. Mae'r ymagwedd anhyblyg hon yn arwain at sefyllfaoedd hurt fel dweud wrth fenyw dros 60 oed â thair swydd ganddi am gyfanswm o 21 awr am gael swydd arall. Gall sancsiynau ddod ar hap, a gallant ddigwydd chwe mis ar ôl y camymddwyn honedig. Mae'r broblem gyda hyn yn ddeublyg. Un broblem yw na fydd yr unigolyn sy'n cael ei sancsiynu yn cofio'r rheswm drosto yn ôl pob tebyg, felly ni fydd yn gallu apelio'n effeithiol. Problem arall yw y bydd yn annisgwyl i raddau helaeth, felly unwaith eto mae'n creu risg y bydd yr hawliwr yn mynd i ddyled neu ôl-ddyled gyda'r rhent -