English: Diolch, Llywydd. I thank all the Members for their contributions on this. Just to answer one of the particular things that was raised that I didn't cover in my opening remarks, I do understand the frustration of Members on the timing of the supplementary LCMs. We originally thought that we could table a single, supplementary LCM in relation to this Bill that covered all the amendments made to it, which would have been much more useful to Senedd Members than multiple supplementary LCMs dealing with different amendments at different times. However, unfortunately, there was a much longer delay in the tabling of subsequent UK Government amendments than had been expected at the outset. In the end, they did not happen until 30 November, by which point I had already decided to issue the delayed supplementary LCM, so it was just caught up in the timescale. I'm very happy to work, as Huw suggests, with the committees on the process to make it more streamlined and to understand from the committees whether a stream of individual LCMs on each individual amendment is more helpful in the end than attempting to consolidate them. In terms of the three regulation powers that Members have mentioned, excluding those relating to amendments that have not been delegated, I am content that they are not critical in any way to the effective operation of the legislation. The three are a non-delegated power for the prescription of notices to be used in relation to the exemption of business leases from the legislation. It is very difficult to understand how we would ever prescribe a different notice in Wales for this purpose. It's a very technical matter. The second is for regulations to be made amending the definition of home finance plan leases, which are exempted from the Bill. There are no current plans to use this in England, and there's no reason why we ever would in Wales. And the last one is the power to make consequential amendments. That's not at all unusual, and when legislation's made by the Senedd, it often includes the power for Welsh Ministers to make consequential changes to other non-devolved UK legislation. So, I don't think that's of any real significance, far from the significance accorded to it by occasional Members. In the end, Llywydd, I appreciate very much the concerns that Members have raised, particularly about the amount of time for scrutiny. We will certainly want to work with the committees to ensure that they have the maximum amount of time available to them. But, in the end, this Bill is fundamentally good legislation that addresses obvious unfairnesses in the system. There is, of course, much more to do, and, just in answer to one question from John Griffiths, we understand that the UK Government intends to bring forward the next leasehold reform Bill in the next parliamentary session. There is much more to do, but this is a vital first step in securing fairness for leaseholders in Wales, and I urge all Members to support the motion. Diolch.
Welsh: Diolch, Llywydd. Diolch i'r holl Aelodau am eu cyfraniadau. I ateb un o'r pethau penodol a godwyd nad oeddwn yn ymdrin â nhw yn fy sylwadau agoriadol, rwy'n deall rhwystredigaeth yr Aelodau ynghylch amseriad y memoranda cydsyniad deddfwriaethol atodol. Yn wreiddiol, roeddem o'r farn y gallem ni gyflwyno un LCM atodol mewn cysylltiad â'r Bil hwn a oedd yn cwmpasu'r holl welliannau a wnaed iddo, a fyddai wedi bod yn llawer mwy defnyddiol i Aelodau'r Senedd na nifer o femoranda cydsyniad deddfwriaethol atodol sy'n ymdrin â gwahanol welliannau ar wahanol adegau. Fodd bynnag, yn anffodus, bu oedi llawer hirach o ran cyflwyno gwelliannau dilynol gan Lywodraeth y DU nag y bu'r disgwyl ar y dechrau. Yn y pen draw, ni ddigwyddodd tan 30 Tachwedd, ac erbyn hynny roeddwn eisoes wedi penderfynu cyhoeddi'r LCM atodol gohiriedig, felly roedd wedi ei ddal yn yr amserlen. Rwy'n hapus iawn i weithio, fel y mae Huw yn ei awgrymu, gyda'r pwyllgorau ar y broses i'w wneud yn symlach ac i ddeall gan y pwyllgorau a yw ffrwd o femoranda cydsyniad deddfwriaethol unigol ar bob gwelliant unigol yn fwy defnyddiol yn y pen draw na cheisio eu cydgrynhoi nhw. O ran y tri phŵer rheoleiddio y mae Aelodau wedi'u crybwyll, ac eithrio'r rhai sy'n ymwneud â gwelliannau nad ydyn nhw wedi'u dirprwyo, rwy'n fodlon nad ydyn nhw'n hanfodol mewn unrhyw ffordd i weithredu'r ddeddfwriaeth yn effeithiol. Mae'r tri yn bwerau heb eu dirprwyo ar gyfer defnyddio gorchmynion hysbysiadau mewn cysylltiad ac eithrio prydlesi busnes o'r ddeddfwriaeth. Mae'n anodd iawn deall sut y byddem byth yn gorchymyn hysbysiad gwahanol yng Nghymru at y diben hwn. Mae'n fater technegol iawn. Yr ail yw i reoliadau gael eu gwneud sy'n diwygio'r diffiniad o brydlesi cynllun cyllid cartref, sydd wedi'u heithrio o'r Bil. Nid oes unrhyw gynlluniau ar hyn o bryd i ddefnyddio hwn yn Lloegr, ac nid oes rheswm pam y byddem ni byth yn ei ddefnyddio yng Nghymru. A'r un olaf yw'r pŵer i wneud diwygiadau canlyniadol. Nid yw hynny'n anarferol o gwbl, a phan fydd deddfwriaeth yn cael ei gwneud gan y Senedd, mae'n aml yn cynnwys y pŵer i Weinidogion Cymru wneud newidiadau canlyniadol i ddeddfwriaeth arall nad yw wedi'i datganoli yn y DU. Felly, nid wyf yn credu bod hynny o unrhyw arwyddocâd gwirioneddol, ymhell o'r arwyddocâd a roddir iddo gan Aelodau achlysurol. Yn y pen draw, Llywydd, rwy'n gwerthfawrogi'n fawr y pryderon y mae Aelodau wedi'u codi, yn enwedig ynghylch faint o amser a roir ar gyfer craffu. Byddwn ni'n sicr eisiau gweithio gyda'r pwyllgorau i sicrhau bod ganddyn nhw yr amser mwyaf sydd ar gael iddyn nhw. Ond, yn y pen draw, mae'r Bil hwn yn ddeddfwriaeth sylfaenol dda sy'n mynd i'r afael ag annhegwch amlwg yn y system. Wrth gwrs, mae llawer mwy i'w wneud, ac, mewn ateb i un cwestiwn gan John Griffiths, deallwn fod Llywodraeth y DU yn bwriadu cyflwyno'r Bil diwygio lesddaliad nesaf yn y sesiwn seneddol nesaf. Mae llawer mwy i'w wneud, ond mae hwn yn gam cyntaf hanfodol o ran sicrhau tegwch i lesddeiliaid yng Nghymru, ac anogaf bob Aelod i gefnogi'r cynnig. Diolch.